Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Hometown Teacher Heroine: Danielle Bero

Teacher makes connection between writing schoolwork and students’ lives

Nearly half of the students in Danielle Bero’s class are homeless or in foster care, and almost all come from low-performing middle schools and meet federal standards for a free lunch. For these kids, concentrating in class can be almost impossible. But Bero’s approach to writing and speech — from poetry slams to screenwriting — is engaging the students, and earning her a nomination for a Hometown Heroes in Education award.

Comments (1)











Danielle Bero is nominated for a Hometown Heroes award for her work as a creative writing teacher with disadvantaged kids.

Susan Watts/New York Daily News

LINK

Danielle Bero is nominated for a Hometown Heroes award for her work as a creative writing teacher with disadvantaged kids.

For her amazing ability to inspire students, a creative writing teacher at a Manhattan school for troubled kids was tapped for a Hometown Heroes in Education award this week.
Queens native Danielle Bero, 28, connects with students at the Broome Street Academy Charter High School in SoHo by encouraging them to express themselves through poetry, screenplays and letters to pen pals overseas.
Nearly half of her students are homeless or in foster care, and almost all come from low-performing middle schools and meet federal standards for a free lunch. For these kids, concentrating in class can be almost impossible.
But Bero keeps them engaged with creative assignments that draw on their own life experiences.
No topic is considered off-limits or too difficult to tackle in her class.
RELATED: DAILY NEWS “HOMETOWN HEROES IN EDUCATION” AWARDS OFFICIAL RULES
“I create a safe space for students to talk about whatever they want,” said Bero, who has taught at the Academy since it was founded in 2011. “They know they can share anything and nobody will judge them for it.”
Bero’s inspiration for teaching at-risk youth in the city came from stints studying in Africa and working as a teacher in Indonesia after she graduated college.
That’s when she came to believe that even young people who face dire situations, such as war and extreme poverty, can find solace and strength from creative projects.
And Bero said her background attending Queens public schools and Lafayette College on a scholarship helps her forge a special connection with her students.
RELATED: BROOKLYN TEACHER SAVES UNCONSCIOUS 7-YEAR-OLD
“The students connect with me because I came from a similar background and I understand where they’re coming from,” said Bero, whose class is mandatory for freshmen.
She tries to make her assignments as accessible and inspiring as possible for her students. Poetry slams and screenplay-writing exercises are class favorites so far.
The goal, said Bero, is to forge a connection between schoolwork and her students’ lives outside of class, even if the subjects can be difficult.
Sexuality, domestic violence, addiction, homelessness and racism are among the topics that Bero’s students have confronted in their coursework.
RELATED: MUSIC TEACHER NOMINATED FOR NYC HOMETOWN HERO
Jayda Estrada, a freshman from the Bronx, said the class takes kids out of their comfort zone, but in a way that allows them to feel confident in what they have to say.
“It taught me how to stand up for what I believe in, in a creative way,” said Jayda, 15. “It’s okay to have opinions when you write. You can say what you want.”
Bero, who also runs the school’s creative writing and performance club, and coaches the basketball teams, said she’s happiest when her students feel empowered.
“I want to provide them with a safe and productive environment so they’re not on the streets,” said Bero. “Whatever it is, at least I’m in the room with them.”
bchapman@nydailynews.com


