Quantcast
Channel: NYC Rubber Room Reporter and ATR CONNECT
Viewing all 1018 articles
Browse latest View live

Oh My, Linda Hill, When Will You Take a Punishment and Run? The Silence of Carmen Farina

$
0
0
Linda Hill
 Principal Linda Hill and "Berta Bucks" , NYC Rubber Room Reporter, May 7, 2012

Fariña principal pal gets free pass after ripping off taxpayers

By Susan Edelman, Feb. 22, 2015
LINK

It pays to be the chancellor’s pet.

Principal Linda Hill of IS 49 in Staten Island was caught red-handed ripping off taxpayers in 2013 — after years of double dipping into overtime funds.

But Chancellor Carmen Fariña — Hill’s mentor when she became principal — has yet to discipline Hill or even require her to pay the money back.

Hill admitted she collected simultaneous overtime on multiple occasions for attending IS 49’s School Leadership Team meetings and for supervising an after-school program.

In testimony in a teacher’s lawsuit last October, Hill said she faced no fine or other discipline.

“I’m going to have to pay back whatever they decided the amount,” Hill said, but added she wasn’t told how much to repay or when.

Hill, whose salary last year was $146,713, has raked in an extra $55,700 in overtime in the last six years, records show.

Francesco Portelos, a former IS 49 teacher and member of the School Leadership Team, blew the whistle on Hill after obtaining overtime records in a Freedom of Information Law request.

The Department of Education completed a probe in 2013, but has kept it under wraps. The DOE refused to release its report to The Post, saying only, “The matter is pending.”

Portelos was banished to the rubber room for two years while the DOE probed charges lodged by Hill after he questioned her handling of school finances. Now a temporary teacher at IS 24 in Staten Island, he is suing the DOE in Brooklyn federal court, charging retaliation for raising his concerns.


NYC Teacher Francesco Portelos Challenges The Department of Education on The Issues of Retaliation and Secrecy by Betsy Combier

Re-posted from Parentadvocates.org

Francesco started his blog after he found his school's Principal, Linda Hill, was hiding improper documentation of school funds, would not answer his questions, and attacked him for two months. Francesco was removed the next month and put into a rubber room. In Francesco's Federal case the City Law Department, representing the Department of Education and Principal Hill, submitted a gag order to the Judge to shut him up. He is not complying. Why should he?

In order for the charges to be validated and Francesco punished, the DOE will have to prove that he intended to "bring harm" (prove it first, DOE)  to the school, to Linda Hill, and/or the students.After many conversations with Francesco I can say that he never wanted anything but good outcomes for his school. That's why he asked questions, always in good faith. NYC DOE corruption cannot survive in the open, so they are retaliating against Francesco for his courage to expose their corruption and fraud. I am a big fan of Francesco and his blog.
          
   Francesco Portelos   
     Francesco Portelos is a very intelligent man, a charismatic and excellent teacher, father, and blogger. It's the last category which may have been the "straw that broke the camel's back" and landed him in the rubber room - that 'no longer exists' (according to the UFT's April 15, 2010 agreement which neither the UFT nor the NYC DOE give a hoot about).  Francesco didn't plan to become the whistleblower hero of teachers that he is now. He was doing his job, teaching and being a chapter leader, when he believed that something was wrong with the data that his principal wrote into the school CEP. He wanted to know why the numbers didn't add up, and he wanted to make sure that the students came first, not a coverup of fraud.

Many people now know, after reading the blogs and websites on the global internet, that government personnel lie....so do union Presidents and staff. The media doesn't get the story straight, either.  (The Staten Island reporter did a better job) As you will see below, Francesco's story is generic, a mixture of DOE retaliation, dislike, exposure of secrets, and ludicrous errors. For his efforts Francesco won an "A For Accountability" Award from my Foundation.

Soon after he was removed from his classroom, I filed a Freedom of Information request for Principal Linda Hill's personnel file. Here are the results of my FOIL request:

Hill-files
school-files

I did not start my blog, NYC Rubber Room Reporter, until 2007. but since I studied the Soviet and American Military Industrial Complex at Columbia University and at Johns Hopkins' School For Advanced International Studies, and my dad was Assistant Attorney General of the State of New York under Louis Lefkowitz, I knew that governments exist because they can keep their operations secret. Secrecy is a major issue in politics, and whenever a whistleblower comes along, this person becomes the magnet for investigations, and harm. Really, what do cockroaches do when the light turns on? They scamper into the nearest dark crack or hole. NYC DOE personnel despise anyone who challenges them on their "right" to harm people by subterfuge and threats of harm. They want the victim to be so scared of future retaliation that they run away, never to be heard from again.

Francesco did not fit this approved status. He asked the question, "where's the money?" and, when Principal Linda Hill retaliated against him for asking questions she did not want to answer, he started his blog, Protectportelos, to tell the public everything that was said and done at the school.
Linda Hill at IS 49






From Francesco's blog:

Allegations Against Mr. Portelos
LINK
On April 26, 2012 I was removed from my position as an educator. This was after I tried resisting four months of attacks that began when I raised issues at NYC Public School Berta A. Dreyfus I.S. 49. I have not been permitted back to educate the inner city youth there ever since. Why? I was informed that I was under investigation. NYC DOE Executive Director of Human Resources,
Andrew Gordon, (pictured at right) stated he and then
Chief Deputy Counsel Courtenaye-Jackson Chase (pictured above) were the ones who decided to remove me based on some “very serious allegations“. I thought to myself ”I know I didn’t do anything wrong, so there must be some seriously false allegations made“. I was sent to a basement 20 miles away to do nothing for months and was told nothing. The taxpayer continued to pay my salary and that of the substitute. Good thing there is a big surplus in funds for education.


Queens rubber room
I was not going to sit and rot at a desk (rubber Room) when I should be teaching.


Francesco Portelos in front of Tweed, NYC DOE Headquarters
 I told my union provided attorney that I want to speak to investigators about whatever they have. He was reluctant and advised me against it. “Anything you say can and will be used against you.” he warned. “I don’t care. I want everything on the table. No guessing games.” He was able to set up a meeting with investigators from the Special Commissioner of Investigation’s office. Two professional gentleman met with me on June 14, 2012. We sat for over 2 hours at my attorneys office as they read out to me the long list of allegations. They read the first 3 that included some bogus real estate claims and a fake a text program I never heard of. I thought “No problem. That’s it?” Then they proceeded to state there is an additional 15 or so more allegations. I then thought to myself “Oh boy. I know I didn’t do anything wrong, but can I dodge all these bullets?”

Betsy Combier and NYSUT Attorney Chris Callagy

It turns out I can. As they read through the dates and names of those making the allegations, my nervousness went away. By the time they finished, I thought “That’s it? These are the serious allegations? This is why the students were educationally neglected?

Since that June 14, 2012 day, the allegations continued to mound and mound. It got to the point that investigators would visit me in exile and joke about it. “Surprise!…You’re the subject of a new investigation.” one stated and threw his hands up. “Well Mr. Portelos, this should be of no surprise, but you are the subject of another investigation.” another from OSI would say. It got to the point that I started wearing these frivolous allegations like a badge of honor. How scared were they of what I was uncovering that they were throwing anything and everything?
Here are all the allegations against me that started with SCI Case 12-537. Keep in mind that these all started AFTER I had case 12-533 opened (notice the numbers). Case 12-533 was reported January 26, 2012 and is still open (over 600 days). It alleged that Principal Hill was sitting and getting paid at the School Leadership Team, while also getting paid for OSYD’s Achieve Now Academy at the same time…double dipping?

See this file that shows alleged financial misconduct
Allegations 1, 2 and 3 were all submitted on January 30, 2012 – Just 3 business days after my first allegations of Principal Hill’s financial misconduct were reported (Jan 26) and UFT Chapter Leader, Richard Candia, walked out of a UFT meeting as I spoke and demanded I resign as UFT Delegate (Jan 27).
1. January 30, 2012- Principal Hill called and stated that Mr. Portelos hacked www.dreyfus49.com, and took her administrative privileges away.
2. January 30, 2012- Principal Hill received an anonymous call that Mr. Portelos used an iTunes program called Fake a Message to email a student and make it appear that it was sent by the Principal.
3. January 30, 2012 Rich Candia (UFT Chapter Leader) claims that Mr Portelos conducts real estate business during class time. Also, an “anonymous caller” left a message at SCI on Sunday January 29, 2012 and stated the same as above.
4. February 22, 2012- Principal Hill alleges that Mr. Portelos requested that a paraprofessional work with him and other teachers on a Learning Technology Grant (LTG) after school to help his students. Principal Hill declined and Mr. Portelos apparently had him work anyway and submit time sheets.
5. March 2012 -Assistant Principal Joanne Aguirre discovered a website called protectportelos.org and it had student names mentioned. Parents did not complain.
6. March 2012- Principal Hill alleged that the website, protectportelos.org, had pictures of students. Parents did not complain.
7. March 2012- Principal Hill and Richard Candia made allegations that Mr. Portelos sent emails to the staff about his investigation.
8. March 2012- Principal Hill made allegation that there was an agreement to shut down Protectportelos.org and he did not.
9. March 28, 2012 -Rich Candia claimed that Mr. Portelos hacked into the website www.dreyfus49.com and copied personal email between him and Principal Hill and distributed it to the staff.
10. March 28, 2012 -Rich Candia alleges that Mr. Portelos walks back and forth in front of his classroom everyday and intimidates him. He was going to file a police report.
11. March 29, 2012 -Principal Hill alleges that she directed Mr. Portelos to shut down the website he owns and he did not. He also read, printed and distributed private emails from Rich Candia.
12. April 5, 2012 -Assistant Principal Joanne Aguirre alleged that Mr. Portelos asked the Parent Coordinator for pictures of a social gathering to possibly use to Photoshop Aguirre.
13. April 5,2012 – Assistant Principal Joanne Aguirre alleged that three emergency buttons in rooms around the school were blinking and that Mr. Portelos must be responsible.
14. April 2012 -Rich Candia emailed investigators stating again that Mr. Portelos hacked into the website he owned and distributed personal emails.
15. April 2012 -Rich Candia emailed investigators that Mr. Portelos sent a secret code to Rich Candia’s phone and retrieved his text history and distributed it to the staff.
16. April 2012 -Rich Candia emailed investigators that Mr. Portelos bashed IS 49 on Facebook.
17. April 2012 -Rich Candia alleges that Mr. Portelos “mailed” 2 harassing letters to Mr. Candia’s home.
18. April 2012 -Rich Candia alleged that Mr. Portelos posted pictures of students without parental consent. No parents have complained.
19. April 2012 -Rich Candia alleged that Mr. Portelos sent an email to the staff urging them not to share union matters.
After Mr. Portelos was removed from school:
20. May 2012 -Principal Hill alleges that Mr. Portelos emailed parents telling them that he posted lessons on his private website mrportelos.com
21. May 2012 -An unidentified teacher stated that they saw a message pop up on one of his classroom computers stating “Mr. Portelos’ class is fun“.
22. June 2012- Mr. Portelos also worked on his own clothing site called www.faceshop.me.
23. September 2012- Principal Hill alleged that Mr. Portelos remotely connected to his STEM lab and forced users to connect to his site www.mrportelos.com
24. September 2012- Teacher Jennifer Wolfson, Principal Hill and Richard Candia alleged that Mr. Portelos shared her teacher certification information with a parent in the community and it included her address and social security number.
25. October 2012- Principal Hill Alleged that Mr. Portelos hacked and manipulated the school’s voice mail system and routed listeners to his website www.occupywarrenstreet.org.
26. November 29, 2012- Principal Hill asked that Mr. Portelos redirected the site he owns, dreyfus49.com, to another site he owns, protectportelos.org.
27. November 30 2012- Principal Hill alleged that Mr. Portelos put hidden cameras and microphones in the staff lounge.
28. December 14, 2012- Superintendent Erminia Claudio alleged Mr. Portelos forwarded a video of an AP allegedly frisking a female student to community parents. A parent was going to put it on YouTube.
29. March 2013- Principal Hill alleged that Mr. Portelos informed students how to smuggle weapons into school on his blog.
30. April 2013- Principal Hill alleged that Mr. Portelos sent an anti-semetic, sexist and racist email to parents because he used the word “kosher” and his signature file quoted Martin Luther King Jr.
31. April 2013- Principal Hill alleged that Mr. Portelos uploaded a video of a student on youtube without permission.
32. May 2013- Principal Hill, Teacher Susanne Abramowitz and Teacher Richard Candia alleged that Mr. Portelos ordered several magazines to the school in the complainant’s name and then sent them the bill for it.
And there you have it. 32. All of which I believe, and can back up, are….unsubstantiated. SCI published a report about some of these that was extremely vague. So vague that even an AAA arbitrator could not make sense of it.

Francesco wrote Superintendent Erminia Claudio a letter:
Erminia Claudio
















Dear Superintendent Erminia Claudio,
II was summoned to your District 31 office for a disciplinary meeting last Friday May 3rd. At the meeting I indicated that I would like to exercise my right as a citizen and record the conversation. You indicated that I cannot. The meeting was postponed. I thought due to pending attorney review of the matter. This Wednesday I received another letter (attached), indicating I should meet you again today. In addition you wrote I "have no right" to record as per the Collective Bargaining Agreement. You never cited an article or section. I believe that is because one does not exist and that was just another false statement made to me.
After being greeted by three School Safety Agents, I entered your office and stated that I'm again exercising my right to record. I also stated that the UFT told me to "stick to my guns". You stated there is a policy against it. You failed to reference any law, policy, regulation or article of our contract that prohibits me from recording. I thought you had a week to discuss with attorneys. You tried to imply that I did not want the meeting to take place. That is not true. I always want to explain what is happening and have done so many times on my website www.educatorfightsback.org.
The meeting ended and I left, but not because I wished it to. I'm more than happy to address the SCI report, without recording, if you can show me something that states I legally can't. I'm all about following the law.
On my 380th day of wrongful exile, I will drive 20 miles from my community school, and sit at an empty cubicle. The taxpayer will continue to cover that bill. This parent and educator is waiting to see when someone will step up to resolve this issue that has negatively affected countless children and adults.
Keep in mind that I'm still uncovering more allegations of financial misconduct on Principal Linda Hill. $40,000 in unsupervised overtime? Using the school credit card for personal items? Breaking down payments so she doesn't need authorization? Your signature appears to be missing from all time cards. Why? See All Down Hill

Francesco filed a Federal lawsuit to obtain justice. During this proceeding, which is ongoing, he received approximately 3,000 emails and posted many of these on his website. This is a nightmare for the NYC DOE, so the NYC Law Department filed a Motion for a Protective Order against any further exposure of intra-agency actions. This is, in all respects, a "gag" order. Francesco submitted opposition.

Ironically, I was in the same room with Federal Defendant Linda Hill and OSI Investigator Dennis Boyles on Wednesday, November 6, 2013. One of my teacher clients asked me to go with her to see OSI Investigator Katherine Higgenbotham at OSI, and write Ms. Higgenbotham that as she did not work for the DOE, she did not have UFT representation, and she was bringing an advocate with her. My client was told to come in for an interview about the complaint she filed against the Principal of her former school. She no longer works for the DOE, and of course I don't either. We got to 65 Court Street, 9th floor, a little early, so we sat in the waiting room not far from the large wall poster with DOE CEO Dennis Walcott's picture peering out over the top of a bouquet of fake blue roses, with glitter on them (how appropriate - see picture).



When Ms. Higgenbotham came to the door of the offices to bring my client back inside for the interview, she looked at me and said, "Who are you"? Then "Do you work for the Department?" (my answer: "No") . My client told her that I was the advocate about whom she wrote would be accompanying her. Higgenbotham, in line with bizarre DOE "policy" told us that due to confidentiality I could not come inside, she just could not talk with my client with me in the room. We told Higgenbotham that my client waived all confidentiality, and that she did not work for the DOE Either, but the answer was still NO. So, my client went to the back office, then came out a few minutes later. She told me that Higgenbotham had told her she could give her an oral statement. My client said "No, I'm going to write a statement and I'm going outside to do it". She came outside, we wrote a statement about the principal in the waiting room, and she went back, with the statement and proof that OSI Investigator Andy Mina had already investigated the Principal and had dropped it. Higgenbotham knew nothing about this, she claimed, and said that this "changed everything".

Soon after I entered the OSI waiting room, a CSA Representative who knows me came into the room, said hello, and sat down. A short while later, Linda Hill came in and sat down. Turns out Ms. Hill was called in to be interviewed for wrong-doing, after she did not report a possible incident in her school, reported by none other than...Francesco Portelos. The OSI Investigator is Wei Liu. I was very surprised at the coincidence of being there at the same time as Linda Hill who was very upset with Francesco, she told her CSA rep. He is retaliating against her, she said, and the CSA rep. agreed, it's "simply awful". The CSA Rep. reminded Principal Hill, "I can't protect you if you don't report what happened". Then Dennis Boyles walked in, and strangely, did not see me at first. Mr. Boyles tried to get $5000 from me in 2004, but I refused to take his 'request' seriously.

Boyles put his hand on Ms. Hill's right shoulder and said to the CSA Rep., "Ms. Hill and I are personal friends...this Portelos guy, he is legitimately nuts...we shouldn't worry about him, he is in a rubber room". He laughed. Dennis was speaking very loudly. Then Investigator Wei Liu came and asked Ms. Hill and her Rep. to come into the office - behind the locked doors - and Dennis started to leave the room. As he was turning the corner to leave, he looked back for a quick second. He disappeared for less than a minute, and then came back, and came over to me and my client. I said, "Hello, Ms. Boyles, how are you?" He grunted "fine" and then asked my client 3 times whether she needed anything. Neither of us told him her name. Then, he went into the office after asking the receptionist to buzz him in.

The push to shut Francesco up continues as he proceeds with his 3020-a "arbitration" (which is more like a criminal trial). Arbitrator Felice Busto, a very sweet lady who used to be connected with a thoroughbred rescue organization named ReRun, has asked NYSUT Attorney Chris Callagy and DOE prosecutor Jordana Shenkman to refrain from discussing any part of the 3020-a or write or post anything. Busto has also asked members of the public to not post the proceedings, and even though I do not have to comply, I will do whatever Arbitrator Busto requests at this point. Im sure that the entire "trial" will be on my blog and Francesco's when it is over and the decision is made.

NYC DOE Gotcha Squad Attorney Jordana Shenkman

So, I will not discuss any of the testimony or what has transpired during the hearing, but I will tell you here a little bit about the people involved. NYC DOE Attorney Jordana Shenkman loves being the center of public attention, it seems. She allowed Time Out magazine to do a spread about her apartment near me on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Ms. Shenkman, her co-prosecutor in the Portelos 3020-a Frances Hopson, and DOE Attorneys Jeffrey Gamils and Philip Olivieri, all now working for the Gotcha Squad, were all appointed Assistant District Attorneys in the Bronx, September 2004. On the same list is Gina Martinez, possibly the Director now of OPI who helped the DOE destroy the career of former District 19 Superintendent Martin Weinstein.

I have been watching and documenting the destruction of truth and integrity in the NYC Department of Education since 1999, when I, PTA President of Booker T. Washington MS 54, asked Lawrence ("Larry") Lynch, Principal, when we, the parents, would get our $13,000+ raised at a Barnes and Noble fundraiser, back. He gave our check to District 3 Superintendent Patricia Romandetto the money so she could "see it". As PTA President I was a member of the School Leadership Team (SLT) and saw that the Comprehensive Education Plan (CEP) which we were responsible for writing, had no data in it. I went to the District 3 office and a person there handed me a copy of the CEP which Larry Lynch had handed in - with the Xeroxed signatures of all of us from the previous year, the year that he was given $1 million in Title 1 funds the school was not eligible to receive. I was also given information that proved the special education students at MS 54 were not getting their services, and the money was flowing into the District 3 office through the unethical and dirty hands of DJ Sheppard, DOE Family Engagement Representative. I wrote a report about all of this and handed it in to District 3 on June 5, 2001, soon after winning the PTA President position for the third time (3 of my 4 daughters attended MS 54, so I was there more than 7 years). On June 7, 2001 DJ Sheppard, 10 white parents, Larry Lynch, and staff of Pat Romandetto, came to the last PTA meeting of the year and called me a "liar, child abuser and thief". The DOE created an "investigation" against me and went after all 4 of my children. The investigator, Richard Switach, became very friendly and told me how he had received the information, and who was behind it. He mentioned the names of DJ Sheppard and Theresa Europe.

Several years later, I worked with the Chinese parents at Stuyvesant High School in exposing the theft of money there, and we were all made into monsters for doing this. My name was defamed by parent Paola De Kock, who was then gathered into the clique run by Class Size Matters' Leonie Haimson, who vowed never to have my name or anything I write on her blogs.

So in 2003 when I started visiting the rubber rooms, asked by David Pakter to speak there with UFT members, I was not completely shocked with the false claims and baseless charges filed against tenured teachers. Luckily, I was given the "Mein Kampf" of the Bloomberg administration, the successful removal of the NYC Board of Education and a general public vote, as a way to obtain and keep democracy out of public schools. I thought that someone had to document this process known as "the rubber room", or "rubberization" (my definition of 'rubber room' is that this is not a place but a process), so I started attending the teacher trials known as 3020-a. The first "teacher trial" I attended, as an observer, lasted several months, the arbitrator was Senior panel member Martin Scheinman, and David's NYSUT Attorney was Chris Callagy.

We all got to know each other very well. I have been documenting the teacher trials ever since, for my book. The purpose of my writing on my blogs, website, and my book is to stop this random, arbitrary and shocking mess of teacher abuse in NYC and America as well as parent and student harassment. Sadly, parents attack other parents and school administrators use students to get false claims passed on to hearing officers as "facts". All of this I hope will stop.

Former 3020-a Arbitrator Leona Barsky Tells the Judge She's Mentally Ill

$
0
0
I remember very well the 3020-a hearing that I worked on as the paralegal where Leona Barsky was the Arbitrator. Both I and the person who attended as the member of the public where astonished at Ms. Barsky's lack of respect for the process and for the private Attorney who was defending the Respondent.

We thought she was not rational.

Now New York Supreme Court Judge Ellen Gesmer thinks so as well. And Leona's ex-husband, Stephen Radin. Maybe they are all nuts.

Leona Barsky herself evidently thinks she is too mentally ill to hold a job (see article below). Did she come to this realization before, during, or after she was working as an Arbitrator on the 3020-a Panel with the Department of Education?

Betsy Combier
Leona Barsky (left) failed to soak soon-to-be ex Stephen Radin (right) for extra alimony by claiming she was
too mentally unstable to work

Judge doesn’t buy wife’s ‘mentally ill’ bid for more alimony


She’s crazy greedy.
An Ivy League-educated lawyer tried to claim she is too mentally ill to hold a job — to get her estranged husband to pay for her lavish lifestyle after their divorce, according to Manhattan court papers.
But while Leona Barsky, 56, has been supposedly so whacked out, she has blown $1.5 million of her lawyer husband’s dough on plastic surgery, extravagant vacations, jewelry, clothing and legal bills, documents show.
Barsky — who arbitrated high-profile disputes between the city Department of Education and the teachers union in 2010 — also even volunteered to talk to law students at her alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania.
A Manhattan judge didn’t buy her crazy story — and has now awarded her a relatively measly $12,000 a month in alimony after she asked for more than five times that amount.

Justice Ellen Gesmer snipped in her searing, 29-page decision that Barsky could “achieve anything [if] she puts her mind to it.”
Gesmer was miffed by Barsky’s attempt to duck a court hearing by submitting a doctor’s note claiming she was on the verge of a heart attack — when she showed up at a Knicks game that night.
The fed-up judge calculated that the Penn and Cornell University grad — who once worked for Revlon — could earn more than $300,000 a year since she’s only been out of the workforce since 2012.
Barsky’s soon-to-be-ex-husband, Stephen Radin, rakes in more than $2 million as a partner at the international corporate law firm Weil, Gotshal & Manges.
The couple was married for almost 25 years and has two grown children.
When Radin, 55, filed for divorce against his wife in 2012, she claimed that “her mental condition prevent[ed] her from maintaining employment.”
Barsky said her psychiatrist would testify that she was “very fragile” and “seriously traumatized.”
But the judge never let the shrink take the stand to answer questions about the unnamed mental illness because the same doc had already claimed in a previous custody dispute that her patient was “a strong person” who “has never evidenced any symptoms of mental illness.”
The judge also knocked Barsky for “lying on her net-worth statement by inflating expenses by large amounts in 22 separate categories.”
Barsky still made out well in the divorce.
On top of the alimony, she’ll receive 35 percent of the family’s $12 million in assets, including a 2011 Lexus, a $3 million Upper West Side apartment and $140,000 worth of silverware, jewelry and art.
She declined to comment.
Her husband also declined to comment through his lawyer, ­Robert Cohen.





Leona Barsky

Summary

Specialties: alternative dispute resolution, arbitration and mediation, workplace investigations, employment compliance, training and audits, human resources, employment, equal employment opportunity/employment discrimination, affirmative action, labor and employee benefits law

Experience

Labor and Employment Arbitrator and Mediator, Principal Attorney and Consultant

Workplace ADR and Compliance Services
 – Present (11 years)
Labor and Employment Arbitrator and Mediator 2010 to present
Principal Attorney, Consultant and Factfinder, Workplace Investigations, Compliance and Training 
Cornell University, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Martin Scheinman Institute on Conflict Resolution, Labor Arbitrator Development Certificate Program

Cornell University

1980 B.S. 1981 M.S., industrial and labor relations

Master's thesis: "A Comparison of the Treatment of Arbitrability Questions in the Private Sector and the New York State Public Sector"

Additional Info

  • Advice for Contacting Leona

    leonabarsky@aol.com

  • Carmen Farina and Her Favored - Oops, - Partnership Support Organizations (PSOs)

    $
    0
    0
    The High School of Telecommunication Arts and Technology in Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, is part of a school-support network run by New Visions for Public Schools. While Chancellor Carmen Fariña eliminated most of those networks, New Visions may survive.
    How a few school-support groups created under Bloomberg survived Fariña’s overhaul

    A group of privately run partner organizations will remain,
    but some may fare better than others
     
    Carmen Farina
     
    Chancellor Carmen Fariña unveiled a sweeping redesign of the school system last month, replacing the Bloomberg-era support teams that had helped principals manage their schools with powerful superintendents and borough offices.
    She did, however, allow one vestige of former Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s system to persist: the handful of support teams run by nonprofits and universities, which she said could still work with schools in a limited way.
    But, as the dust settles, it appears that some of those groups could fare much better than others. While certain ones will work with far fewer schools and in a much narrower capacity than they did before, others could keep most of their schools and support functions, according to interviews with people at the privately run groups, known as as “partnership support organizations,” or PSOs.
    Robert Hughes, the president of New Visions for Public Schools, is in talks with the city about the role
    his school-support group will play under the new system.
    The group most people point to as the likely winner in the reorganization is New Visions for Public Schools, a large PSO overseeing about 80 schools with a high-powered board of trustees who descended on City Hall before the restructuring was announced. The schools in that group and a few others will be overseen by their own superintendents even though they are spread across the city — a contrast to the rest of the chancellor’s new system, which is built around geographic districts.
    While the new arrangements are still being finalized, supporters point out that groups like New Visions have deep experience helping run schools and that many principals are eager to keep their PSOs. But experts say that could complicate Fariña’s new power structure, which was meant to remove a layer separating the chancellor from schools and create consistency across districts. Some suspect that letting a group like New Visions retain such influence was not Fariña’s first choice, but a concession to politics.
    “It does seem to be a little bit at odds with the chancellor’s desire to have very clear hierarchal authority lines,” said Aaron Pallas, a Teachers College professor who the department consulted as it planned the reorganization. “It may be a bit of political compromise that everyone had to live with.”

    Fearing change, a PSO pushes back

    Bloomberg and his long-serving schools chief, Joel Klein, launched the partnership program in 2007 as part of their push to let schools choose the type of support they received. Nonprofit groups such as New Visions and the Urban Assembly — which had also opened new schools — joined the program, as did universities such as CUNY and Fordham.
    PSO pull quote 2
    Schools paid the groups up to $60,000 or so each year for their services, which include everything from help with hiring and budgeting to teacher training and data analysis. A few years later, the administration created the current school-support networks that provided similar services but were staffed by city employees.
    Early last year, Fariña dispatched a team to study Bloomberg’s school-support system and propose ways to improve it. While the team was still working, Fariña retrained and gave new authority to the district superintendents, whose role had been diminished under Bloomberg.
    By the fall, superintendents were showing up regularly at schools, weighing in on instructional matters, and hosting training sessions — activities that, until then, had been handled by the networks and PSOs. As Fariña’s restructuring announcement drew near, many of those groups became convinced that she planned to cut them out of the system.
    At that point, New Visions sprang into action.
    Some of its board members met with First Deputy Mayor Anthony Shorris to argue that the group should continue to support its schools under the new structure, according to sources. (Disclosure: Chalkbeat shares a board member with New Visions.) The group’s founder, corporate lawyer Richard Beattie, emailed the mayor directly.
    The New Visions board has strong ties to City Hall. Its co-chairman, Roger Altman, is an investment banker who co-hosted a fundraiser for de Blasio in 2013 and later joined his pre-kindergarten campaign committee. Its president, Robert Hughes, was appointed to a joint City Hall-education department advisory group last year. (Richard Kahan, the head of Urban Assembly, also was on that task force.)
    “It would have been a political nightmare for the mayor to pull the plug” on New Visions, said David Bloomfield, an education professor at the CUNY Grad Center and Brooklyn College, who has called for more scrutiny of the PSOs.
    Altman’s office did not respond to a request for comment about New Visions’ advocacy efforts, while Beattie referred requests to Hughes. Hughes did not address the board’s efforts, but said he has had conversations with Fariña about New Visions’ “strengths, challenges and potential partnership roles going forward.”
    “I have no way of knowing their impact internally on her or anyone else in the administration,” he said in an email. “And while they are continuing, they have been productive and we are moving in a good direction.”

    PSOs downsized to “affinity groups”

    When Fariña finally made her announcement last month ending the networks, she said that groups like New Visions, Urban Assembly, and CUNY would remain “valued partners.” But now, the former PSOs would be called “affinity groups” and would provide a narrower range of services while receiving closer supervision by the education department.
    “They will be brought under a superintendent,” she said, “and they will be held accountable for results – just like everyone else.”

    Chancellor Carmen Fariña with her chief strategy officer, Josh Wallack, who led a review of the city’s
    school-support structure last year.
    Fariña had already met individually with the leaders of each of the half-dozen or so PSOs in the days before the speech, according to people with knowledge of the meetings. She asked them to submit “concept papers” describing how they could offer schools whatever particular support she considered each group’s specialty — mostly training services, like helping teachers work with English learners or foster students’ emotional development, the people said.
    “It was not an open-ended invitation,” said Patrick Montesano, director of US education programs for FHI 360, a PSO serving 21 schools.
    Some of those groups are still waiting to hear back weeks after submitting papers, but several said it is clear that they will go from helping manage every aspect of their schools to coaching staffers on very specific topics. Some, including Fordham, said they expect to partner with fewer schools than they do now. In fact, the largest PSO — a group known as CEI-PEA, which has a long history working with New York City schools — will go from serving over 200 schools as a PSO to just 25 as an affinity group, according to sources.
    PSO pull quote 3Some of the groups, such as Fordham and FHI 360, said they welcomed the new opportunity, adding that it returned the PSOs to their original focus on instruction rather than schools’ operations or compliance with city rules. But others complained about a lack of transparency as the department makes decisions about the role each group will play, which will involve many schools and contracts worth thousands of dollars.
    “They have made some decisions based on criteria that we don’t fully understand,” said one PSO leader who asked for anonymity while negotiations continue.
    Officials did not share the full set of criteria for those decisions, but said one consideration was the performance of each group’s schools.

    Different deals raise questions

    As it turns out, not all affinity groups are created equal.
    Even as some of the PSOs are being invited to become narrowly defined affinity groups with fewer schools, others are negotiating to keep all of their schools and to play a substantial role supporting them.
    New Visions, for one, is trying to keep all 80 of its schools and support them in key areas, including math and literacy instruction, data analysis, preparing students for college, and catching up students who are behind, sources said. (It does not expect to continue helping its schools with back-office operations.) Urban Assembly is also angling to keep most of its 23 schools, a significant role in supporting them, and roughly the same budget, according to sources.
    Richard Kahan
    “There are going to be changes in our relationship with D.O.E., which I think are positive,” Urban Assembly’s Richard Kahan said in a city press release about the school system restructuring, which also quoted Robert Hughes. “But we stay together as a network, our principals stay together, we stay together as a team with our principals.”
    PSO pull quote 1
    Those schools have also been promised dedicated superintendents (two for New Visions, and one that Urban Assembly will share with another group), who will oversee all their schools even though they are spread across several districts. That is a boon for the groups, since the superintendents rating their schools and principals will now have a deep understanding of each group’s approach.
    While that arrangement benefits the two well-connected groups, it is likely as much a factor of their focus on high schools as it is their political clout. State law dictates that elementary and middle schools be grouped in geographic districts overseen by superintendents, but high schools are not bound by those rules — freeing the city to organize them by affiliation.
    In fact, the city is in the process of putting several other coalitions of like-minded high schools spread across the city under single superintendents, people from those coalitions said. They include multiple Outward Bound schools that use a particular learning model, Internationals high schools that serve recent immigrants, and schools in the Performance Standards Consortium, which use alternative assessments instead of traditional tests.
    But with the city so far sharing few details about the affinity groups and what role each will play, some groups have questioned the way decisions are being made.
    “We’ve learned that there is politics in education,” a PSO leader said, “and politics came into play in this.”
    Fariña’s spokeswoman, Devora Kaye, said the chancellor’s redesign was meant to make sure schools get the support they need while giving successful principals more flexibility.
    “The chancellor made the decision to streamline and align the school support structure by creating a system with stronger superintendents, Borough Field Support Centers, and affinity groups reporting to superintendents,” Kaye said, “based on her judgment that this was the structure that would be most effective in helping all our schools improve and all our students succeed.”