January 7, 2013

Danielle Bero ’07 Helps Inner City Youth Find Their Voices

tagged with
0
Whether in the classroom at Broome Street Academy in New York City or on the island of Sumatra in Indonesia, Danielle Bero ’07 is never without one accessory—a bracelet an Easton child made for her while participating in Lafayette’s Kids in the Community (KIC) program. It reminds her of what is important and who matters.
Danielle Bero '07 with her class at the Broome Street Academy in New York City
Danielle Bero ’07 with her class at the Broome Street Academy in New York City
What is and has always been important to Bero is social justice. So important that she created her own major at Lafayette called creative media and social justice. Discovering who matters occurred when she worked as a KIC volunteer through the Landis Community Outreach Center. As KIC grew, Bero realized the programming could no longer accommodate children spanning ages 6 to 17, so she started a spinoff program called Teens in the Community.
“The minute I went down the hill and met those kids, I knew that was what I wanted to do,” she says. “Back in my social justice classes, I found that the solutions to most of the problems we discussed were access and education. If I could be involved in education, I could target a lot of the issues directly.”
She began that journey by first winning a Fulbright English Teaching Assistantship to work at a high school outside Jakarta, Indonesia, for a year. She taught students conversational English and helped them gain a better understanding of the United States. When she returned she began teaching English to sixth-, seventh-, and eighth-graders in the Bronx through Teach for America.
Bero received a master’s in secondary English education at Herbert H. Lehman College, City University of New York, and is completing a second master’s there in educational leadership/educational management.
She is a founding teacher at Broome Street Academy (BSA), a charter high school that opened in the SoHo area of Manhattan last year. The school recruits students who are homeless, in foster care, or from low-performing middle schools. Through its partnership with The Door, one of New York City’s leading youth development organizations, BSA also provides nonacademic services, including counseling, health care, creative arts, and college prep programs.
“Students in foster care or transitional housing are one of the most troubled, at-risk, and forgotten populations,” Bero says. “A school like BSA completely changes the game—and the trajectory of success—for them.”
Danielle Bero '07 teaches her creative writing class.
Danielle Bero ’07 teaches her creative writing class.
Bero teaches creative writing, coaches the boys’ basketball team, runs a writing program, and serves on the committee that oversees the school’s unique advisory program. Each student is assigned to a small group, guided by an adviser. Bero’s creates the curriculum and lesson plans, which include team building, community service, and leadership.
Most of Bero’s students relate more closely to Jay-Z than Shakespeare, so by integrating artistic genres like hip hop and film, she gives them more confidence to express themselves. Her pupils study hip hop lyrics and culture and discuss misogyny in the music industry. They create their own 16-bar verses and choruses about topics that arise in class. The slam/spoken word unit builds on those skills.
“Hip hop can be visceral and gut-wrenching, and when I see my students have that same connection with their inner selves, it’s a beautiful moment,” says Bero, who records and performs her own work.
Bero wants to do more than teach. For instance, she wants her students to study abroad. In addition to her year in Indonesia, as an undergraduate, she mentored and taught children for a summer in Namibia and South Africa and studied in Guatemala for three weeks during an interim session.
“My trips to Indonesia have produced some of the most meaningful experiences in my life,” she says. “My first stay allowed me to grow up. I became more patient. It solidified my desire to teach. I felt the most intense homesickness and felt the most liberated. Being able to travel through Lafayette opportunities equipped me with the strength and knowledge to absorb into the culture.”
BSA will select 10 students for a cultural immersion program, in which they will study language and culture, and conduct team-building exercises. Bero will accompany them to Java, Bali, and Sumatra next spring.
“Lafayette helped me define myself and put me in a position to speak for those who didn’t have a voice,” says Bero. “If I hadn’t gone to Lafayette, many of the opportunities I have been able to take advantage of might not have existed. It provided me the very access that I try to provide to my students.”

1 Comment

I read with great interest the work you are doing and your dedication to helping children who are less fortunate. It is apparent that this has been a passion and commitment of yours from the time you attended Lafayette .
As an alumnus who graduated 50 years before you (1956) I have similar feelings and interests. I will be in New York in the Fall and perhaps we can have lunch and discuss our mutual interests. Amongst my involvements is the Lee Pesky Learning Center http://www.lplearningcenter.org and the Pesky Award for Inspirational Teaching (Google).
Congratulations on your good work ………Best regards , Alan Pesky