    UFT, NYSUT, Department of Education, and Arbitrators Working in 3020-a Hearings Will Hold a Secret Meeting Today, February 24, 2015 at 4PM

    $
    0
    0
    We are wondering what new, secret policy changes will be handed down today at a mandatory meeting for all Arbitrators, NYSUT and DOE attorneys who work in 3020-a cases. Who is paying for the time of these attorneys and arbitrators? ( Some arbitrators on the NYC panel are not attorneys).

    Laura Brantley, Naeemah Lamont and Dennis Da Costa prowl the halls of 49-51 Chambers Street 6th floor for any person who dares to challenge their authority - i.e. anyone who gives an extra date or cancels a 3020-a date because a private attorney cannot make it; argues that a Respondent must pay if they have a death in the family and want to postpone a hearing, or the Respondent cannot come in because he/she is in a coma, etc.

    Nothing matters to them except termination, resignation, or anything similar.

    The 3020-a arbitrators are supposed to be appointed by the Respondent and the Department of Education, but they are not. They are picked by Claude Hersh, Associate General Counsel for NYSUT in New York, and Theresa Europe of the DOE, but then Dennis Da Costa appoints the arbitrator for each case, my sources tell me.

    If an arbitrator strays from the path created by Dennis, Laura and Naeemah, one of the three, usually Dennis, will come into the hearing room and either scream and yell abuses and insults, or sit quietly, letting his presence tell the arbitrator that he/she does it his/the Dept's way, or you, Mr./Ms Arbitrator, get the highway.

    Today at 4PM there is a meeting for NYSUT, attorneys for the Department of Education, and all Arbitrators at 49-51 Chambers Street, set up by Adam Ross, UFT attorney and Courtenaye Jackson-Chase, General Counsel for the Department of Education.

    Private attorneys are not invited (we tried).

    This meeting should be in the public eye because it concerns the public.

    In my opinion, the autocratic leadership by NYSUT/UFT/DOE over 3020-a hearings in New York City and the violations of due process which consistently plague the hearings must stop.

    Every Respondent should have an open and public hearing (it's your choice) and open up these hearing to public scrutiny.

    Betsy Combier

    PS 321 in Brooklyn Asks For Parents To Help Stop Governor Cuomo From Making Changes To Teacher Evaluation Process

    $
    0
    0
    Governor Andrew Cuomo

    Teachers at popular school ask parents for help: This may sound ‘absurd’ but it’s true.
    LINK

    PS 321 in Brooklyn’s Park Slope area is a popular school. Parents and kids like going there because of the dedication of its principal, Elizabeth Phillips, and its approximately 100 teachers. Now, in an unusual move, those teachers are publicly turning to parents for help against school reform proposals by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo that they say will harm the school. The letter clearly explains why some of the proposals that Cuomo has advanced to change teacher evaluation will negatively impact schools around the state. These reforms are not unique to New York, so the letter speaks to what is happening in schools around the country.

    The reference to Liz in the letter is to the principal, Elizabeth Phillips. In 2012, I published a letter from Phillips to then New York State Education Commissioner John King (who is now a senior advisor to Education Secretary Arne Duncan) saying that there were many “flawed questions” on the state’s mandatory English Language Arts standardized test given to students for “accountability” purposes. The letter was sent after King had invalidated one set of now infamous questions on a the eighth-grade test about a talking pineapple.

    Here is the new letter from PS 321 teachers to parents, on the school’s website, which I am republishing with permission.


    February 23, 2015

    Dear PS 321 Families,

    It is with heavy hearts that we, the teachers at 321, reach out to you to ask for your help.

    Governor Cuomo has proposed major changes to teacher evaluations in New York State. We want to let you know, from a teacher’s perspective, the changes this law could bring to PS 321 – and to our profession – if it passes.

    50% of a teacher’s rating would be based on state test scores. (Currently it is 20%).
    35% of a teacher’s rating would be based on the findings of an outside “independent observer” who will conduct a one time visit to the classroom. (This has never been done before. Currently our principal and assistant principals’ observations count for 60%).
    15% of a teacher’s rating would be based on observations by the principal or assistant principals. The very people who know our work best would have the least input into our evaluation.
    50% + 35% = 85% of our evaluations would be removed from the hands of our community and placed in the hands of the state.


    And then, using these numbers, any teacher who is rated ineffective two years in a row can be fired. Liz might have no say in this.

    So what might that do to PS 321? Realistically, many of us could be fired. Every year. And many more of us would be pushed away from the profession we love.

    Here’s something parents need to understand. Even though, when our students take the standardized tests, most of them do just fine… many PS 321 teachers do not. Teachers’ ratings are not based on their students’ raw scores for the year, but whether their students improved from one year to the next. If a student with a ‘3’ gets one fewer question correct in 4th grade than she did in 3rd, that student might not have demonstrated the “added value” their teacher is expected to have instilled. Even though the student has mastered that grade’s content. Even though it’s just one question. And that teacher might, therefore, be rated in the bottom percentile of teachers.

    That may sound patently absurd. However, that has already happened here.

    If Governor Cuomo’s evaluation proposals come to pass, it might start to happen more and more. And if we are rated ineffective as a result two years in a row, we might be fired.

    That is why so many schools in NYC spend so much time prepping for the tests. One or two wrong answers can make or break a teacher’s rating.


    Faced with these changes, we’ve already been hearing from so many of our colleagues from across the city and state who will be forced to do more test prep. Even when they know that the tests do not give an accurate picture of student learning, or of the effectiveness of teachers. Even though they know teaching to the test is bad teaching. Faced with the reality of the loss of a paycheck – the loss of the career they are building, have built, or want to build – these proposals will push them to teach in ways they know to be counterproductive.



    That breaks our hearts. But the truth is, faced with the same reality, there are those of us here who would be feeling the very same pressure. Not because we’d want to. We would try to resist. But it is inevitable that if the governor’s proposals go through, all schools will narrow their curriculum to some extent.

    And that’s scary. And it breaks our hearts even more. Because we know what we have here. We love what we have— in you, in our students, in all that the PS 321 community represents. The joy that is present— every day, in our school. The value that is placed on intellectual curiosity, on creativity, on the arts. The love of learning that is visible when you enter our building, when you go into classrooms, and when you talk to students and teachers.

    The values present in Governor Cuomo’s proposals are antithetical to our own. And they place them at risk. The numbers are clear: 50% of our value will be six days of tests. 35% of our value will be one day with an independent observer. And 15% of our value will be in evaluation by Liz and the assistant principals, those who know us best as educators.

    Those are their values.

    Our joy, our love of learning, our desire to help students become deep thinkers and problem solvers, our community, our commitment to constantly improving our practice… those are ours.

    PS 321 Families: don’t let them take our values away.

    We need your help. And we need it now. The education law is folded into the state budget. It goes up for a vote before April 1st.

    We need you to let your legislators know that you disagree with this plan:
    1. Email Governor Cuomo right now at gov.cuomo@chamber.state.ny.us.
    2. Visit http://www.nyteacherletter.org/ and sign the letter to let your legislator know you disapprove of the law.
    3. Contact your assemblymember. Go to http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/ to find their contact information. Don’t stop there. Go to their offices and demand attention.
    Post this issue on Facebook and tell your friends. Use social media to spread the word. Go to Albany. Make whatever noise you can.
    We need you to come to the PTA meeting on Wednesday, 2/25, at 8am to learn more – and hear more from us.
    And sign up today at ps321.org to receive information and updates from the Testing Task Force about what you can do to help support us.
    What we have together is rare, especially today, when so many schools have succumbed to the pressures of testing. We must not take our school’s joyful community for granted. All that we have– all that we do together–is far too important and far too valuable to be taken away. Thank you, as always, for your energy, your support, and your inspiring, creative children.
    Your Devoted Teachers

     

    The Teachers of the New York City Public Schools Need Your Help

    Governor Cuomo has proposed major changes to teacher evaluations in New York State. We want to let you know, from a teacher's perspective, the changes this law could bring to public schools -- and to our profession -- if it passes.
    • 50% of a teacher's rating will be based on state test scores. (Currently it is 20%).
    • 35% of a teacher's rating will be based on the findings of an outside "independent observer" who will conduct a one time visit to the classroom. (This has never been done before. Currently our principal's and assistant principal's observations count for 60%).
    • 15% of a teacher's rating will be based on observations by the principal or assistant principal. The very people who know our work best will have the least input into our evaluation.
    • 50% + 35% = 85% of our evaluations will be removed from the hands of our community and placed in the hands of the state.
    And then, using these numbers, any teacher who is rated ineffective two years in a row can be fired. Principals may have no say in this.
    So what might this mean for our schools?
    Realistically, many of us could be fired.
    Every year.
    And many more of us may be pushed away from the profession we love.
    Here's something that's not being made clear to the public. Even in schools where children do well on the standardized tests, many teachers do not. Teachers' ratings are not based on their students' raw scores for the year, but whether their students improved from one year to the next. If a student with a '3' gets one fewer question correct in 4th grade than she did in 3rd, that student might not have demonstrated the "added value" their teacher is expected to have instilled. Even though the student has mastered that grade's content. Even though it's just one question.
    That is why so many schools in NYC spend so much time prepping for the tests. One or two wrong answers can make or break a teacher's rating. It has already happened.
    If Governor Cuomo's evaluation proposals come to pass, it may start to happen more and more. And if we are rated ineffective as a result of Cuomo's proposal two years in a row, we may be fired.
    That is what forces teachers to do test prep. Even though we don't believe in the standardized tests. Even though we know that the tests do not give an accurate picture of student learning, or of the effectiveness of teachers. Even though we know that teaching to the test is bad teaching. Faced with the reality of loss of a paycheck (and the loss of the careerswe are building, have built, or want to build), these proposals may push us to teach in ways we know to be counterproductive. The schools that we all love with active, engaged learners, inquiry, questioning, creativity, and joy in learning may cease to exist.
    Time spent on test prep will mean less time for real learning and real curriculum study. There will be no time for creating suspension bridges, experimenting with water wheels, or closely observing pigeons in their natural habitat. No time for raising silkworms and weaving the silk into belts, recreating a life-size wigwam in Prospect Park, or figuring out how the Maya moved water in aqueducts. No time for exploring real world problems, such as using clean energy to create electricity, designing ways to mitigate storm water runoff in our school yard, or composting cafeteria waste and using it to fertilize the school garden. Through projects like these, we engage all types of learners. We teach children to question, problem solve, and work collaboratively. Test prep does not teach this.
    And what about the social and emotional toll these changes will inflict on children? As teachers, we look at the whole child. We know how they exist and operate within a community, and we strive to meet their emotional needs. We want our students to become citizens of the world. Narrowing our focus to improve performance on standardized tests means losing sight of the whole child. We know the emotional toll this takes on children. The genuine joy of learning disappears and is replaced with headaches, stomachaches, and school avoidance. None of us want this for our students. We didn't go into teaching to spend hours, weeks, months, on mind-numbing test prep.
    We hope this is not the type of education you want for your children.
    So, we need your help. And we need it now. The education law is folded into the state budget. It goes up for a vote on April 1st.
    If you want to take action, here's what you can do:
    1. You can send letters of disapproval to your state senator, yourassemblyman, and the Governor, or send emails, or call.
    2. You can also click here and sign the letter to let your legislator know you disapprove of the law.
    3. We need you to talk to your friends and your family members and post the information on Facebook.
    4. In short, we need you to get the information out any way you can.
    If you want public education to move forward, we need you to stand up and let your voice be heard.
    Cora Sangree, Nancy Salomon Miranda, and the teaching staff at The Brooklyn New School, PS 146

    Chicago Wants An Elected School Board

    $
    0
    0
    The only way change can happen and the only way that the rights of parents, teachers, and children can be protected is by changing Mayoral Control so that there is once again an elected school board, elected by ALL voters in the New York City School District.

    And, we must be able to elect the school chancellor, too, and have term limits for everyone.

    This is common sense.

    Wasn't there a tea party to establish a vote for each person in order to have fair taxation?

    Betsy Combier
    Rahm Emanuel
    Elected school board referendum shows 90 percent want the elected school board
    Despite the tricks played by Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his allies (especially Alderman Joe Moore) to block a major referendum on the elected school board in 2011, in 2015 the voting on the elected school board in 37 of the city's 50 wards was decisive: Chicago citizens have voted by 90 percent in favor of an elected school board. When the February meeting of the Chicago Board of Education begins at 10:30 a.m. on February 25, it will be interesting to see how the seven members of the city's school board, all appointed by Rahm Emanuel, treat the citizens and press. Under Board President David Vitale, the members of the school board have been smug, arrogant, and generally hostile to any citizen or member of the press who expresses criticism of the appointed school board system.
    Members of the Chicago Board of Education at the January 28, 2015 Board meeting. Left to right, Henry Bienen, Mahalia Hines, Jesse Ruiz, David Vitale, Andrea Zopp, and Carlos Azcoitia. Not shown because of the difficult media angles at Board meetings is the corrupt Board member Deborah Quazzo (see photo below). Substance photo by George N. Schmidt.Chicago has never had an elected school board.
     
    The current system, under which the mayor appoints a seven-member school board (originally called the "School Reform Board of Trustees" for two years), began in 1995, with the passage of the Amendatory Act by the Illinois General Assembly. The Amendatory Act also stripped the Chicago Teachers Union and the Cook County College Teachers Union of most bargaining rights and made strike illegal for the first two years of the law.
    Despite the overwhelming vote in support of an elected school board on February 25, 2015, the reality of the appointed school board will continue until the Illinois General Assembly votes to change the law and create, for the first time in history, an elected school board in Chicago. The Illinois General Assembly is currently in session.
    The February 25, 2015 vote took place in 37 of the city's 50 wards. Despite attempts by Rahm Emanuel's allies to block the referendum, only 13 wards did not vote in the referendum.
     


    Despite the numerous media exposes showing how Chicago Board of Education member Deborah Quazzo (pictured above) was profiting from her position on the school board, Quazzo sat stolidly at the January 28, 2015 Board meeting (above). At the meeting's end, Quazzo continued her silence, while five of her fellow Board members spoke about how the media and public were picking on Quazzo -- not mentioning Quazzo's corruption. Only Board member Carlos Azcoitia kept his mouth shut as Henry Bienen, Mahalia Hines, Jesse Ruiz, David Vitale and Andrea Zopp praised Quazzo as being a nice person who really cared about the children, etc., etc. etc. All of the current members of the school board were appointed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Quazzo, a multi millionaire investor, was appointed in March 2014 to replace Board member billionaire Penny Pritzker, who had been appointed U.S. Secretary of Commerce by President Barack Obama. Substance photo by George N. Schmidt.Ward by Ward results reported by DNA Info Chicago early on February 25 follow below. 
     
    Chicago REALLY Wants An Elected School Board, Ballot Results Show
     
    By Jen Sabella and Ted Cox on February 24, 2015 10:33pm
     
    More than 400 from the Chicago Teachers Union and other groups came out for a rally at Operation PUSH on Martin Luther King Jr. Day calling for an elected school board. More than 400 from the Chicago Teachers Union and other groups came out for a rally at Operation PUSH on Martin Luther King Jr. Day calling for an elected school board. View Full Caption DNAinfo/Sam Cholke
    CHICAGO — Chicago voters overwhelmingly voted in favor of an elected school board Tuesday — even after what some described as "political shenanigans" kept the question off the ballot in parts of the city.
    In nearly every ward that had the opportunity to vote on the topic, nearly 90 percent of voters said they were in favor of an elected school board. Vote breakdowns are below.
    Currently, the school board is appointed by the mayor.
    “I’m tired of going to school board meetings where people who don’t have skin in the game are making decisions,” said Jitu Brown of the Kenwood Oakland Community Organization, at a rally for an elected school board last month.
    Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who is heading to a runoff with Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, has dismissed the notion of an elected school board, saying, "I don't believe what we need right now is more politics in schools."
    Garcia, however, believes an "elected school board is a constitutional right."
    Ald. John Arena (45th) had pushed for a citywide referendum on an elected school board, but in October the council's Rules Committee approved three other questions to fill up the ballot: a proposal by 49th Ward Ald. Joe Moore on mandatory paid sick leave, another on public campaign financing backed by the grassroots group Common Cause and another on whether city employees should be forced to seek counseling if convicted of domestic abuse, sponsored by Ald. Deborah Graham (29th).
    Ald. Bob Fioretti (2nd) charged that the move was illegal, but those referenda held their spots.
    A collection of grassroots groups filed 50,000 signatures to place an advisory referendum on the ballot for an elected school board in 37 of the city's 50 wards. The Chicago Teachers Union joined in the effort.
    Here is how 37 Chicago wards voted on the elected school board question:
    1st Ward
    Yes: 86.55%
    No: 13.45%

    3rd Ward
    Yes: 87.83%
    No: 12.17%

    4th Ward
    Yes: 87.05 %
    No: 12.95 %

    5th Ward
    Yes: 86.69 %
    No: 13.31%

    6th Ward
    Yes: 92.71%
    No: 7.29%

    7th Ward
    Yes: 92.68%
    No: 7.32%

    8th Ward
    Yes: 91.97%
    No: 8.03%

    10th Ward
    Yes: 91.20 %
    No: 8.80%

    12th Ward
    Yes: 89.89 %
    No: 10.11%

    14th Ward
    Yes: 89.09 %
    No: 10.91%

    15th Ward
    Yes: 90.50%
    No: 9.50%

    16th Ward
    Yes: 92.04%
    No: 7.96%

    17th Ward
    Yes: 92.07%
    No: 7.93%

    19th Ward
    Yes: 85.45%
    No: 14.55%

    20th Ward
    Yes: 92.51%
    No: 7.49%

    21st Ward
    Yes: 92.35%
    No: 7.65%

    22nd Ward
    Yes: 91.75 %
    No: 8.25%

    24th Ward
    Yes: 93.26%
    No: 6.74%

    25th Ward
    Yes: 88.30 %
    No: 11.70%

    26th Ward
    Yes: 91.16%
    No: 8.84%

    27th Ward
    Yes: 88.62 %
    No: 11.38%

    28th Ward
    Yes: 90.57%
    No: 9.43%

    29th Ward
    Yes: 91.18%
    No: 8.82%

    30th Ward
    Yes: 87.63%
    No: 12.37%

    31st Ward
    Yes: 90.27%
    No: 9.73%

    32nd Ward
    Yes: 82.96%
    No: 17.04%

    33rd Ward
    Yes: 89.79%
    No: 10.21%

    34th Ward
    Yes: 92.24 %
    No: 7.76%

    35th Ward
    Yes: 90.67%
    No: 9.33%

    36th Ward
    Yes: 88.74%
    No: 11.26%

    37th Ward
    Yes: 92.44%
    No: 7.56%

    40th Ward
    Yes: 86.94%
    No : 13.06%

    45th Ward
    Yes: 85.18%
    No: 14.82%

    46th Ward
    Yes: 83.21 %
    No: 16.79%

    47th Ward
    Yes: 84.04%
    No: 15.96%

    49th Ward
    Yes: 87.03%
    No: 12.97%

    50th Ward
    Yes: 83.87%
    No: 16.13%

    Clarion-Ledger: Teachers Are Frazzled

    Dreyfus Intermediate Principal Linda Hill is Under Investigation, Again

    $
    0
    0
     Whose money was Linda Hill taking, after all?

    Betsy  Combier

    "Principal Linda Hill and "Berta Bucks" (Monday, May 7, 2012)


    Linda Hill

    Dreyfus Intermediate principal under investigation for
    alleged procurement violations

    Zak Koeske | zkoeske@siadvance.comBy Zak Koeske | zkoeske@siadvance.com 
    Follow on Twitter 
    on March 05, 2015 at 1:38 PM, updated March 05, 2015 at 1:39 PM
     STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- A Staten Island principal who faces disciplinary action for billing the district for overtime she didn't work is also being investigated for her procurement practices, a Department of Education spokesperson confirmed.
    Dreyfus Intermediate principal Linda Hill is accused of exceeding purchasing limits on her Department of Education-issued Procurement Card or P-Card by splitting up payments made to the same vendor.
    A copy of Ms. Hill's P-Card statement shows five transactions with a single vendor, The Pin Man, on Sept. 17, 2010.
    None of the purchase orders exceeded $1,500 individually, but in total summed to $6,390, or more than twice the single P-Card transaction limit of $2,500 noted in the Department of Education's Procurement Card instructional guide
    "It is impermissible to attempt to circumvent the purchasing thresholds by making multiple awards to the same vendor within the same fiscal year (also referred to as 'split purchase orders')," the DOE's standard operating procedure guide for Other Than Personal Service (OTPS) expenditures states.
    A 2010-2011 fiscal year audit of the school found that Ms. Hill's invoice was split for payment purposes. Ms. Hill's explanation for the subversion, according to the audit, was that she had received approval to split the payment, although she could not locate documentation of that approval.
    She said she would not split payments in the future, according to the audit report.
    Former Dreyfus science and technology teacher Francesco Portelos, who recently reported the allegations against Ms. Hill to DOE's Office of Special Investigation, asserts that the payments went to purchase flash drives that were later sold to students for $10 apiece.
    Ms. Hill did not return a message for comment.
    Portelos was removed from the classroom in 2012, while under investigation for dozens of misconduct complaints initiated by Ms. Hill, and whiled away in a rubber room for two years. In April 2014, an independent arbitrator found Portelos guilty on 11 of the 38 charges brought against him and recommended a $10,000 fine, but denied the DOE's request to terminate him and ruled that he could return to the classroom.
    Rather than return him to Dreyfus, however, the DOE placed Portelos in its Absent Teacher Reserve pool, where he remains today, substituting for absent teachers at schools across the borough.
     
     
    Dreyfus Intermediate principal double-billed district for overtime, DOE investigation finds
    STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- An internal investigation into Dreyfus Intermediate School principal Linda Hill's workplace timesheets has found that the longtime school administrator repeatedly clocked in for overtime she didn't work, a Department of Education spokesperson confirmed.
    Ms. Hill, the principal at Dreyfus for the past decade, was accused of filing timesheets indicating she was supervising the Dreyfus Achieve Now Academy, an after-school program aimed at getting at-risk students back on track, while she was actually attending monthly School Leadership Team meetings.
    In January 2012, a colleague accused her of collecting simultaneous overtime for both activities on multiple occasions. The Department of Education's Office of Special Investigation launched an investigation into the claims a short time later.
    OSI substantiated the charges against Ms. Hill approximately 2.5 years later, in mid-2014, emails provided by the whistleblower show.
    A Department of Education spokesperson, who declined to specify the amount of money Ms. Hill bilked from the district, said disciplinary action against her is pending.
    She remains the school's acting principal.
    Ms. Hill earned a salary of $143,764 in 2013. Payroll records show that she took home an average of more than $11,000 in per session fees (overtime) in 2010 and 2011, before the allegations of her double dipping surfaced. Her overtime pay dropped nearly 20 percent to $9,295 in 2013

    Punitive Evaluations By the Department of Education and the PIP+ Process - Scamful

    $
    0
    0
    Re-posted from NYC Rubber Room Reporter June 12, 2012

    Since this was published, the PIP+ program was not funded. Thank goodness!

    This program was set up by the DOE to create paperwork to terminate a teacher. There is no mention, none, in the RMC Contract about the UFT. What a scam.

    Betsy Combier

    The Issue Of Observation Reports And Using These To Punish and Terminate Teachers

    The issue of teacher evaluations is fascinating, when you realize that the New York City Department of Education and the UFT (and NYSUT) violate the Collective Bargaining Agreement ("CBA") all the time.

    Take the UFT/DOE Peer Intervention Plus (PIP+) process, for example. The way it works is this: RMC, the PIP+ vendor (at approximately $330,000/year) hires former educators (you can work for them if you have not worked for the DOE for 1 year) to observe teachers who are targeted for termination. RMC is contacted by the DOE and given an assignment: an employee who is not, supposedly, 'up to par' with the expected workload. In fact, any principal can request PIP+ after one "U" rating, a violation of their contract with the DOE -see my website and blog 
    RMC Contract 1-53 
    RMC Contract 54-105 
    RMC Contract 3

    Training Manual 1
    Training Manual 2

    The RMC observer goes to the school and discusses the employee with the principal. The principal tells the observer what he/she wants the person to observe, and what the person is supposed to "find".
    The RMC protocols do NOT call for pre-observations, which is a blatant violation of the contract which states that there must be a pre and post observation for each formal observation. RMC observers ignore this. In fact, I have heard RMC employees testify that they have never read the CBA. 

    The UFT did not object to the procedures used by RMC, thus there is no repercussion for the RMC observer for breaking the rules of observations. I can only wonder, "What was Randi Weingarten/Mike Mendel/mike Mulgrew thinking when they approved PIP+, the Termination Program? 

     Below is the information gathered from the UFT on Observations:

    Observation and Evaluation


    The information below is about observations and evaluations. This information is the process REQUIRED by contract. Please use this to introduce the next hearing, because it shows that the PIP+ program violated the contract with the UFT and Teaching For the 21st Century, but also that Sue Lichtenstein's observations can hold no weight. Here is the link:
    I'm home all weekend (drat)
    Betsy
    Observations and evaluations fall under the general category of performance review, which is cited in Article 8J of the UFT contract. Performance reviews are intended to help teachers accomplish their educational goals with their students.
    Currently, the UFT and the Department of Education have an agreed-upon plan for teacher evaluation that is incorporated in the contract and is spelled out in the document “Teaching for the 21st Century.”
    Under that plan, tenured teachers, in consultation with their supervisors, may choose either the “performance option” or the traditional classroom observation as the basis for theirperformance review.
    New and probationary teachers at all levels should expect to have formal, traditional classroom observations several times a year. If you think you are being excessively observed, keep a log of the visits and speak to your chapter leader.
    A formal observation is one which includes pre- and post-observation conferences and written feedback and/or comments. A supervisor has the right to enter a teacher’s class unannounced. However, such informal visits generally are not written up. If your supervisor writes up such an informal observation and if it is negative in nature, you should ask in writing for a post-observation conference with the supervisor.
    A pre-conference may be: 1. one-to-one conferences between the supervisor and teacher; 2. small group meetings; or 3. a written notification outlining a menu of possible instructional areas to be evaluated during the formal observation, with teacher input on the area(s) to be addressed.
    One-to-one conferences are required for all formal observations of probationary teachers or U-rated teachers.
    Tenured teachers who have been rated satisfactory are entitled to an individual, lesson-specific pre-observation conference if they request it in writing. The UFT recommends that all teachers make such a request at the beginning of each school year. A written request for a one-to-one conference must be granted (see Chief Executive Memorandum # 80, 1997-98). If your written request is denied, you may grieve under Article 8J and Article 20 of the teachers’ contract.
    Following the observation, you should write down your recollections of the lesson, which will be helpful to you in the post-observation conference with your supervisor.
    You will receive a written report of the observation after the post-observation conference and will be asked to sign it to indicate that you have seen it, whether or not you agree with it. If you believe the observation was improper, you should speak to your chapter leader, who can help you formulate a written response and advise you of the other options open to you. Your response must be attached to the original report and placed with the original in your file.

    THE NEW EVALUATION AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR TEACHERS

    In May 2010, the UFT, NYSUT and the State Education Department agreed to create a new teacher evaluation and improvement plan.
    This new evaluation system will include content knowledge, pedagogical practices, instructional delivery, classroom management, knowledge of student development, use of assessment techniques/data, effective collaborative relationships, and reflection of teaching practices (criteria that currently exist) as well as multiple measures of student learning such as test scores, classroom work, presentations and projects. The mix of those measures in New York City will be negotiated between the UFT and the Department of Education, but the use of state test scores will be capped at 25 percent.
    The new system will take effect starting in the 2011-2012 school year. The union will be at the table during the 2010-11 school year working out the details of the agreement and determining the criteria to be used.

    USEFUL RESOURCES FOR OBSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS


    Below is an email that my friend Harvey Elentuck sent to Daily News reporter Kenneth Lovett about teacher evaluations: 

    to:  Ken Lovett
    from:  Harvey M. Elentuck
    cc:  Betsy Combier, Robert J. Freeman, Esq., Camille S. Jobin-Davis, Esq.
    date:  6/12/12

    Hi, Mr. Lovett!
    I just saw your article, "Shhh, it's a secret!" about teacher evaluations in the print edition of today's Daily News.  I also looked at the online version, "Unions want Cuomo to allow parents to see teacher evaluations."

    I was the petitioner in Elentuck v. Green (202 AD2d 425).
    That was a CPLR Article 78 suit (relating to the application of the Freedom of Information Law) in which the Second Appellate Division found that there were no "statistical or factual tabulations or data" in a large collection of records that I had requested, including unsatisfactory lesson observation reports and Chancellor's Committee reports that were in possession of Community School District 24 and Community School Board 24.  Don't ask me how the court made such a finding when there was never an in camera inspection of all the records that had been requested.  The Court of Appeals turned down my Motion for Leave to Appeal, so the decision stood.


    My case was cited in the following advisory opinion of the NYS Committee on Open Government:


    My case was also cited by the lower court (Judge Cynthia Kern of NYS Supreme Court, New York County) in the Mulgrew case about "teacher data reports" (which was the case responsible for the current push to close off access from the general public):


    If there are no "statistics" or "facts" in lesson observation reports, then one must wonder:

    1)  What good are they?

    2)  Why is so much public money being spent on having supervisors observe lessons, discuss the lessons with teachers afterward (the "post-observation conference"), and then write up such reports?

    3)  Why are teachers sometimes rated unsatisfactory or fired based on their contents, thereby denying teachers' rights to due process?

    If there are no "statistics" or "facts" in Chancellor's Committee reports, then one must wonder:

    1)  What is the purpose of holding administrative hearings that result in the issuance of such reports?

    2)  How would the Chancellor know whether to adopt or reject the recommendation contained in such reports (which is practically always to sustain the adverse personnel action that had been taken -- such as a U-rating, discontinuance of probationary service, or denial of tenure) without a recitation of the facts and statistics upon which the recommendation had been based?

    In my opinion, it is imperative that the final ratings of teachers, plus the statistical and factual aspects of the supporting documentation, continue to be made available to the general public pursuant to FOIL requests.  Furthermore, if teachers are being given "instructions to staff that affect the public" within the body of performance evaluations, then, that type of information, too, should continue to be accessible.

    For one thing, school districts are spending huge sums of money on "professional development." Think of how this can be avoided if teachers were simply able to easily access the specific "secrets of good teaching" (to emulate) and the "secrets of bad teaching" (to stay away from) as revealed in the supporting documentation.

    For another thing, occasionally the evaluations of teachers and administrators reveal unsafe conditions in the schools, and these need to remain within the sphere of public access.

    Here is an example of an evaluation of a high school principal which was released to me under FOIL over thirty years ago by Ruth Bernstein, the (at the time) Deputy Records Access Officer of the NYC Department of Education:

        [Name Deleted]’s performance as principal during the school year 1980-81 was unsatisfactory.
                This evaluation is based on a review of the degree to which he fulfilled specified goals and objectives, and on his performance in the organization, administration, and supervision of other school-based matters.
                However, it should be noted that [Name Deleted] did satisfactorily fulfill, at least in part, some specified priorities.  These included formulation of plans to accomplish schoolwide goals and objectives; making plans for review of lesson planning; establishing plans to increase the school’s holding power and to improve attendance and decrease cutting.  Unfortunately, while these plans were made, few were implemented successfully.
                A major positive accomplishment was the establishment of an Honor Academy in the 9th grade.  This will serve as the basis for expansion of the Honors program into higher grades.  In addition, objectives to strengthen communications among and between members of the school’s staff appear to have been met.  The Business Education program was expanded.
                [Name Deleted]’s overall performance, however, was unsatisfactory in the following areas:

    (1)        He violated policy with regard to admitting students who arrived late to school.
    (2)        He failed to address or remedy the lockout situation until mid-October 1980 despite the superintendent’s prior instructions.
    (3)        He failed to organize and administer a procedure to properly and accurately record pupil lateness to school in such a way that parents would know of these latenesses.
    (4)        He failed to follow the superintendent’s instructions to identify, diagnose, and analyze absenteeism and cutting so as to improve performance in those areas.
    (5)        He failed to organize, administer, and supervise a program of classroom observations by assistant principals in a manner and on a schedule which would afford sufficient opportunity and time to provide assistance to teachers for improvement of their performance.
    (6)        He failed to administer and supervise procedures to guarantee a safe, secure, and wholesome school atmosphere with special reference to stairways and the student cafeteria.
    (7)        He violated instructions and guidelines concerning implementation of a funded PSEN math position.
    (8)        He failed to properly follow instructions concerning the exclusion of non-immunized pupils.
    (9)        He violated High School Division instructions regarding the administration of final examinations and end-of-year activities for the Spring 1981 semester.  This resulted in a loss of 4 full days of instruction to students, waste of instructional time and resources, waste of tax-levy and funded monies, and substantial and unwarranted decrease in attendance.
    [Name Deleted] has demonstrated by the above that while he is generally capable of making plans, either alone or with others, to address daily and/or ongoing school-based problems and situations, he is inefficient and incompetent in satisfactorily fulfilling the administrative and supervisory functions and activities necessary to their successful implementation, in keeping with the level of performance expected of a high school principal.
                                                    [Superintendent’s Signature Deleted]
                                                                [Superintendent’s Name Deleted]

    Wouldn't you agree that the above performance evaluation contains material that is of vital public interest to the students who attended the school in question, and, of course, to their parents, guardians, members of the community, the media, etc.?

    I hope you will contact your colleagues at the Daily News, and at other newspapers, and see to it that the newspapers and publishers of New York State and New York City step forward to vehemently oppose the three "bad bills" which are currently in Albany that seek to exempt records of teacher evaluation from the Freedom of Information Law.

    I'm aware that back in April, the Daily News came out pretty strongly for public access in the opinion piece, "Don't even think of a gag order for parents on teacher evaluations."

    Here are the URLs of the bills:

    Take a look at the following article from Education Week as reprinted in Betsy Combier's blog, NYC Rubber Room Reporter:


    Take a look at the following North Dakota judicial decision which was referred to in the above article:


    Take a look at the following Michigan judicial decision on the same topic:


    Take a look at the following advisory opinion from the NYS Committee on Open Government:


    It seems to me that the benefits of disclosure far outweigh the potential for "embarrassment" of named employees.

    Finally, here is a little-known judicial decision, Blecher v. NYC Board of Education (NYLJ, 10/25/79), which I "rediscovered" in the 1980s, when I saw it summarized in the FOIL Case Summary of the NYS Committee on Open Government.  You may wish to research the case.