Saturday, June 22, 2013

The Grading Fiasco

Murphy’s Law and The Regents Grading Fiasco of 2013

LINK

21JUN
By: Two Social Studies Teachers for MORE
By nature, social studies teachers do two things: they make it their business to know what’s going on, and they try to answer why is this happening. Perhaps this is why many of the bloggers you read just happen to be social studies teachers.
For high school social studies teachers, this June marks the first attempt at centralizing the grading process for our two exams: Global History and Geography and United States History and Government. According to the plan, student exams, when finished, are placed in a shipping box and sent (to Conneticut, of all places) to be scanned by McGraw-Hill, a private company. The scanned version of the exam is then presented to a teacher for grading over the Internet using software that has been developed by McGraw-Hill.
Teachers have been assigned to report to central grading hubs located throughout the city’s five boroughs. Each hub can accommodate approximately two hundred teachers. The process is supposed to be simple: teachers go to a URL, located on a McGraw-Hill-owned domain, and use their official Department of Education username and password (the same used for email, SESIS, ARIS and the payroll portal [each built by other for-profit corporations]). Upon entering the password, the teacher is presented the test that he or she has been assigned to grade and grades the different portions of the exams.
A few things need to go right in order for this to happen. Well, a lot of things need to go right in order for this to happen. First, the exams must reach their destination and be scanned over the two-day weekend. I’m sure McGraw-Hill swears they were. Then, the Internet connection between the exam locations and the user (the teacher, located at the school) needs to be up and running—and it needs to continue to operate throughout the entire process. Lastly, the servers (including the file server, where the scanned version of the exams are stored and the authentication servers that validate the usernames and passwords for each teacher) must be functioning.
Now, the original schedule for the week included having social studies teachers grade between the days of Monday and Thursday. We were supposed to return to our assigned school on Friday. Remember that original schedule. The fiasco that has ensued since yesterday wouldn’t be the same without referring to this original schedule.
On Monday, we all sat around while the “system” presented exams on our screens to grade. Many teachers were not able to log in (a true problem with the authentication server). Others were able to log in, but not able to access a single exam item to grade. Although the system listed many exams available to be graded, it simply did not present these exams to teachers’ screens for grading. After two hours of sitting around in the borough of Brooklyn, teachers were told to go back to their assigned schools. The system had a problem, the supervisors said. It couldn’t download the scanned exams. Teachers in Queens and Manhattan were given this news one hour later (a noon “dismissal to site” order was given at one hub at least in Queens; a 12:30 “dismissal to site” was given in at least one hub in Manhattan). At that point, teachers in all three boroughs were informed that Friday “may be a grading day.”
Overnight, the system seemed to be doing just fine. Exams were processed and seemed ready to be delivered to teachers’ screens at their “hub” schools. When teachers arrived this morning, everything seemed to be up and running. Now this was similar to the experience that high school English teachers had during the January Regents: The exams weren’t ready to be viewed on the first day, but by the second day, everything was up and running. So imagine the surprise felt on people’s faces when, at around 9:25 (just 25 minutes after everyone in the system was logged in and grading the exams), the system started to experience glitches. It would hang for long periods of time before presenting an item to grade. It would not present exams. It would freeze completely, forcing the user to log out and log back in to try to access more exams.
It limped along until about 11:30 AM (remember that time) and the folks in charge thought they had fixed the glitch. But by about 12:30 in the borough of Brooklyn and 1:00 in the borough of Queens (unknown as of this moment in Manhattan) teachers were, once again, sent back to their assigned schools and told to come back again on Wednesday.
Wednesday was another disaster with the computer system crashing and teachers being sent back to their home schools for a third straight day. Hey, we though this mayor was so concerned with the environment, yet he has people driving back and forth!
Thursday the system worked until 2:00pm then shut down. At this point we have frustrated, demoralized teachers grading exams. That’s not fair to anyone. Per session (over-time) hours are being offered for the weekend. Can this money be better used going to our classrooms and our children?
Update: Friday, over a week and half after the exams were given the system continues. To say teachers are annoyed and mentally drained would be an understatement. We are not robots and the week of a fiasco, out of our home schools, in am environment where we are treated as nothing more than factory workers, teachers are “sick and tired”. the crowning moment was when we were notified that we were required to report back to the grading centers on Monday. Remember if we were in our home schools doing this the right way, we would be done already. We try to remain as objective as possible when grading, but we’re not machines and this deteriorating situation has to be affecting the grades.
Many of us who have been assigned to reeducation—I mean, grading centers—will miss the most important day of the year, graduation day. We all know the media, politicians (both parties) and corporations have attacked teachers and our unions saying we’re the ones who are anti-children, but truth be told, watching “our kids” graduate is our favorite day of the year. Not allowing us to watch our own student’s graduate, the chance to spend one last moment celebrating with them, is an extreme disappointment for us all who have watched our students grow for the past four years.
The greatest travesty is as class-size continues to increase; after-school programs have been eliminated; arts and music, and many other courses have been reduced; yet millions of dollars are being spent on a flawed system. Where are all the “private sector always does it better” folks now? The grading system is impersonal: read the essay, punch in a score, and move on to the next one. This is supposed to a more accurate, fairer system? We think not. The art of teaching and grading continues to be done away with. Cookie-cutter rubrics, scripted lesson plans, standardized testing, and now computerized grading. Millions of dollars has been siphoned off from our public school children instead it goes to further fill the pockets of Bloomberg’s cronies and their corporations who only look to “monetize” our children
There isn’t anyone, even the most corrupt politician, who wouldn’t agree that this money being wasted on a flawed grading system could not be better utilized by going to our children, where it belongs!
So as exceptional social studies teachers we have learned the key to any great lesson is great questions.
The state law says teachers can’t grade their own students’ exams, why did this mayor feel the need to take it one step further and start this new multi-million dollar system?
Why are charter schools excused from this process?
Can the money being diverted to McGraw-Hill be better used for our children and their schools?
If teachers are being evaluated on these tests, how do we know if we have have improved or not without grading the final test?
How can we help our children improve if we don’t grade their last exam?
Is standardized grading the right answer to help all our children become “college and career” ready?
Isn’t a teacher who has taught the student better prepared to grade their essays and know if they have developed their skills?
Does the regents exam and the grading rubric take into account the child’s cognitive skills, socio-economic situation, and level of fluency with the English language?