    Linda Hill and Her "Berta Bucks" (May, 2012)

    $
    0
    0
    Re-posted from NYC RUBBER ROOM REPORTER on May 7, 2012:

    Principal Linda Hill and "Berta Bucks"
    IS 49: Berta A. Dreyfus

    who is Linda Hill?

     

    Evidently she has been in the news in the past, see below. Anyone with information can send updates to me at: betsy.combier@gmail.com

     

    City declares war on truants

    Published: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 8:04 AM     Updated: Sunday, January 16, 2011, 8:10 AM
    Amy Padnani 
    16truancy.jpgWith Dreyfus Intermediate School principal Linda Hill are three students who missed a month or more of school last year. But they have changed their ways in response to a new anti-truancy program. The students, from the left, are seventh-graders Justin Juarez and Stephanie Colon, and eighth-grader Mustafa Wright. Dreyfus is one of the Staten Island schools targeted by the city's initiative.
    STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- On any given school day, more than four out of 10 students don't show up for class at PS 14 in Stapleton. At nearby Dreyfus Intermediate School, more than one-third of the students are no-shows each day. 

    The city is making plans to put these chronic truants in their place -- specifically, in the classroom. And it's getting personal. 

    The mayor's office is wooing students who skip a month or more of school by taking a personal approach -- delving into their family lives and offering rewards for coming to class. 

    The so-called "truancy initiative" is focusing on PS 14 and Dreyfus Intermediate School, among 25 schools across the city with a high number of chronic absentees. 

    Examples include nagging parents to find out what's keeping children from getting to class, and rewarding those who come to school with a shopping spree at Old Navy. 

    "If you're not in school, you're never going to learn," said John Feinblatt, the criminal justice coordinator for Mayor Michael Bloomberg. "Truency rates and high chronic absenteeism rates are associated with very bad outcomes down the pike, whether it be juvenile delinquency, teen pregnancy, joblessness and so on." 

    As part of the plan, success mentors -- City Corps volunteers or students studying social work -- will be placed in each school to track 15 chronically absent students and make contact with each family. 

    There also will be numerous incentives, such as trips and freebies, for coming to school. City agencies like the Department of Homeless Services, the Administration for Children's Services and the Health Department also are part of the initiative. 

    16truancy2.jpgStudents who improve attendance and do well in other areas earn 'Berta Bucks' that can be redeemed for prizes.
    The attention from the mayor's office followed an alarming report released by The New School in 2008, pointing to a citywide problem in which one in five students skips a large amount of class time. 

    According to the report, 41.3 percent of students were chronic absentees at PS 14, while 35.4 percent fit into that category at Dreyfus. 

    A GOOD START 

    Kim Nauer, one of the report's authors, called the mayor's initiative a good start, considering the financial constraints the city is facing. 

    "Knowing they have no money, yes, I'm extremely pleased," she said. "People are awake about it now." 

    Still, she said chronic absenteeism runs deep in the challenges of a surrounding community, and would take a lot of resources and time to delve into. 

    PS 14 and Dreyfus Intermediate, located just a block from one another, flank the Stapleton Houses, the largest public housing complex in the borough and a main feeder to both schools. PS 14 is on the state's list of persistently dangerous schools; Dreyfus was only removed recently. Both are listed under the state's list of Schools In Need of Improvement. 

    Both schools have a large population of minority children, with 81 percent of students at PS 14 eligible for free lunch and 71 percent eligible at Dreyfus. 

    Among the challenges the principals see are single parents, families with lower socioeconomic backgrounds and children with health problems. 

    Since September, PS 14 has been concentrating on 122 chronic absentees, while Dreyfus has been focusing on about 150. The school chancellor's regulations say each child is expected to have a 90 percent attendance rate, which both schools are aiming to maintain. 

    MANY VARIABLES 

    "There are a lot of variables involved with the families. A lot of things happen to them in their lives, and young children take on a lot of responsibilities," said PS 14 Principal Nancy Hargett. "We do whatever we can to find out what we can, whether it's because the children don't have the proper clothing to come out that day, or maybe they had to bring their siblings to school first." 

    She said some students come from two nearby shelters, and she has no clue how long they'll actually remain in her building. Last week alone, seven new children walked into her school. 

    The staff looks for patterns -- for instance, zeroing in on the large group of students who show up 30 minutes past the morning bell -- Ms. Hargett said. Latenesses are also calculated into the attendance rate. 

    "It's a very hard, challenging job ... it's not all roses for me," the principal said. "It's a very tough community, a very hard community. But I think, in the long run, for those children that are here -- and they're sweet little darlings -- any little bit will help." 

    PS 14 also has partnered with Dreyfus to hold parent summits, inviting families to talk about the importance of attendance and letting them know about city services that can help those who are struggling. 

    "I know our parents are overwhelmed with responsibilities, with many of them working two jobs," said Dreyfus principal Linda Hill. "It's a challenge. I understand it from both sides of the picture. If you have your job in jeopardy, and you have to be there, yet you have a sick younger kid, what do you do?" 

    STUDENT-ONLY SUMMIT 
    She said the school also has a student-only summit called Dreyfus Everyday for Success, in which students meet regularly and participate in activities. A recent raffle granted some of the students a trip to see "In the Heights" on Broadway. 

    "It validates them. They are a member of an organization that cares," Ms. Hill said. "They absolutely feel good -- you can just see from the smiles. That's not a whole lot of data but it's something that absolutely can be recognized." 

    The summit complements existing efforts to promote attendance and good behavior. Among those efforts are the M&M Club, which stands for Mentors and Mentees and pairs adults with students, and Berta Bucks, in which students are rewarded with fake money to redeem for small prizes. 

    On a recent afternoon, several students in the truancy program spoke proudly of the improvements they've made in their attendance so far this year. 

    Mustafa Wright, an eighth-grader, missed 65 days of school last year after his family moved to Staten Island from the Bronx. Now, Ms. Hill said he's only missed three days so far, and is holding steady with a 96 percent attendance rate. 

    "I'm going to graduate this year, so I want to pass all my classes," the 14-year-old said. 

    Stephanie Colon, a seventh-grader who also moved to Staten Island a year ago -- and attended the same Bronx school as Mustafa -- said she missed 26 days of class last year because it was tough to focus. Since she's been coming every day so far this school year, she's found it's easier to keep up with schoolwork. 

    She said the school staff has been attentive, which has helped to keep her on track and resist temptations to cut class. 

    "They told me that no matter what, they want me to talk to them and that they would welcome me with open arms," the 13-year-old said. "Sometimes my friends say they're going to skip school and ask if I want to come. I just say no and then I walk away." 

    Getting to class has been especially tough for Justin Juarez, also in the seventh grade. The 13-year-old's grandmother, who played a strong role in raising him, recently died, and he has been suffering from depression. 

    Justin said he missed 22 days of school last year, but that he's managed to keep a 100 percent attendance rate so far this school year. Going to the Old Navy event -- during which he met his favorite baseball player, the Mets' Jose Reyes -- was a definite incentive. 

    "Some days I get up and I'm tired and I don't want to come to school, but I tell myself, 'you have to go,'" he said. "At the end of the day, I feel good."

     

    Principal under fire after 'spleen boy' remark

    Published: Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 5:40 PM     Updated: Wednesday, October 17, 2007, 11:58 PM
    John M. Annese 
    Linda Hill, the principal of Dreyfus Intermediate School in Stapleton, is being blasted as "insensitive" after an alleged comment at a faculty meeting.
    A Staten Island middle school principal is being blasted as "insensitive" after reportedly forgetting the name of an eighth-grader at her school who was severely injured in a textbook-tossing incident, then referring to the teen as "spleen boy."
    Linda Hill, the principal of Dreyfus Intermediate School in Stapleton, made the "spleen boy" remark on Monday during a faculty meeting, according to sources present.
    The teen's name is actually Chaz Carvalho, 13, of South Beach. Carvalho's spleen burst after his classmates pelted him with flying hardcover textbooks on Oct. 3 during a bizarre variation of the "Quiet Game." Doctors removed his spleen two days later, and used 29 surgical staples to re-seal the incision in his stomach.
    A city Department of Education spokeswoman yesterday confirmed that Ms. Hill made the remark.
    "The comment was inappropriate but made at a closed staff meeting and not intended to be malicious," said spokeswoman Dina Paul Parks. "The principal is apologetic. We do not anticipate taking disciplinary action."
    "It's beyond insensitive at the very least," said Carvalho's lawyer, Ralph Porzio, a former Family Court judge.
    Even though he didn't believe Ms. Hill was deliberately mocking Carvalho, Porzio questioned what was going on in her mind when she forgot the teen's name.
    Chaz Carvalho, 13, reveals his scars in his South Beach home.
    "That's the first thing out of her mouth?... That's the insensitivity. This child is someone who has been scarred literally and figuratively," Porzio said.
    He added, "This isn't 'Seinfeld.' This is life. You're allowed to be a little bit nasty in 'Seinfeld,' but not if you're the principal of a school."
    Ms. Hill refused to discuss the matter when contacted by the Advance today. "I really don't have any comment, thank you," she said.
    The textbook toss happened while Carvalho's eighth-grade math class was being supervised by a first-time substitute teacher, who school officials say never reported the incident to administrators.
    Carvalho went to the nurse after class, but only admitted to having a stomach ache. He didn't mention the flying textbooks until two days later, when the pain wouldn't go away.
    Ms. Hill wasn't present in the school building the day of the incident -- she was on a camping trip with students and faculty, according to school officials.
    Ms. Hill brought the matter up during the faculty meeting as an example of why teachers needed to report classroom incidents as soon as they take place, but she forgot Carvalho's name, and called him "spleen boy" instead, according to sources.
    The comment elicited shock from some of the teachers present, said one source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "She realized her mistake, and kind of repeated it again with a nervous laugh," the source said.
    "When I heard her say it the first time, I was taken back by the whole thing," the source said, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "If it was a teacher that said it, and a parent complained, she would have their back to the wall."

    Spending Public Funds On Private Treats Is Rampant Throughout NYC Government, and It's Not Just Principals Like Linda Hill. Its Embedded in Government

    $
    0
    0
    We hear all the time about principals using their p-card for personal purchases, and other thefts of public money by politicians.

    But when the Mayor's people are involved, the money flow into private pockets is often ignored. Take Anthony Shorris, for example.  He took his son to school in a chauffeur-driven car when he worked for Joel Klein. When Bill De Blasio became Mayor he hired Shorris as Deputy Mayor - Gotta have him back, he is the only man in the US who knows enough secrets of NYC government to keep those secret if on salary.

    Anthony Shorris is Baaaack and ready to Start a New Deputy Mayorship After He was Fired By David Paterson
    Anthony Shorris

     Joel Klein seemed to be particularly immune to public scrutiny of public funds, and I think his deep loyalty to Hillary and Bill Clinton and their coverups is what got him the job. The chauffeur driven cars became an issue for a second, see below.

    ED CHIEFS KEEP ROLLING Despite layoffs, school honchos get chauffeurs



    Thursday, April 10, 2003, 12:00 AM

    The Board of Education changed its name, but its love of perks lives on. Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, who is chauffeured around town in a city car by a bodyguard/driver, has extended the fringe benefit to six of his top deputies - costing taxpayers nearly $600,000 a year. At a time when the Education Department is considering laying off some 3,200 lunch ladies and teacher's aides, bodyguards and door-to-door car service for educrats making six-figure salaries is raising eyebrows. "It's outrageous because [Mayor] Bloomberg promised there would be savings and all would be plowed into the classrooms," said Sol Stern, a fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. "It's totally hypocritical, especially when they are talking about laying off school aides to balance the budget.
    " The officials are picked up at their homes and driven to work in Ford Crown Victorias outfitted with police lights and sirens to cut through traffic. The Daily News recently spotted a driver for $250,000-a-year Deputy Chancellor Diana Lam shoo another car out of the way with lights and sirens - despite a City Hall directive against using them for anything other than emergencies. The News also saw Deputy Chancellor Anthony Shorris taking his son to school in a chauffeured city car. Shorris earns $168,700. At an estimated cost of at least $580,000 a year - based on 2001 figures for driver salaries, maintenance and fuel - the stash of cars is a pricey perk. That's enough to pay the salaries of 28 teacher's aides. Chancellors have had chauffeurs since at least the late 1970s.

    But after the Board of Education was disbanded, Klein doubled the number of school brass with drivers to six from three, according to a current roster obtained by the Daily News. Klein's three deputies - Lam, Shorris and Kathleen Grimm - have the benefit, as did former Chancellor Harold Levy's top three aides. But Klein has expanded the perk to Benjamin Tucker, schools security chief; Lester Young, director of youth development, and Robert Knowling, head of the new principal recruitment institute, the roster shows. Shifting gears Contacted yesterday by The News, school officials said they were going to start a car pool for top management. "We have been reviewing all expenses at central, and as part of that process we are eliminating the use of individual cars by senior leadership," said Klein chief of staff LaVerne Srinivasan.

     David Chai, a spokesman for Klein, said the administration had shrunk the system's fleet to 78 cars, down from 138 when the chancellor took office in August - a drop of more than 40%. Still, this kind of largess was supposed to vanish when the state Legislature abolished the board, which gave each of its seven members a car and driver. A News review of board perks last year prompted a law barring its replacement - the Panel for Educational Policy - from getting cars and drivers. Rather than fire the drivers/bodyguards and mothball the fleet, Klein assigned the cars and drivers to his staff. The move came despite a vow by Mayor Bloomberg - who takes the subway to work at least once a week - to reduce the number of cars doled out to city employees.

      "We eliminated the perks - the cars and chauffeurs - so the money could be plowed into the classroom, not so the cars could be recycled for some other school official," said Assemblyman Steven Sanders (D-Manhattan). Fourteen men and women work as bodyguards and drivers for the school system, according to the most current roster. Eight of the 14 are assigned to Klein, who has two drivers, and his team. Two more are available to drive other top brass or to fill in. Of the remaining "executive protection unit," one is assigned to gang investigations, one is at the front desk of the department's headquarters in the old Tweed Courthouse and two are on leave. "A lot of promises have been made about money being saved, and people are beginning to see that what they say at Tweed and what they do are two different things," said teachers union President Randi Weingarten. "People are going to be laid off, so this is the time for management to make sacrifices as well.
    **************************

    First Deputy Mayor
    First Deputy Mayor Anthony Shorris serves as the second-highest ranking official at City Hall, and is charged with managing the day-to-day operation of City government and the provision of core services across the five boroughs. Shorris comes to the post as a proven manager at City agencies, public authorities and private sector institutions.
    Anthony Shorris began his service at City Hall in 1978 during the Koch Administration. He served as Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget, responsible for the City’s (then) $23 billion revenue budget, $3 billion annual capital program, and all spending on social services, housing and economic development. While at OMB, Shorris served as an architect of the landmark Ten-Year Housing Plan—the largest local housing initiative in the country. As OMB Deputy Director, Shorris dedicated more than $4 billion in City capital funds to the construction and rehabilitation of nearly 200,000 units of affordable housing in arson-ravaged neighborhoods. The massive initiative brought together and coordinated community-based non-profits, private developers, contractors and government agencies. Shorris continued to serve Mayor Koch as Finance Commissioner, leading the fourth largest tax agency in the nation with more than 3,000 employees and responsibility for collecting over $15 billion in City revenues. At Finance, he spearheaded efforts to reduce tax fraud, culminating in some of the largest investigations in city history that recouped significant funds for the City of New York, as well as creating a Taxpayer Bill of Rights.
    Shorris returned to City government in 2001, where he served as Deputy Chancellor for Operations at the Department of Education under two chancellors. After the September 11th attacks, Shorris managed the Department’s efforts to provide mental health services, clean up damaged sites and transport relocated students displaced in Lower Manhattan. Shorris helped steer the Department through the difficult budget immediately following the attacks. His education experience led then-Governor Spitzer to turn to him to lead negotiations to settle the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit and create the NYS Contract for Excellence program to increase school aid across the state.
    Shorris served both Governors Mario Cuomo and Eliot Spitzer at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. As First Deputy Executive Director from 1991 to 1995, he helped steer the agency through the aftermath of the first World Trade Center attack. Among his chief accomplishments as Executive Director were advancing the development of the World Trade Center site, including strategies to reduce the spiraling costs of the transportation hub; acquiring Stewart Airport in Westchester County in 2007 setting in motion plans for its expansion as the fourth major regional airport; creating new standards for green construction and the agency’s first carbon offset program; developing the first Compstat program for the PAPD; requiring agency contractors to provide health insurance; and breaking the influence of powerful lobbyists whose clients had business with the agency.
    Shorris is a widely respected leader in healthcare. He previously served as Senior Vice President, Vice Dean, and Chief of Staff of the NYU Langone Medical Center, one of the nation’s leading academic medical centers. He helped direct the hospital’s successful efforts to recover from Hurricane Sandy, re-opening just nine weeks after the storm. From 1995-2000, he served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer at Healthfirst, a nonprofit that he helped launch, offering free and low-cost insurance plans to low income individuals, families, and seniors. A multi-billion dollar company, Healthfirst is one of the largest nonprofit managed healthcare organizations in New York, serving over 900,000 members, and during his tenure Shorris significantly expanded its reach and services to vulnerable New Yorkers. He worked closely with the 1199SEIU National Benefit Fund to create a path-breaking program to provide homecare workers with health insurance.
    Shorris has also taught and consulted widely. While at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School, he led the Policy Research Institute for the Region and taught classes in crisis management, poverty policy and education economics. At NYU Wagner, he led the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and taught classes on both management and transportation as a lever for social change. He has taught and lectured overseas in Italy, East Europe, and the Middle East. He was also a board member of the Regional Plan Association and co-chair of the Fourth Regional Plan, an advisory board member of the Independent Budget Office, as well as a board member of the Healthcare Association of New York State. In the past, he has served as board chair of the Center for Employment Opportunities and the Coro Foundation-New York, as well as a board member of the University Settlement House.