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Jeff Kaufman on The New Evaluation Plan, the Scam

 


This is Jeff:
Direct Vimeo link: http://vimeo.com/26575544

Sunday, June 16, 2013


Danielson: What We Lost – The Lesson Plan

LINK


While the ink is drying on John King’s decision and our Union touts how great Danielson is as an evaluative tool it is becoming clearer just how much our current contract was changed without a single vote from one of our members. Of course there is much that will be decided and practice may be implemented in different ways in different schools but there are some changes which could cause major problems to future employment.

Under 8E of our contract a lesson plan is for the use of the teacher. Who knows what we gave up to get this provision in our contract but it was important enough to stop principals from routinely collecting lesson plans or forcing teachers to spend punishment time creating documents. An extraordinary example of the abuse was when a bilingual Chinese teacher who wrote her lesson plans in Chinese was given a letter to her file because the principal could not read the plan and would not allow her to translate it.
Similarly a more experienced teacher who has good command of her pedagogy need not write down every aspect of a lesson to demonstrate good planning where a newer teacher might need some prompts. It’s like going to a good friend’s house who has just moved upstate. The first visit you put his address in MapQuest and follow the detailed turns. By the fifth visit you’ve figured out shortcuts and don’t need a map.

Lesson planning is essential to effective teaching. Danielson recognizes this in Domain 1. But evidence of good lesson planning is how the lesson is preformed, not in a piece of paper a supervisor must rate you on.

Under Danielson 2 out of our 22 rated components specifically deal with the lesson plan, component 1e and 1f. Under component 1e, the lesson plan is mentioned as part of a teacher’s design for coherent instruction. Here a highly effective teacher will have a lesson plan that “clearly indicates the concepts taught in the last few lessons” and that “the teacher plans for his students to link the current lesson outcomes to those they previously learned." An effective teacher “reviews lesson plans with her principal; they are well structured, with pacing times and activities clearly indicated.” An ineffective “teacher’s lesson plans are written on sticky notes in his grade book.” Source: Danielson 2013 Rubric-Adapted to New York Department of Education Framework for Teaching Components.

Similarly, component 1f, designing student assessments, appears to evaluate a lesson plan based on how well it “indicates correspondence between assessments and instructional outcomes.”

To be clear, both before King and Danielson and after King and Danielson you need a plan. It’s just now the plan is not for the teacher and it doesn’t matter how many times you’ve driven to your friend’s house; you better have a copy of the turn by turn directions or you may be rated ineffective.

Posted by Jeff Kaufman at 6/16/2013 08:08:00 AM

1 comment:

NYC Educator said...
I get your point, and agree completely. I'm told there is a union-initiated grievance against this nonsense, for whatever it's worth.
    From Betsy Combier: Did UFT President Mike Mulgrew bargain away the rights of UFT members in order to hide his own alleged misconduct? Jeff called for accountability:
    ‘Sex coverup’ with counselor should force UFT President Mulgrew out: foes By REUVEN FENTON, ANTONIO ANTENUCCI and YOAV GONEN, NY POST
    Posted: 1:02 AM, May 21, 2012
    LINK
      He needs to be taught a lesson!
      An outraged UFT chapter leader yesterday called on union boss Michael Mulgrew to step down if he traded away his members’ rights to school officials who hushed up his alleged classroom affair with a guidance counselor.
      The startling accusations came in a federal lawsuit filed in Suffolk County that names Mulgrew, the United Federation of Teachers, Mayor Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott.
      Jeff Kaufman, a union chapter leader at Aspirations Diploma HS in Brooklyn, said he and other teachers “would expect him to resign’’ if he’s guilty.
      WOE! Then-guidance counselor Emelina Camacho-Mendez allegedly had sex with UFT chief Michael Mulgrew (above) at Grady HS in 2005.
      Daniel Shapiro
      WOE! Then-guidance counselor Emelina Camacho-Mendez allegedly had sex with UFT chief Michael Mulgrew (above) at Grady HS in 2005.
      Michael Hicks
      Michael Hicks
      Grady HS
      Grady HS
      Kaufman, an outspoken member of a faction that opposes Mulgrew, said, “We have an election next year, when a group of us will be mounting a battle to unseat him, and if we find there’s anything suggesting any proof to the allegations — that he gave up something to suppress the story — we’ll be all over him for it.
      “The question is whether stories like that were suppressed and something was given for it.’’
      The suit by Manhattan math teacher and union member Andrew Ostrowsky claims Mulgrew had sex with colleague Emelina Camacho-Mendez in the woodshop at William Grady HS in Brooklyn in 2005 when they both were working there.
      It charges he and his predecessor, Randi Weingarten, who was grooming him for the top job, gave away their members’ hard-won protections in contract talks with the city to keep the tryst quiet.
      “All of a sudden Mulgrew was sitting at the table . . . Most people didn’t even know who he was,” said Kaufman. “He just slipped in as VP, and then it was just a matter of time before he absorbed the presidency.”
      Mulgrew became UFT president in 2009 when Weingarten took over as head of the American Federation of Teachers. Anti-Mulgrew activists say the married Camacho-Mendez was also rewarded.
      They pointed to a series of cushy union gigs that Camacho-Mendez landed — despite having no background or training in labor relations.
      When Mulgrew became a district rep, she was given a part-time union job in addition to her guidance gig. As her mentor moved up in union ranks, she followed him.
      She eventually became a full-time union employe and was named liaison for special education.
      Mulgrew’s opponents said her “patronage’’ jobs are proof the union cares more about sustaining itself than about fighting to protect its members.
      Even a former UFT staffer was outraged.
      “I’m hoping this story eats away at the belief or the reliance on Michael Mulgrew that he is indeed putting members first,’’ said parent advocate Betsy Combier. “I think it certainly lends itself to people thinking maybe he’s not — so that has to hurt him at the next election.”
      Mulgrew dismissed the lawsuit in an e-mail to union members, noting it was filed Joy Hochstadt, “an attorney who has previously been sanctioned and fined for bringing frivolous legal action.”
      “It is unworthy of serious consideration, and our attorneys will be making that point to the court.’’
      In 2010, Hochstadt was fined $21,000 for filing a suit with “numerous causes of action without any basis in law [or] fact.’’
      Weingarten said, “We live in a country where people are allowed to file crazy lawsuits. I’ve read through the allegations, and while they could be part of some fictional novel, they are utterly baseless in fact.”
      Even Hochstadt admits she doesn’t have hard proof that Mulgrew and the counselor were caught in the act — or that an investigation was thwarted by union horse-trading with the city.
      “Everyone has only hearsay knowledge, but almost everyone in the school talked about it,” the suit reads.
      But it insists, “Mulgrew was embroiled in a meretricious scandal for which anyone else would have been fired, ending his career as an educator,” the suit claims.
      Additional reporting by Julia Marsh and Dan MacLeod

      Monday, June 17, 2013

      Carol Burris: The Problem With Teacher Evaluation

      Carol Burris

      Principal Carol Burris of South Side High School in Rockville Center, Long Island, spent her Saturday analyzing State Education Commissioner John King’s Educator Evaluation plan. Here is her review:
      “When I took a look at the details of the plan imposed by Commissioner King on NYC, I was taken aback. The first thing I noticed was how low the points in the Effective range in the final 60 (other measures) were. These are the points assigned by the principal according to the rubric. I could not understand how the points in the Effective range could be as low as 45. A teacher could be rated effective in the first component, with a growth score of 9 points, effective in the second component the local measure with a score of 9 points and receive 45 points in the effective range established by the commissioner in the final 60 (see page 70) here  , but she would be rated Ineffective overall.
      “If you add up the points, 9+9+45=63.
      In other words, the teacher is rated INEFFECTIVE overall, even though she is Effective in all three categories. At least that is what the statute 3012c would say.
      “Let me explain. 3012c, which you can find here:http://www.regents.nysed.gov/meetings/2012Meetings/March2012/312bra6.pdfstates on page 46 the following when describing points awarded for the local measure:
      “(ii) an Effective rating in this subcomponent if the results meet district-adopted expectations for growth or achievement and they achieve a subcomponent score of: (a) 9-17 for the 2011-2012 school year, and for the 2012-2013 school year and thereafter for teachers and principals whose score on the State assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent is not based on a value-added model; or (b) 8-13 for the 2012-2013 school year and thereafter for teachers and principals whose score on the State assessment or other comparable measures subcomponent is based on a value-added model.
      “In other words, if the teacher receives a score of 9 – 17 on the local measure, prior to VAM, she is in the Effective category. After VAM, it changes to 8-13. That is defined in the statute. Now look on pages 35 and 36 of the plan imposed by the Commissioner:
      “On these pages you will find matrices that award points on the local measure. However, a score of 9 is not in the Effective range as 3012c requires. Rather, a score of 9 is in the Ineffective range. A teacher has to accrue 15 of the 20 points to be Effective without an approved VAM, and 13 out of 15 if there is an approved VAM.
      “The entire section is confusing, because it has typographical errors, as it tries to explain the ratings with or without VAM. However, even if VAM is approved this year, the statute does not change. In fact, Effective moves down to 8 points., according to the 3012C.
      “Unless I am missing an additional conversion chart, it appears to me that this plan violates 3012C. It gives a weight to test scores that was never intended, and it explains why the points are so low in the final 60. They can be low because John King raised the bar in the local measure, expecting very high student performance, for a teacher to be rated effective in that measure, and that is not in accordance with the statute passed by the legislature.”

      Sunday, June 16, 2013

      NYSUT Attorney Claude Hersh: "Trust Us"

      Last week, NYSUT Associate Director Claude Hersh is still at it, telling people that whoever opposes the determination of probable cause by a Superintendent or principal  "doesn't know what he/she is doing...Trust us[NYSUT]". Thanks so much, Claude, for continuing to validate what NYSUT, not me, is doing wrong. And, you have never answered my question: what am I doing that I dont know what I am doing?"

      Many UFT members who are going or have gone to 3020-a arbitration know that I sat in hearings as a member of the public (when the Respondents asked me to be there, and had an open and public hearing) from about 2004-2011. I took notes on everything said, and educated myself on what the Attorneys did, as well as who the arbitrators were, both as people and as "judges" in this random process. Now I am a paralegal at 3020-a and, with the Attorney also hired, am part of the legal team and thus intricately involved in all aspects of the process.If an innocent person is being charged with anything that is false, this legal team will "play hardball" in a professional, nice, warm and fuzzy way.

      Leroy Barr, Judy Gerowitz, Bill Di Blasio
      People who now contact me to work on their cases as a paralegal know that one of the biggest issues which the current NYSUT/DOE partnership tries to ignore is the improper determination of probable cause by a Superintendent and/or principal. Everyone who receives charges gets a packet of documents which have been created either by an Attorney at the ATU Gotcha Squad or the TPU Gotcha Squad. The first, ATU, does the frame up for the DOE to find a person who is charged with misconduct of some kind, and the second Gotcha Squad, TPU,  frames people according to the lie that he or she is incompetent. The ATU Gotcha Squad is under the direction of Laura Brantley, and the TPU Gotcha Squad's Director is Naeemah Lamont and her sidekick Dennis Da Costa.

      The papers in the charging packet are built upon the TAC memos which are created by these teams to produce "proof" of guilt on the part of the future 3020-s Respondent. Papers are removed and/or stuck inside the personnel file to create what the Gotcha Squad attorneys hope will be a foregone conclusion, that the Respondent is terminated, removed, gone from payroll or, even better, paying a "fine" for something the member didnt do.

      Back to NYSUT. Claude and his allies at the 3020-a never bring up the conflict between Education Law Section 3020-a(2)(a), which states that probable cause must be determined by a vote of the school board in Executive Session, and Ed Law Section 2590-j(7) which says that a Superintendent and/or a principal can pass the determination of probable cause around like a football. I dont think so.
      Im willing to be shut up, just prove to me, Claude, that 2590-j trumps 3020-a and there is no conflict, (and I'll still insist that the 3020-a process in NYC is a mess, and NYSUT does not help members by not addressing this issue).