    The OPI Problem Code and How To Get Off of It

    $
    0
    0
    Joseph McCarthy
    I am re-posting a very important post on Chaz's School Daze  about the problem code.

    The UFT is not willing to end this blacklist? The last time I spoke with UFT's Amy Arundel, she insisted the "Problem Code" does not exist.

    Indeed, when I worked for the UFT from 2007-2010, and my office was right next to Amy's office, I used to get calls all the time from members who wanted to know whether or not they were on this list, and I would walk next door and ask Amy, who would look up their file, and then she would tell me yes or no.

    The problem code is a red flag put onto your file number to alert anyone that your fingerprints have been tagged as not cleared to work for the DOE or any vendors.

    When a potential employer calls up the Department, and they ask about you and say that they are thinking of hiring you, all the DOE is permitted to say is how many years you worked for them. But seldom do they stop there. They go on to say that your file has a "Problem code".

    Try it. Have a friend call DOE Human Resources and ask if you can be hired.

    Joe McCarthy, where are you?

    Anyway, if you are on the problem code, you must try to get off of it. What you need to do is, contact the Office of Personnel Investigations (OPI) at 65 Court Street, and ask for an appointment to talk with an "investigator". Bring someone with you, anyone.

    At this meeting make an argument as to why you must have this red flag removed from your employee profile. Get the person's name and email address with whom you spoke, and email them what your argument was, after the meeting. Then wait for the decision. When you get the OPI decision, than you may file an Article 78 to overturn it, and then you can also sue the DOE if you have filed a Notice of Claim.

    Read Chancellor's Regulations C-105.

    OPI is here:

    NYC Department of Education/DHRT
    Office of Personnel Investigation
    65 Court Street, Room 200
    Brooklyn, NY 11201

    Betsy Combier

    Former OSI Director and The Gotcha Squad

    Saturday, March 07, 2015


    Why Has The UFT Leadership Failed To Take The DOE To PERB On The Problem Code Issue?



























    Back in 2012, the DOE decided that any teacher who was subject to a DOE investigation (SCI, OSI, OEO) and found to be substantiated will have a"problem code" attached to their file.  It mattered little that if the teacher decided to go through with their 3020-a hearing and the independent arbitrator found that the DOE investigation was flawed and found no serious misconduct, the DOE still kept the "problem code" on the teacher's file.  At the time the UFT leadership objected and claimed they will take it to PERB.  However, the UFT leadership failed to pursue the PERB complaint.  The question is why did they quietly drop their promise to file a PERB complaint, or did they ever really intend to fire one in the first place?

    The union's failure to protect their members shows up yet again, be it the second class status of the ATRs, reassigned teachers put on ice in a different borough, or the labeling of the unfair "problem codes".  Our union's failure to remove the"Scarlet Letter" from their member files is a disgrace and must be corrected.

    As a member with one of those "problem codes"on my file.  I will be more than happy to be the test case, if the union leadership wants to challenge the unfair DOE designation that has damaged many member chances from obtaining a position.  However, I doubt that the disconnected leadership will do the right thing and file their long promised PERB complaint.

    The SSHAT, or the Test For NYC's Specialized High Schools, Should Not Be Changed; How Students Apply To Take The Test Must Be Changed

    $
    0
    0
    I believe that the SSHAT Test should not be changed, but the procedures for taking the test must change. FYI, two of my daughters were accepted to Stuyvesant HS after taking the SSHAT. This fact does not change my opinion.

    When I was President of the PTA at Booker T. Washington MS 54, the school was racially segregated and I tried to change this. I also tried to stop the misallocation of funds by the Principal. I was attacked, of course, by a group of the white parents, all of whom wanted their children to continue to receive the favors and treats of being white. Ironically, one of the parents who attacked me is the current Parent Coordinator of JHS 54, Anne Pejovich. I have a mountain of information on her duplicity to share in my book in the sad chapter of parents fighting parents who speak up.

     The DELTA Honors program fed students directly into Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, Edward Murrow, Brooklyn TECH. The four other programs inside Booker T. did not permit students to take the SSHAT test. This was the problem. Let all kids who want to take the test TAKE IT. The unfairness in telling a child he/she cannot take the test simply because they are not "ready" or just "can't" is unfair and unjust. I and several other parents did a random survey of the schools in the upper west side of Manhattan by standing outside the schools after Parent visiting day, and we asked 2 questions: 1) is your child in 8th grade? 2) is your child taking the SSHAT test? The answers were surprisingly, no, they knew nothing about applying for the test or when it would be given.

    DELTA was more than 90% white. The other programs at MS 54 reflected the neighborhood, mostly black or Hispanic. I live on the Upper East side, but my kids were accepted at DELTA because the former head of the program, Fred La Senna, accepted them, starting with my oldest, who had an IEP. She, and one of her sisters, wanted to go to Stuyvesant, took the test, and got in. No other school would have challenged either daughter, and Stuyvesant was the right learning environment for their learning style.

    Change the way students apply to take the test, and we may begin to see more diversity in the Stuyvesant pool of incoming students. Don't change the test.

    Betsy Combier
    Stuyvesant High School

    New Study Explores Strategies to Diversify NYC’s Specialized High Schools
    Today, the NYC Department of Education announced the results of the City’s high school choice process, including data about students admitted to the City’s eight specialized schools. As in past years, Black and Latino students are starkly under-represented among those receiving offers to these elite schools. A central question is whether the schools’ admissions policy—based exclusively on the Specialized High School Admissions Test (SHSAT)—is to blame for the lack of diversity. 
     
    A new brief, Pathways to an Elite Education: Exploring Strategies to Diversify NYC’s Specialized High Schools, examines students’ pathways from middle school to matriculation at a specialized high school, highlighting opportunities to intervene and improve access for underrepresented groups. The brief also simulates the effects of various admissions criteria that have been proposed as alternatives to the current SHSAT-based admissions policy, including state test score, grades, and attendance. In general, we found that these rules would increase the share of Latino, White, and female students. But, most of them would not appreciably increase the share of Black students nor reduce the concentration of offers in a small number of middle schools.
     
    “The real take-away is from this study is the lack of diversity in the specialized schools is a much bigger problem than ‘to test or not to test?’” said James Kemple, the Research Alliance’s executive director. “We need to think more broadly about how to reduce inequality in New York City’s schools—identifying strategies that create opportunities for traditionally disadvantaged students will be a primary focus of the Research Alliance’s work in coming years.”

    The brief is based on a working paper by the Institute for Education and Social Policy’s Sean Corcoran and the Research Alliance’s Christine Baker-Smith.
    The Research Alliance for New York City Schools is a nonpartisan research center housed at the New York University Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development. The Research Alliance conducts rigorous studies on topics that matter to the city’s public schools. The organization strives to advance equity and excellence in education by providing evidence about policies and practices that promote students' development and academic success. 

    The Beck Amendment - Get Your Union Refund

    $
    0
    0


    Welcome to UnionRefund.org
     
    LINK
    A new way to help American workers keep their working wages free.
    Under the 1988 Supreme Court decision Communications Workers of America v. Beck every member of a union is entitled to a full refund of their dues that are not directly used for representing them. Until now though, it’s been almost impossible for any member to find out exactly how much their refund should be.
    The process is simple. Choose your labor state from the list below. Fill out some basic information and UnionRefund will automatically generate a letter that you can print and mail to your union representative to claim your individual refund. UnionRefund will also send a courtesy notification letter to your union to ensure a quick resolution for your request. It’s that easy!
    Get your refund today!
    Step One - Select Your State
    District of ColumbiaWashingtonOregonCaliforniaNevadaIdahoUtahArizonaNew MexicoColoradoWyomingMontanaNorth DakotaSouth DakotaNebraskaKansasOklahomaTexasMinnesotaIowaMissouriArkansasLousianaWisconsinIllinoisMichiganMichiganIndianaOhioKentuckyTenneseeMississippiAlabamaFloridaGeorgiaSouth CarolinaNorth CarolinaPennsylvaniaWest VirginiaVirginiaNew YorkVermontNew HampshireMaineMassachusettsRhode IslandConnecticutNew JerseyDelewareMarylandAlaskaHawaii
    re-posted from this blog in October, 2014:


    How To Stop Paying For The UFT Political Action Committee, COPE

    Are the UFT political statements and campaigns annoying you?
     
    You should opt out of COPE, or The Committee on Political Education, which is the UFT political action committee.
     
    How you can choose not to donate: Fax a letter  to 212-510-6435 with your name, school, file #, and state that you want to opt out of COPE as of the day you fax it. Sign the letter. 
     
    You will receive a cancellation notice and you should send this to the NYC DOE payroll office. 
     
    Below you can read the UFT urging all members to sign up and pay for COPE, and below that I have re-printed a post from January 21, 2014 on the BECK Amendment and the movement away from compulsory payment of union dues.

    The movement argues that as long as leaders of a union do not fairly represent members, dues should not be paid.

    This country is founded upon "no taxation without representation", right?

    Betsy Combier

    COPE - 1

    Politics is union business.
    In hard economic times, political action is needed more than ever.
    Every member needs to enroll in UFT/COPE.

    WHAT COPE IS

    The Committee on Political Education (COPE) is the UFT’s political action arm. It covers the expenses of meeting with and educating legislators, and helps elect officeholders who respect our members, support education and work for union goals. With COPE, we work for laws and policies that further education and safeguard our rights; we back candidates who back us; and we support public officials who get things done for our members, parents and students.
    In recent years, teachers and teacher unions have become the new favorite punching bag for politicians and policy makers. And labor continues to be the number one target of anti-worker politicians. The UFT’s record – on both legislativematters and in elections – would be impressive under any circumstance, but under these conditions it is truly extraordinary. It is made possible by the incredibly hard work of thousands of UFT members and by the funding that COPE provides. None of this would be possible without COPE, and COPE is not possible without you.

    WHY COPE NEEDS YOU

    COPE is entirely funded by voluntary contributions. We do not use any union dues money for political action. In these hard economic times, it is critically important that you contribute to COPE. COPE enables us to continue to fight for lower class sizes and additional funding for the classroom, and it will help us make sure that the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes by extending the millionaires’ tax. Thanks to COPE we are able to make sure that our voice is heard loud and clear.
    Thanks to UFT/COPE, we get results.
    We need your support to continue this vital political work.
    See your chapter leader to sign up or contact COPE at 212-598-7747.

    Movement Starts: Toward an End To Involuntary Payment of Dues to the UFT 
    The BECK Amendment deals with the issue of members' dues to their union, and where to draw the line. It's an issue that needs to be addressed, especially in New York City and particularly with teachers, paras, and other members who pay UFT BIGs - Mike Mulgrew, Leroy Barr, Ellie Engler - a lot of money basically to do nothing. 

    Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988) is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that, in a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative. The rights identified by the Court in Communications Workers of America v. Beck have since come to be known as "Beck rights," and defining what Beck rights are and how a union must fulfill its duties regarding them is an active area of modern United States labor law.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]

    And the worst part of this is, UFT members do not have a choice; in blunt language, if you join the UFT you MUST pay your dues. Paying is not voluntary. Doesn't this leave the BIGs to do whatever they want, from helping someone to doing nothing, as they will get your dues money anyway?

    Time to do something about this:
    1) make paying dues voluntary
    2) permit a member to pay their dues money to benefit THEIR welfare, not that of UNITY folk who couldn't care less what classroom or rubber room you are in.

    Betsy Combier

    Free the teachers from automatic dues

    , NYPOST, Jan 21, 2014

    AFT President Randi Weingarten and UFT President Mike Mulgrew
    LINK

    A favorite talking point for the teachers union is that charter-school operators earn more than the schools chancellor.
    Funny thing: As the United Federation of Teachers’ own spending reports show, at least five UFT executives earn more than the chancellor’s $212,614 base salary; union president Mike Mulgrew makes $250,000.
    More interesting is that the source of this money is force. While everything about charters is voluntary — no one forces children to attend, teachers to teach there or foundations to pay executive salaries — it’s the opposite for the rest of the system.
    For the salaries of Mulgrew and Co. come courtesy of an automatic payroll deduction from every teacher’s paycheck that goes for dues. And the city does it for them. Thus, Mulgrew is spared the expense of having to persuade the UFT members he’s worth the dues he asks. And taxpayers underwrite public-sector unions that then use their dollars to buy political influence to extract even more money from the public till.
     
     

    Teachers’ union boss spent $18K in Bond-like HQ spy sweep

    , NYPOST, Jan 20, 2014
    Something’s bugging teachers-union boss Michael Mulgrew — or, at least, he thinks so.
    The United Federation of Teachers president blew a huge wad of union cash to play out a paranoid James Bond fantasy when he paid $17,849 for a security team to sweep his headquarters for bugs, documents show.
    A crew from Protective Countermeasures & Consulting Inc. was hired to sweep for listening devices at the UFT’s offices at 52 Broadway, a review of union spending reports reveals.
    The payments were made in January and March of last year, just as the union leadership grappled with key strategic decisions such as labor-contract negotiations and who to support as the next mayor.
    The union would not say if any surveillance devices were found.
    Some union members thought it was unlikely anyone would bug the union — and that it was ridiculous that Mulgrew is using Cold War tactics to play a game of “Tinker, Teacher, Soldier, Spy” in the UFT headquarters.
    “I have no idea why they’re doing it. It’s very odd,” said James Eterno, a dissident UFT member who ran against Mulgrew for president in 2010. “I didn’t know we were like the CIA and have to keep secrets. I didn’t think we were that important. It’s not like someone is going to get killed if something leaks out.”
    Protective Countermeasures, a New Rochelle-based firm, specializes in identifying security threats such as “corporate eavesdropping” and helps craft “counter espionage” plans.
    Its Web site says it uses equipment that “neutralizes” bugs. The sweep also checks the electric grid, light fixtures and walls for video transmitters, infrared recorders and laser technology.
    Eterno wondered if Mulgrew was looking for the UFT version of Edward Snowden. “I don’t think there’s any worry about me or anyone else planting a bug in Mike Mulgrew’s office,” he said.
    A UFT spokesperson would say only that it pays for “routine security services.”
    The anti-spy initiative was just one of the entries listed in the UFT’s $190 million spending report covering its massive empire, fueled by $50 semimonthly union dues paid by rank-and-file teachers. The UFT also poured nearly $4 million into political campaigns through its super PAC, United for the Future, and spent an additional $4.2 million on TV and radio ad blitzes and advocacy.
    The teachers union defended its spending as appropriate.
    “The UFT’s financial report covers funds spent on our 200,000 members, including refreshments, reimbursement for transportation and parking and other expenses, along with routine security services,” a union spokesperson said.
    “We are proud of every dollar we spend on our members and on advocacy groups fighting for better schools.”

    $tate of the union

    • 54 union reps and staffers got salaries of more than $100,000. The average was $144,000 — triple the starting teacher salary of $45,000.
    • Five UFT officials were compensated more than the $212,614 base salary for the schools chancellor. UFT chief Michael Mulgrew makes $250,000.
    • $264,000 to groups that campaign against charter schools, including the rebranded ACORN, now called New York Communities for Change.
    • More than $1.7 million on food, including conferences at the Hilton and Waldorf.
    • $150,000 for tickets to movies, the Radio City Music Hall Christmas show, Mets and minor-league baseball games, and union swag such as mugs and tote bags.
     

    Which Will It Be - Test-Based Teacher Evaluations or Common Core?

    $
    0
    0



    Will test-based teacher evaluations derail the Common Core?


    LINK
         GREAT NECK, N.Y. — On Sept. 2, the day her principal shared each teacher’s annual

         evaluation, Sheri Lederman came home from work and announced to her husband that

         she was ready to quit.

    Fourth grade math teacher Adelia Weatherspoon teaches her class Common Core math
    at Higgins Middle School in McComb, Miss.
    In the span of one year, Lederman’s score dropped 13 percentage points, suddenly demoting her from an effective teacher to an ineffective one. It was enough to make her head spin.
    This marks Lederman’s 18th year in the classroom. She teaches fourth grade at the Elizabeth M. Baker Elementary School in Great Neck, a middle-class suburb about 20 miles from New York City.
    Following a statewide ranking system put into place in 2012, for the first time 20 percent of her evaluation score was tied to local tests and 20 percent was based on whether students progressed on state tests administered every spring. The rest of the rating was based on classroom evaluations. Depending on the final percentage, teachers in New York receive ratings of highly effective, effective, developing or ineffective. Teachers who receive ineffective ratings for two consecutive years may face an expedited dismissal process.