      3020-a arbitration (Taylor Law) is compulsory and guarantees that tenured teachers may not be disciplined without a hearing unless Respondent intentionally waives his/her rights to such a hearing.
      The requirement to arbitrate arises through a statutory mandate, thus the arbitrator's actions are subject to judicial scrutiny under CPLR §7511. Without a proper determination of probable cause the Arbitrator does not have subject matter jurisdiction and cannot rule on the charges nor proceed.

      New York City tenured personnel are not carved out of the protections given under §3030-a, although this is a common argument of the Department, who often cites Section 2590-h(19) and (38) as controlling law on the issue of a vote on probable cause as well as on the delegation of the powers of the employing board ("chancellor"). These clauses give powers to Community Education Councils but not a vote on probable cause, for 3020-a hearings, according to their duties and responsibilities on their website:

      http://www.learndoe.org/face/files/2012/10/CCEC-ROLES-AND-RESPONSIBILITIES-webinar.pdf

      In fact, CECs have "no administrative or executive function". While there is a reference to 3020-a, there in fact is no specific role or responsibility which the CECs have to charge, find, or impact the charges filed under 3020-a after a vote in Executive Session.

      Either the state legislature neglected to make certain that the vote on probable cause by a school board was included in the CEC Roles and Responsibilities, or the omission of the board's responsibility under 3020-a(2)(a) was deliberate, and the state legislature did not intend for the CEC members to vote on probable cause in an Executive Session on 3020-a charges. Even if the neglect/omission can be excused, which I argue it cannot be, then there must be proper Notice of the public meeting at which the Executive Session took place, along with questions such as who voted, when, with what information, etc.


      In N.Y. CVS. LAW § 200 : NY Code - Section 200: Statement of policy:

      "The legislature of the state of New York declares that it is the public policy of the state and the purpose of this act to promote harmonious and cooperative relationships between government and its employees and to protect the public by assuring, at all times, the orderly and uninterrupted operations and functions of government."

      Public policy is not, therefore, intended to violate existing laws and confound Plaintiff, Defendants, and policymakers with inconsistencies and denial of protections especially those given by the Taylor Law pursuant to Section 3020-a(1) and (2)(a).  

      In fact, in 2008 I was asking these same questions, so Ellie Engler, Leroy Barr, Gary Sprung called me into a meeting at which they told me that attending 3020-a was a "liability"for them and I had to stop. They also told me to take down my blog, even though Randi Weingarten had told me to continue doing my outside advocacy. Randi won. Thanks Randi!!

      UFT Co-staff Director Leroy Barr

      Below is Ellie Engler's apology (spelling and grammatical errors are hers):



      From: Ellie Engler
      Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 4:45 PM
      To: Betsy Combier
      Cc: Randi Weingarten
      Subject: RE: schedule Oct.6-10

      Dear Betsy,

      Please allow me to apologize to you.  I am knew to all of this...I spoke
      with Randi at great length and she assured me that you could go to the
      hearings if the members requested and that the members were more than
      pleased with your advocacy.

      I wrote the email to you prematurely and without investigating the issue
      fully.  Therefore, I would be happy to meet with you again, but carry on
      as they say and thank you for all of your good work.

      I am so sorry for the mistake.

      ellie

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Betsy Combier
      Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 4:32 PM
      To: Ellie Engler; Garry Sprung; LeRoy Barr
      Cc: Randi Weingarten; Betsy Combier
      Subject: RE: schedule Oct.6-10

      Dear Ellie,

      I am quite confused. At the meeting to which I was called with you, Gary
      and Leroy, the subject of my attendance at hearings was brought up by me
      as part of what I thought was my very successful work helping members
      who have been re-assigned. I have no recollection at all of any
      agreement about anything to do with my going or not to the 3020-a
      hearings at 51 Chambers Street. Gary said that he thought it might incur
      some kind of liability, but Adam said that he did not think that it did.
      I agree that everything must and should be discussed so that we are all
      on the same path towards helping every member as much as possible,
      however as I know of no agreement, I am somewhat saddened by what seems
      to be a confrontation coming, something that I do not feel is warranted,
      given that I try at all times to accommodate your requests. I have not
      in the past, nor do I intend to in the future, violate "agreements", and
      I offer that I am not aware of one - or any mention of one - at this
      time.

      I just called Angela to set up an appointment to meet once again.