    The same year the new test-based evaluations went into effect, New York State launched the Common Core State Standards, which aim to deepen critical thinking and enhance problem-solving skills. And along with the new standards came much more difficult tests, which sent student test scores plummeting.

    This was a problem for teachers now dependent on good scores to achieve a rating that didn’t also put their job in jeopardy.

    Lederman was an early believer in the Common Core. With a doctorate in human development and educational psychology, she was drawn to the idea that students in different states would possess a similar knowledge base and skill set across an array of different subject areas. But the concurrent rollout of new standards on top of harder tests, not to mention the addition of a high-stakes teacher evaluation system, has more than soured her on the new standards.

    Among educators, Lederman is hardly alone in her belief that that the one-two punch of Common Core and new test-based accountability systems is too much to handle and leaves teachers — and students — overwhelmed.

    “There weren’t a lot of conversations happening between people working on teacher evaluations and the Common Core.” — Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform

    At first Lederman was fine. Nearly 70 percent of Lederman’s fourth-grade students met or exceeded reading and math standards on the new Common Core tests, far above the state average. With a perfect score on her classroom observations and local district tests, she easily achieved an effective rating.

    But this year, the state awarded her only 1 out of 20 possible points on the state test ranking, because a new class of students didn’t do significantly better than her group from the year before. Instead, they dropped two percentage points in reading and increased slightly in math. Her 18 students far surpassed state averages in both subjects (often by more than double), and she once again did well on the district scores, but not well enough to overcome the low score on the state portion of the evaluation.

    So, Lederman did what any frustrated educator, armed with a litigator spouse, would do. In late October, she filed a lawsuit against the New York State Education Department. The lawsuit alleges that such metrics punish rather than reward excellence, with educators whose students outperform state averages unable to show sufficient progress from year to year. A hearing is scheduled for March 20.


    Lederman’s lawsuit is one part of a major backlash that’s erupted in the last year against both teacher evaluations and the Common Core. The backlash has become mainstream, no longer relegated to teachers and administrators, and has fueled legislation and multiple lawsuits aimed at dialing back the new policies.
         
    The Common Core was introduced in 2010, and more than 40 states had adopted it by the following year. At the same time, nearly 40 states have adopted laws linking teacher evaluations to student performance on standardized tests over the past four years. Essentially, two separate groups of reformers were plugging away at ideas to transform education — and they came barreling down the track at exactly the same time. Though New York was one of the earliest adopters of teacher evaluations tied to student test scores, other states are now launching new evaluation systems while also implementing new, harder state tests tied to the Common Core. Ultimately, the aim is to use performance reviews to decide tenure, promotion or termination.
     In New York and elsewhere, many educators cite a deeply flawed rollout of the two policies, with each inadvertently undermining the other. Now, even die-hard enthusiasts for the new reforms are wondering whether the clash of high-stakes evaluations tied to new, more difficult standards will ultimately derail both ideas.

    Sandi Jacobs, the vice president and managing director of state policy at the National Council on Teacher Quality, a nonprofit that advocates tougher teacher standards, described it as the accidental convergence of efforts to solve “two really big issues in education” — standards woefully lacking in rigor along with a broken teacher evaluation system.

    “How didn’t we see this coming and the problems it was going to cause with the federal government prioritizing these two issues all at once?” asked Jacobs. “There wasn’t enough concern about how these things were running down the path together until the tests became an issue.”

    Two Separate Conversations

    Joe Williams, the executive director of Democrats for Education Reform, an advocacy group that supports test-based evaluations and changes to current tenure laws, agrees that the concurrent rollout in New York has been nothing if not clunky.

    He describes different factions of the reform world seizing upon opportunities that occurred at the same time, and ignoring what their counterparts were doing.

    “There weren’t a lot of conversations happening between people working on teacher evaluations and the Common Core,” said Williams. “There were two separate conversations happening. One hand didn’t necessarily always know what the other hand was doing.”

    Some supporters of the new standards have blamed the Obama administration for its ambitious and controversial initiatives to overhaul American public education. The administration’s competitive Race to the Top grants, part of the 2009 stimulus package, made billions of dollars available to states if they agreed to attempt multiple reforms at once, including creating test-based teacher evaluations and adopting “college-and-career ready” standards, which most states interpreted as the Common Core. The U.S. Department of Education followed up on Race to the Top with waivers it granted from No Child Left Behind regulations, which set similar guidelines for states to receive federal dollars.

    Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, which counts more than 800,000 teachers as active members, blames Race to the Top, and its “fixation on data and testing,” for squelching the enthusiasm that initially accompanied a new, more rigorous set of common standards. New York’s rollout was particularly egregious, Weingarten said, describing the rushed implementation as “profoundly disappointing,”   breeding distrust among teachers, parents and students.

    “This does not create confidence in public education and a lot of people are saying let’s just throw the whole thing out,” said Weingarten, referring to the Common Core. “For those of us who believed in the potential of the standards, we’ve also lost a lot of credibility.”

    Jacobs described new, harder tests connected to the standards as the “lightening rod,” which, when paired with the simultaneous rollout of test-based consequences for teachers, has incited not only inflammatory rhetoric, but subsequent pushback — with some states seeming to delay accountability efforts indefinitely.

    “Not that I could have written the master road map to avoid it, but I do worry. We all should have been more thoughtful about the timing of these transitions,” said Jacobs. “Looking back, we could see that we were creating new tests at the same time we were beginning new evaluation systems.”

    Phil Daro and Susan Pimentel both worked on the standards’ side of things. Daro co-authored the Common Core math standards. Pimentel was one of three writers of the Common Core literacy standards.


    Daro sees too many changes coming all at once — with testing playing too dominant a role. “Right now, everything is being blamed on the Common Core,” said Daro. “There’s an ‘everything at once’ mentality, as if slowing down is bogging down.”

    Pimentel, meanwhile, has been working to align materials and tests to new standards, while helping teachers make huge shifts. From Pimentel’s perspective, tying new assessments to teacher evaluations too soon risks alienating teachers from the standards themselves.

    “We need to unhook assessments from teacher evaluations for a while. Teachers need time and support to acquaint themselves with the new standards before high-stakes consequences are applied,” said Pimentel. “Once assessments are fair, transparent and trusted, our advice would be to then begin to tie student assessments to teacher evaluations. Accountability for student results is a critical component of a high-functioning system of education.”

    In late October, she met with assessment and curriculum representatives from 18 different states. Taken together, Pimentel observed widespread experimentation, with most states tweaking how much the assessment counts in a teacher’s annual evaluation, while others have delayed accountability measures for the foreseeable future. “The bottom line is that states are trying all kinds of different approaches — and some are simply waiting.”

    Even those at the forefront of the push for the new teacher ratings and the Common Core have advocated a more gradual approach.

    Earlier this summer, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation called for a two-year moratorium on states or districts basing personnel decisions on Common Core-aligned tests. And in August, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan urged states to delay using test results for an additional year when tabulating teacher ratings.

    Despite a temporary reprieve, a recent study jointly commissioned by Scholastic, the education publisher, and the Gates foundation shows that, among teachers, support for the Common Core has started to wane. Among 1,600 teachers polled from around the country, the percentage of teachers who are enthusiastic about the Common Core has dropped — from 73 to 68 percent in the last year alone.

    Junk Science

    Adam Urbanski doesn’t mince words. “I do not have confidence this can be fixed,” said Urbanski, now in his 34th year as the president of the Rochester Teachers Association in upstate New York. He sees the simultaneous rollout of new standards and test-based teacher evaluations as “poisoning the well.”

    Last year, labeling the rankings “junk science,” the Rochester Teachers Association filed a lawsuit against the state, citing a discrepancy in how urban teachers were ranked versus their suburban counterparts. During the 2012-13 school year, only 2 percent of Rochester’s 3,400 teachers received highly effective ratings. One year later, that figure suddenly jumped to 46 percent. The lawsuit is now wending its way through the state court system.

    “Unless you believe in miracles, I predict that next year, we’ll see another incredible swing,” said Urbanski. Now a retired teacher, he previously taught high school social studies. “Huge variations are part and parcel of unreliable systems. If it weren’t so sad, it would be laughable.”

    Urbanski says the new metrics unfairly penalize teachers of disadvantaged students. Since the new evaluation system went into place two years ago, he’s witnessed an unprecedented number of voluntary resignations and early retirements. More concerning, he sees tenured teachers unwilling to work with student teachers for fear of disrupting their students’ test scores and Rochester-based private and charter schools using their exemption from the Common Core to recruit faculty and lure students.

    When advising colleagues around the country, Urbanski describes New York as “an extreme example of how not to do it.” Though an early proponent of a common set of national standards, he has since reversed his position. “Sometimes it’s cheaper to just buy a new car than to fix a damaged one,” he said. “The Common Core should be scrapped. As soon as you fix one thing, something else pops up elsewhere that’s equally problematic.”

    Joe Williams, however, cautions against reverting back to the old evaluation system. In New York, teachers previously received two ratings: satisfactory or unsatisfactory. “It wasn’t fair to teachers, especially to the really good teachers,” said Williams. “Less than 3 percent were ranked unsatisfactory.”

    Though proficiency rates in reading and math have hovered around 30 percent, large swaths of teachers haven’t exactly received negative ratings since beginning the new evaluation system. Earlier this fall, 94 percent of teachers across New York State received highly effective or effective ratings. Meanwhile, in some districts, not a single teacher received an ineffective rating.

    While some states have taken a more gradual approach, Lauren D’Amico, an elementary-school teacher in Arizona, has experienced the sudden jolt of the new system. Arizona adopted College and Career Ready Standards, a set of state-specific standards aligned to the Common Core in 2010, though local schools didn’t begin implementing them until the 2012-13 school year.


    Two years ago, her district launched test-based evaluations. During the first year of implementation, test scores accounted for 25 percent. Last year, classroom observations comprised 50 percent of her annual evaluation, with 40 percent tied to state and local tests. An additional 10 percent relates to grade-level and school-wide growth as measured by similar tests.

    For the 2012-13 school year, D’Amico was labeled developing. This past September, her score suddenly shot up two levels — to highly effective. Much like New York, Arizona rates its teachers using four categories: highly effective, effective, developing and ineffective.

    “I’m scratching my head and wondering what kind of teacher I’m going to be this year,” said D’Amico, who is now in her eighth year in the classroom. “If I went from developing to highly effective, what could this year have in store for me? It’s a bogus system.” Besides test-based evaluations, her district has further ratcheted up the stakes by implementing a merit pay system. Final ratings now determine annual bonuses, which range between $1,000 and $5,000.

    Meanwhile, following Arizona’s abrupt withdrawal in May from the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC), one of two state-led groups that develop tests aligned to the Common Core, her students now face a brand-new end-of-year test — with half of her annual evaluation hinging on their performance. Four months into the school year, the Arizona Department of Education announced AzMERIT, a state-issued Common Core-aligned reading and math test, which it plans to unveil later this spring.

    Following classroom observations, D’Amico used to come away with detailed feedback from her principal. Now, she receives a number from zero to five on a 26-point rubric. Among her colleagues, she can sense a precipitous drop in morale once observations begin.

    “When you have everybody reduced to numbers, it doesn’t create a good atmosphere. It doesn’t help teachers teach and it doesn’t help children learn,” said D’Amico, who initially supported the Common Core. The concurrent launch of other reforms has since made it far less palatable. “Launching everything all at once, it just takes the wind out of everyone’s sails.”

    This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news website focused on inequality and innovation in education. Read more about the Common Core.

     

     

    3020-a Arbitration and Calling in Witnesses For Respondent's Defense

    $
    0
    0
    Calling witnesses to a 3020-a hearing for the defense of a Respondent is very important. My company, ADVOCATZ, protects a Respondent's right to have witnesses appear at his/her 3020-a, and protects the witness from retaliation as well.

    For these reasons, I filed a lawsuit against ATU Attorney Michael Francis in August 2014.



    My Company, ADVOCATZ, believes that 100% zealous advocacy gives the most probability for winning any case, and this necessitates calling in witnesses for our clients, the Respondents. We issue non-judicial subpoenas for any student and anyone who works for the Department in any capacity.

    Of course the Department of Education - and, I might add, NYSUT-  attorneys  often want a case to be as short as possible. That is, if they (NYSUT) cannot settle the case with the Respondent being "convinced", without any rational basis, to resign/go away, they may have the Respondent testify, but seldom do they 'allow' the Respondent to call in several witnesses.

    ATRs brought to 3020-a arbitration are in serious trouble in this area. Unless you have the name and contact number of a student or a parent from each class you teach, how can you call a witness if, three or more weeks after you have left the school, you are charged with misconduct, corporal punishment, and/or verbal abuse?

    I remember the case where the DOE called in a 7-year old to testify against her teacher, but this little girl loved the teacher, and refused to testify against her until after the DOE Attorney took her outside and "reminded" her that she MUST testify that they teacher touched the nose of the student and "hurt" her.

    The very wise and terrific arbitrator Earl Pfeffer asked this little girl if she wanted to draw while she testified. She said yes.
    Earl Pfeffer

    Earl gave her a sheet from his yellow pad, and a red marker, and she started doodling while she was asked about what happened. When she finally said that the teacher had touched her nose, the questions stopped, and there were none from the Respondent. Then Earl asked the little girl if she would give him what she drew, and she handed the sheet back.

    On the sheet, in big red letters, was written, "NO".

    Earl dismissed all charges. He is a great arbitrator but is no longer working on the NYC Panel. The DOE attorney on that case also no longer works at 49-51 Chambers Street.

    Of course not all witnesses are as good as this little girl, however witnesses are important.

    But people are scared that there will be retaliation, especially if they are still working within the DOE. This is a valid concern, even though the US Supreme Court has ruled that retaliation against a person who testifies for a public employee is prohibited:

    US Supreme Court Rules That Public Worker Testimony Is Protected From Retaliation

    Of course the Department of Education - and, I might add, NYSUT-  attorneys  often want a case to be as short as possible. That is, if they (NYSUT) cannot settle the case with the Respondent being "convinced", without any rational basis, to resign/go away, they may have the Respondent testify, but seldom do they 'allow' the Respondent to call in several witnesses.

    ATRs brought to 3020-a arbitration are in serious trouble in this area. Unless you have the name and contact number of a student or a parent from each class you teach, how can you call a witness if, three or more weeks after you have left the school, you are charged with misconduct, corporal punishment, and/or verbal abuse?

    Protection for witnesses is sometimes violated by the DOE Attorneys.

    On or about June 4, 2013, NYC DOE Administrative Trials Unit (ATU) Attorney Michael Francis screamed at the Attorney I was working with in a case for a Respondent accused of hugging a girl student in his class. The Respondent called in 7 witnesses, all of whom felt strongly that he was innocent (I did too) and wanted to testify for him. 

    DOE Attorney Francis threatened one of Respondent's witnesses, yelling "You are going to be sorry for coming in today", "you are going to regret this". While Francis was screaming at the witness, I was standing behind him. When Francis finished, he turned around very quickly, almost pushing me to the ground, then walked quickly to the hearing room and told the Attorney to "get that bitch out of my face". The witnesses waiting to testify were terrified.
     
    On August 13, 2014, after filing a Notice of Claim, I sued Francis in Manhattan Supreme Court for tortious interference, tampering with witnesses, and verbal abuse, holding Michael Francis accountable for his improper actions.

    The only way to stop people from deliberately violating the rights of another person or group, it seems, is to hold the person doing the harm accountable for his/her actions. I wish people would do the right thing the first time!

    Betsy Combier

     




    Principals From Hell: Caterina Lafergola-Stanczuk at Automotive High School Keeps the F-Rating, Proudly, With Carmen Farina's Support

    $
    0
    0
    Automotive High School
    Don't forget that Automotive HS is a New Visions school. New Visions' Schools don't fail, they have slumps that are not anyone's fault, especially not the principal's fault.....NOT

    and people wonder what the heck is going on at the DOE? Who knows? Trouble is, we care. We must care.

    Betsy Combier

    Caterina Lafergola-Stanczuk

    Brooklyn high school principal rehired despite failing record

    , March 15, 2015
    LINK
    The city has quietly kept a principal who presided over four years of failure at Automotive HS in the driver’s seat — despite the state’s demand for dramatic change at the “out-of-time” school, The Post has learned.
    Under Caterina Lafergola-Stanczuk, the F-rated school in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, has seen its enrollment plummet from 1,000-plus to 420 students.
    Last Monday, a committee including Department of Education and union officials voted behind closed doors to rehire Lafergola.
    But no announcement was made the next day, when Mayor de Blasio and Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña held a press conference to tout the city’s progress in helping 94 failing schools.
    Among the schools was Boys and Girls HS in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn, and Automotive, both of which were declared “out of time” to improve by the state.
    “The status quo is unacceptable,” de Blasio had declared.
    He and Fariña boasted of replacing Boys and Girls’ principal, Bernard Gassaway, with Michael Wiltshire, leader of the Medgar Evers College Preparatory School in Brooklyn. Fariña later called him “a proven leader.”
    No one mentioned that Lafergola-Stanczuk was staying.
    Some staffers at Automotive, which includes auto-repair training, were disgusted.
    “What’s the point of changing the school if you have the same failing principal who’s been failing for four years?” one said. “Nothing different is happening. The school is still in bad shape as far as servicing the students.”
    The staffer questioned de Blasio’s claim that 54 of the 94 schools in the DOE’s School Renewal program were given “extra instructional time” for students.
    “What extra time?” the staffer said. “The students come in at 8 a.m., take classes until 1:30 p.m. and have a lunch period until 2:20 p.m. They’re not getting anything extra.”
    It offers Advanced Placement classes, but records show no student has passed an AP exam.
    Of the Class of 2014, 49 percent graduated in four years, but only 3 percent did so with Regents scores high enough to enroll at CUNY without remedial help. That was up from 1 percent in 2011.
    Faculty have openly faulted Lafergola-Stanczuk’s leadership. In 2012, Tiffany Judkins, a teacher hired under a federally funded “transformation” plan, testified at a hearing that the school suffered from “rampant miscommunication, a lack of organization and a lack of any kind of clarity of purpose,” Chalkbeat.com reported.
    A veteran teacher said: “Any other principal with this record would have been dismissed. Why is she being allowed to continue?”
    DOE spokesman Harry Hartfield said both Automotive and Boys and Girls “need strong leadership to succeed — and that’s exactly what they have.”
    Both principals have boosted daily attendance rates and credit accumulation, putting more kids on track to graduate, he said. Automotive offers tutoring after school and is also beefing up its career and technical program.
    The state Education Department declares low-performing schools “out of time” if they fail to make sufficient progress after three years. The designation requires drastic action, including shutting, converting to a charter school or assuming an “alternative governance” — the option chosen by the DOE.
    The city put the troubled schools in a group under Superintendent Aimee Horowitz, who sources say likes Lafergola-Stanczuk.
    But Lafergola-Stanczuk dissed a veteran administrator whom the DOE sent in September to coach her, calling him “a moron,” staffers told The Post.
    Also last fall, two teachers at Brooklyn Technical HS complained of being told their scoring of Regents essays for Automotive students was too strict because the seniors “needed to graduate.”
    Lafergola-Stanczuk denied any fudging.
    Lafergola-Stanczuk, 44, makes $140,000 a year as principal. She previously worked as an English teacher at Franklin K. Lane HS in Queens.
    In an e-mail to staff on Tuesday, Lafergola-Stanczuk said she “sat for my re-interview” and got the job. “I look forward to serving our learning community as we continue to strive toward excellence,” she wrote.

    Pledging Stronger Public Schools, Mayor de Blasio Announces ‘School Renewal Program’

    November 3, 2014
    LINK
    City investing $150 million to transform 94 struggling schools
    All 94 schools will become Community Schools, provide one-hour extra of instruction each day, launch after-school programs, strengthen family engagement, and receive extra professional training for teachers
    Schools and leadership will be held accountable for results
    NEW YORK—In a speech before hundreds of parents and community leaders, Mayor Bill de Blasio unveiled the School Renewal Program, a new strategy to turn around New York City’s most challenged schools.
    The School Renewal Program will fundamentally change the direction of and accelerate progress in 94 struggling schools, in stark contrast with the old approach of simply closing or phasing out schools. Each Renewal School will transform into a Community School, knitting together new services that support children’s families, as well as their mental health and physical well-being. Each Renewal School will provide an extra hour each day of extended instruction and could offer additional after-school, weekend, and summer learning opportunities, as needed. And each will receive additional resources for academic intervention and professional development to create a better learning environment for students.
    The plan will invest $150 million to fundamentally build each school’s education capacity across the elements of the Chancellor’s Capacity Framework: rigorous instruction, supportive environment, collaborative teachers, effective school leadership, strong family-community ties, and trust.
    The Department of Education will develop tailored implementation plans, closely track every school’s progress, and hold schools accountable to meeting strict goals over the next three years. Schools that do not meet targets for each academic year would face a leadership and faculty change, as needed, and possible reorganization.
    “We believe in strong public schools for every child. Getting there means moving beyond the old playbook and investing the time, energy and resources to partner with communities and turn struggling schools around. We’re going to lift up students at nearly one hundred of our most challenged schools. We’ll give them the tools, the leadership, and the support they need to succeed—and we’ll hold them accountable for delivering higher achievement,” said Mayor Bill de Blasio.
    “Today marks an unprecedented commitment to deliver for our schools that need extra support, and I know this will translate into real improvements in student outcomes,” said Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña. “With the right leadership, rigorous instruction, community partnerships, family engagement, and ongoing support, every school can be great. We will ensure our school communities are anchored in trust, and with the cooperation of all major stakeholders, we will support our schools—our students deserve no less, and I’m determined to get this right.”
    Among the 94 schools participating in the School Renewal Program, 43 are located in the Bronx, with 27 in Brooklyn, 12 in Manhattan, and 12 in Queens. The 94 schools include schools that were identified by the State as Priority or Focus Schools and have demonstrated low academic achievement for each of the past three years, ranking in the bottom 25 percent of City schools on Math and ELA state exam scores or graduation rates, and showed limited capacity for improvement with a rating on their most recent Quality Review of “proficient” or below.
    The research-based Community School model has a proven track record of improving academic achievement. It provides vital mental health and social services and engages families and community as partners in students’ education, as part of a holistic approach towards elevating educational outcomes. Based on individual circumstances and challenges, each of the 94 schools will be matched to one or more community-based organizations and a full-time resource coordinator, who will organize the delivery of resources like optometrists, dentists, mentors, and mental health professionals.
    In addition to adopting the Community School model, each school will offer one hour of extended time each day for student learning. Additional supports could include more after-school, weekend, and summer programming.
    Each school will develop its own School Renewal Plan by Spring 2015, in partnership with its school leadership team and school community.
    Aggressive Supports and Reforms for 94 Low-Performing Schools
    Each school-specific School Renewal Plan will outline the school’s approach to transforming into a Community School and offering extended time, as well as feature the following supports and reforms:
    • Additional resources, such as academic intervention specialists, guidance counselors, social workers, small group instruction and individualized plans to meet the academic and emotional needs of every student
    • Extensive professional learning and development for school staff, including intensive coaching for principals
    • Enhanced oversight from superintendents who all recently completed a rigorous interview process
    • Frequent visits from DOE trained staff to provide feedback and closely monitor progress
    Additional targeted supports tailored to each school, based on its individual needs, may include:
    • Modified curriculum to maximize school improvement
    • New master and model teachers who can share their craft with other educators at the school
    • Operational support, enabling principals to focus on supporting their teachers to ensure rigorous classroom instruction
    • Additional resources for school safety and social service programs designed to address the specific identified needs of the student population
    Accountability and Transparency in the School Renewal Program
    The 94 struggling schools will be expected to meet clear and strict benchmarks in their first three years under the program.
    The goals for the coming years are:
    • 2014–2015
      • Each school must develop and put in place a School Renewal Plan for transformation by Spring 2015
    • 2015–2016
      • Each school must meet concrete milestones defined in its School Renewal Plan and improve on targeted elements of the capacity framework, as identified in the needs assessment
      • Each school must demonstrate measurable improvement in attendance and retention of effective teachers
    • 2016–2017
      • Each school must demonstrate significant improvement in academic achievement
      • Each school must demonstrate continued improvement on targeted elements of the capacity framework
    While the School Renewal Program is intended to provide holistic supports and services needed to turn low-performing schools around, schools that do not meet their benchmarks will face consequences, including changes to leadership and faculty of the school, as needed, and/or possible reorganization of the school.
    Possible modes of reorganization include combining schools, splitting large schools into smaller academies, or closing and replacing schools. School reorganization will only occur when necessary to best meet the needs of students and the school community.
    “For the past 12 years, New York City’s ‘answer’ for struggling schools was simple: warehouse our neediest students, starve their schools of support, and then close their schools, if they didn’t miraculously turn around. It was a political press release, not an educational solution. As a teacher, if you see a struggling student, it is your job to come up with a plan to help that child. You don’t throw that student out of your class. It is refreshing that New York City is finally willing to clean up this mess and take responsibility to help schools instead of rushing to close them,” said Michael Mulgrew, President of the United Federation of Teachers.
    “Nurturing local schools through the School Renewal Program is like nurturing the heart and soul of the whole surrounding community,” said Ernest Logan, president of the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators. “It is just common sense to support and improve individual schools in ways that speak to their unique populations and situations and to enlist the greater school community to help with this enlightened effort. This initiative is consistent with the Chancellor’s philosophy of collaboration over competition, and it reflects the deeply held values of most of our school leaders.”
    “Based on our experience with a pilot community learning project, we are encouraged that bringing support services into troubled schools will allow educators to dedicate more time and energy to teaching, while the social, emotional, and health care needs of students and their families are attended to by others,” said Kathryn Wylde, President & CEO of the Partnership for New York City. “This approach of engaging the whole community in helping struggling schools makes a lot of sense.”
    “Earlier this year, working with Mayor de Blasio, we were finally able to achieve my dream of fully funded statewide universal pre-K. And now, the Mayor has put forth yet another important plan to transform struggling schools and give all our children a chance to succeed. This is the kind of visionary thinking Assembly Democrats have been advocating for years in order to level the playing field by providing resources and support for families and children. I look forward to working with the Mayor and City officials, so that we can make our schools the best they can possibly be,” said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.
    “Mayor de Blasio and Chancellor Fariña are to be commended for a plan to allow challenged schools to be renewed. It is important that schools be given the resources and the assistance to renew their commitment to students, parents, teachers, administrators and communities. This plan is a balanced attempt to do that. I look forward to working with NYC DOE on making sure that these opportunities are available and properly funded as this important program moves forward. Chancellor Fariña has the expertise and Mayor de Blasio the commitment to make this a success. Our children deserve the best help we can give them,” said Catherine Nolan, Chair of the State Assembly Education Committee and the parent of a New York City public school student.
    “Our students are the future of our city, and we must make sure we are educating and meeting the unique needs of all of them,” said City Council Education Committee Chairperson Daniel Dromm. “The School Renewal Program reflects a commitment to students in all our schools, engaging school communities, educators, and experts and providing necessary supports to turn schools around. New York City schools must do whatever it takes, so that all students are learning in the classroom and thriving.”
    The School Renewal Program is partially underway at 23 schools, and all 94 schools will develop their intensive, school-specific plans by this spring. The schools will be expected to employ the community schools model for the beginning of the 2015–2016 school year.
    Additionally, beginning in the 2015–2016 school year, the DOE will consider additional schools for the School Renewal Program based on performance across the six elements of the Capacity Framework.
     
    pressoffice@cityhall.nyc.gov

    (212) 788-2958
     

    NYC DOE Senior Counsel and Investigations

    $
    0
    0
    If you are charged with corporal punishment or verbal abuse, use the information below to prove/disprove what the investigator on your case did wrong, and hopefully you will win your case.

    Betsy Combier

    Available at: NYC DOE Senior Counsel

    Senior Field Counsel

    Each Children First Network (CFN) has a designated senior attorney and a paralegal to provide legal support to network and cluster staffs, as well as to school leadership throughout the borough.

    The Senior Field Counsel provide direct assistance to administrators and school leadership in resolving matters with legal implications. The attorneys also provide guidance in interpreting and implementing the Chancellor’s Regulations.

    Senior Field Counsel can provide legal guidance in many areas, including:
    • Labor and Employment law, including employee discipline
    • student safety and health
    • student discipline
    • school policies, including religious accommodations, dress codes, school trips, school security, student health, etc.
    • facilities issues
    • other school-based legal issues as needed
    • assist with responses to litigation, human rights investigations, student discipline matters and other legal matters


    The Senior Field Counsel also provide regular trainings to school leadership on a variety of legal issues. Specific trainings can be requested through your Senior Field Counsel.


    School Based Investigation LinksCorporal Punishment Reporting Form
    A-420: Pupil Behavior and Discipline - Corporal Punishment
    A-421: Verbal Abuse


    School Based Investigation Checklist
    Instructions for Investigating School Based Complaints
    48 Hour Notice
    Waiver of Union Representation
    Waiver of 48 Hour Notice
    Privacy Acknowledgement

      Francesco Portelos Files a PERB Complaint Against the UFT For three Years of Mis-Representation

      $
      0
      0
      Francesco has done what all individuals should do if they feel that they have been misrepresented by their UFT Representatives - file a PERB complaint.

      See the post below.

      By the way, if you are in, or have gone to, a 3020-a arbitration, and feel strongly that an Attorney has done something unethical, improper, or in violation of his/her attorney/client privilege, file a complaint with the Departmental Discipline Committee and the Committee on Professional Discipline..

      You can, of course, do the 3020-a arbitration yourself "pro se", or with an assistant.

      And, if an Arbitrator has, in your opinion, violated his/her mandate to be neutral, respectful, and fair, file a complaint with the American Arbitration Association and NAA.

      Hold everyone who harms another person, accountable for their actions.

      Betsy Combier

      Portelos v UFT Leadership – Three Years

      of Misrepresentation

      They say “Choose your battles wisely.
      I say “Leave no necessary battle unfought!
      For three years my career has been under attack. My name and my reputation smeared. Those who know my story know the fight I have fought against a very corrupt system. However, even if you have read ever single character I have placed on this site, Facebook and Twitter, you still would not know everything. Especially not the fighting behind the scenes. I don’t mean just with my employer, the New York City Department of Education, but my union representatives.
      Since I started teaching in 2007 I have been a member of the United Federation of Teachers  (UFT) union. I have paid a monthly fee for being a member. Do you know what else I have been paying for monthly? Roadside assistance.
      In both cases I spent most of my time not needing to call either. I still paid both regardless. However, when I did have trouble with my car, I made a single call to AAA Roadside Service, and I received immediate…wait for it…assistance! I wish I could say the same for when I reached out to the UFT.
      That…that right there is the difference between my union and roadside assistance. Pay either way, but one helped and the other did not.
      A week ago I wrote something vague on social media about launching a “long overdue missile at 52 and it was not 52 Chambers Street” (DOE Headquarters). It was actually at 52 Broadway (UFT Headquarters).
      [Disclaimer: I did not, nor do I intend to, launch any real ballistic type missiles or any such explosive or damaging weaponry. There is no need to falsely arrest me again for blogging. Once is enough. It’s a figure of speech. ]
      Many UFT members do not know that if you feel retaliated against because of your union activity (grievances, chapter leader/delegate positions, asking for curriculum etc) you can file a complaint with the NYS Public Employee Relations Board (PERB). It’s free and you can find out how to file here: http://solidaritycaucus.org/how-to-file-a-perb-complaint-for-union-activity-protection/
      Many members also do not know that under the Taylor law, the employee organization (union) has an obligation to fairly represent its members. Should they fail to do so, and/or act in bad faith, members can also take the union to PERB. One needs to go no further than my inbox, or this link, to see that our union needs to, nay MUST, be stronger. http://solidaritycaucus.org/repreview/
      Below is my very detailed, and well documented, case against those who are paid to represent us and unfortunately do not. I dare anyone, from supporter to foe, friend or colleague, on or off the UFT payroll, or otherwise, to read these pages and tell me that I should not have engaged in this complaint. I actually believe I should have done it sooner. Based on the reactions from the many members who have already read this already, many will be following suit.
      Note: This is not an attack on the UFT, nor the notion of a union. I’m a strong believer of unions and their place in defending the working class. This country was built on the labor of countless. They need protection, not corruption. Thank you to the many union representatives who work hard and do defend their members.
      Francesco Portelo
       

      Kids Publish Their Stories in StoryMonsters Ink

      $
      0
      0
      Kids Can Publish University
      Re-posted from Parentadvocates.org
       
      Kids Can Publish Has Joined StoryMonsters Ink

      LINK

      Getting published in a national magazine just got a lot easier for kids! Children in kindergarten through 12th grade who love to write—and teachers who would like their students to embrace the written word—are now able to submit their writing samples to Kids Can Publish to be considered for publication in the nationally circulated StoryMonsters Ink magazine. The magazine recently joined together with Kids Can Publish, a division of Five Star Publications, Inc., to help broaden its audience.
                
      Kids Can Publish Has Joined StoryMonsters Ink!

      Getting published in a national magazine just got a lot easier for kids! Children in kindergarten through 12th grade who love to write—and teachers who would like their students to embrace the written word—are now able to submit their writing samples to Kids Can Publish to be considered for publication in the nationally circulated StoryMonsters Ink magazine. The magazine recently joined together with Kids Can Publish, a division of Five Star Publications, Inc., to help broaden its audience.

      “Partnering the two divisions together makes sense,” says Linda F. Radke, president of Five Star Publications, Inc. “Their objectives complement each other so well, and I think it is important to give young writers—our future generation of authors—a place to have a voice. What better way to do that than to give them an opportunity to participate in the publication of a national magazine?”

      Teachers and parents can now submit their students' written works, such as poems, articles, stories, book reviews, etc. to Kids Can Publish/StoryMonsters Ink for print consideration. A completed permission form signed by a parent or guardian must accompany submissions. To download a permission form and for instructions on how to submit work, visit www.StoryMonstersInk.com.

      Win a Copy of StoryMonsters Ink for Each Student in Your Classroom!


      StoryMonsters Ink is now holding a monthly drawing through its Facebook page where teachers can enter to win a printed copy of the magazine for each student in their classroom! Visit the Facebook page and add your school name and grade level in the comments below the teacher announcement post. The names will be added to a drawing and on April 18, we will pick a winner! Don't forget to "like" us!

      Viewing all 1018 articles
      Browse latest View live