      Betsy

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Ellie Engler
      Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 7:29 PM
      To: Betsy Combier; Garry Sprung; LeRoy Barr
      Cc: Randi Weingarten
      Subject: RE: schedule Oct.6-10

      Thank you for the email. I understand all the points you raise in your
      email however it contradicts the agreement we reached at our last
      meeting. Agreements That you participated in. We have concernS about
      your representatioN at the hearings and after our meeting last week I
      thought we were all on the same page.

      However this email makes it clear that your role at the trc is not one
      we all agree upon. Betsy we are all on the same page about advocacy for
      our members. The problem is that the roles we each play are not clearly
      defined.

      I would appreciate it if you could call angela berry to set up another
      appointment for us to meet. Have a great weekend. Ellie

      Sent from my GoodLink synchronized handheld (www.good.com)

       -----Original Message-----
      From:   Betsy Combier
      Sent:   Friday, October 10, 2008 05:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
      To:     Garry Sprung; Ellie Engler; LeRoy Barr
      Cc:     Betsy Combier
      Subject:        RE: schedule Oct.6-10

      Dear Gary, Ellie, and Leroy,

      Several weeks ago I was asked by a member at the 333 7th
      Avenue TRC, to attend her 3020a hearing on October 6, 2008, as an
      observer. She had requested an open and public hearing prior to asking
      me if I could attend. Members in the TRCs know that I provide this
      advocacy work to people in need here in New York City, and have attended
      open and public 3020a hearings for teachers for many years as an
      observer. I attended all the hearings of a teacher in 2005 by the name
      of David Pakter, at his request. I was fascinated by the process.

      Randi asked me to provide advocacy at the UFT in August, 2007. I was
      asked to help members, and have, I believe, done so by listening to all
      members and putting members in touch with the borough offices and other
      UFT staff who can file a grievance, correct a certificate, or do
      whatever is necessary to resolve a problem. All last year I brought to
      Leroy's attention pending issues that needed immediate attention for TRC
      members. I am not an attorney and do not give legal advice.

      I have been asked by members to attend open and public 3020a hearings
      (after he/she decides, on his/her own volition, to have observers at the
      hearing) and this attendance is very important to the members for
      psychological support. I knew, from already attending hearings and
      speaking with teachers in the New York City public school system before
      August 2007, (three of my four daughters were attending NYC public
      schools and one still is in the system in NYC) what many of the concerns
      were. A major issue with newly re-assigned teachers is, as you well
      know, the emotional trauma that seems to overpower members when removed
      from their school, suddenly. I help the member who is feeling despair by
      listening to all their concerns, and helping them understand what the
      process is, in a very general way. I have, over the past year, gained
      the trust of many of the members at all of the TRCs.

      The 3020a hearing is frightening to all members, even those who have
      been through the experience before. The member who wants an open and
      public hearing wants someone there to just be "there" for him/her. I
      never speak, never contribute "evidence", never testify, and never add
      my opinion or give a judgment about a case. Members ask me to be at
      their hearings because they are scared, and gradually realize that
      indeed the UFT is "there" for them, throughout the process. There are
      many members out there who say that the only way to win a hearing is to
      have an open hearing. I do not ever say that. There are never any
      guarantees of anything. If asked to attend a hearing, I do because it is
      important to the member. There is no liability as I never contribute any
      information that could be harmful or disrupt the process in any way.

      By the way, perhaps I should add a little bit of my background in this
      area. For thirty-three years I have been a TV News producer, reporter,
      and journalist; for thirty years I have been an advocate. In 1978 I went
      to Egypt to help villagers "talk" with the government and get the
      appropriate goods and services needed to not only survive, but create
      businesses, obtain an education, and realize their dreams, by setting up
      solar-powered video and letting the villagers "speak" through this
      media.

      I worked on this project while producing news for ABC - TV, NBC, and
      CBS, in Egypt, Israel and Jordan. I obtained a grant in 1983 for $84,000
      and left Egypt after setting up the solar-powered video as a tool in
      assisting the villagers. I wrote my Masters thesis on this topic for New
      York University's Interactive Telecommunications Masters Program. This
      form of advocacy work combines information forensics, reporting and
      assistance in reaching a resolution to a problem for a person in need.

      I hope that this addresses your question.

      Betsy

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Garry Sprung
      Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 3:27 AM
      To: Betsy Combier; Ellie Engler; LeRoy Barr
      Cc: Adam Ross
      Subject: RE: schedule Oct.6-10

      Can you explain to us what hearing you are attending and under whose
      authorization on Monday at Chambers Street
      Thank you