GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

human capital

TFA, Fellows won’t get extra help; new schools under debate

A top city school official is reassuring union president Randi Weingarten that teachers in alternative-certification programs like Teach For America will not get a preference over graduates of education schools. But whether new schools will be able to work around the hiring freeze, as school officials initially declared, appears to be under debate.

The note to Weingarten, from Deputy Chancellor Christopher Cerf, followed a letter she sent yesterday urging the Department of Education to treat all teachers outside the system the same. Cerf’s note says the department will do that. But it also includes a new twist in the story: an acknowledgment that the hiring-freeze exception for new schools, who Chancellor Joel Klein said could hire anyone they wanted, is now “under discussion.”

Cerf did not offer me clarification on what exactly that means, though he did say that Weingarten and the teachers union have no role in the discussions.

One clue is that, in addition to Weingarten, Merryl Tisch, the head of the state Board of Regents, is also voicing concern about the idea of holding new schools exempt from the hiring freeze. In a short telephone interview today, Tisch said that the policy could hurt her goal of sending the most qualified teachers to the hardest-to-staff schools. New schools are actually easier to staff than existing struggling schools, she said, so why should they be the only ones to get free reign on hiring?

“All of these schools should be treated equally. The small schools and the remaining schools, which is most of the schools, should be allowed to hire teachers along the same guidelines,” Tisch said.

Tisch also indicated that she may have leverage on this point. “We do not, at the state, have the authority to tell the city school system how they can staff their schools or how they can fire,” she said. “What we do have is, we have the authority to look at the alternative pathways and see if the policy is being used the way we want it to be used.” Alternative pathways to teaching were created, she said, with the explicit goal of steering qualified teachers to hard-to-staff schools.

Weingarten’s original letter also asked Cerf to consider offering a retirement incentive for veteran teachers. Cerf told me that the city has considered incentives before, but determined them to be more expensive than frugal in the long run.

Cerf’s full note to Weingarten is below:

Randi:  Thanks for your letter referenced below.   I am replying quickly and by email as I want no time to  e lapse before correcting a misimpression contained in your letter.  In no respect are Teach for America members or Teaching F e llows given any preference whatever over graduates of schools of education.   In light of our budget situation, schools may only fill vacant positions via the excess pool or the Open Market Transfer System.  Only if there are insufficient candidates (e.g, in certain shortage areas) in the closed universe of the DOE labor pool, may a school look elswhere.  Were that to occur, they would be free to hire teachers from any source — and no pathway would be preferenced.   As you know, we are currently in discussions with respect to a limited exception for new schools.  Even in that context, however, no preference would be made for teachers from different pathways.

With respect to your second point, we have carefully considered your suggestions with respect to the budget and incorporated many, but not all, of them.

Best regards,

Chris

  • Greenlight

    This whole back-and-forth still doesn’t address the issue of F-status teachers who are WORKING RIGHT NOW but will be unable to hold on to their existing positions, regardless of their principals’ intentions, because of a technicality. Klein’s desire to “hire” (i.e. reappoint) within the system would be logical, if it didn’t involve also FIRING people arbitrarily on a technicality.

    (And for those of you paint F-status teachers with a broad negative brush, as though all of us are semi-retired cronies looking for some extra cash on their way out, please stop doing that. I’m in my 30s, satifactorily-rated, and chose to accept a wonderful F-status position rather than work at a prior position which I hated. I was obviously _not_ aware, a year in advance, that this way of staying in the system was going to EXCLUDE me from the system.)

  • Another Teacher

    We also have a couple F-status teachers who are great at what they do- my principal relies on them heavily because they know so much.

  • Greenlight

    @ Another Teacher: And those great teachers will be let go, and likely replaced with less experienced teachers from the ATR. (I say less-experienced because younger teachers are more likely to be excessed.) Or, if these F-status positions existed because of budget constraints, the positions may disappear entirely. If one of those was an orchestra teacher, then the orchestra itself disappears. Nice.

  • Elizabeth Green

    Greenlight, Definitely we should look into F-status teachers. Can you explain exactly what was different for you as an F-status teacher rather than regular payroll — before the hiring freeze? What has your principal told you to do?

  • Friend of a Teaching Fellow

    It irks me that the UFT undermines teaching fellows. My husband is a teaching fellow and has been a dues paying UFT member since his training began. I understand not wanting to give them preference in hiring over other teachers, but considering the plight of these fellows again this year, as happened with my husband’s co-hort last year, many of these folks have given up other jobs and/or moved across the country to participate in this program on the promise of a teaching job they are now being denied. As UFT members, the union should do something on their behalf about this situation.

  • Greenlight

    Per the usual, as F-status I’m paid 1/200th of a regular teacher’s Step 4A salary per “day” (a “day” being 6 hours and whatever minutes). I work a total of about 3.33 “days” per week, spread out over five days (and yes, the math gives me a headache, but it works out well). Other than the reduced teaching time, I’m held to the same standards as any other teacher– unit planning, classroom management, grading, punctuality, attendance at faculty meetings, room decoration… all of the important and stupid-but-still-important stuff. As a tenured, dually-certified teacher, I would expect no less than to be held to the same standard as everyone else.

    In terms of post-freeze, my principal and local ISC contact both say (and are sincerely regretful) that their hands are tied, and that according to the letter of the, er, letter, I’m unhireable for next year. Or, more, accurately, I must be let go. I was fully aware upon taking this position that only full-time teachers hold retention rights for their positions and _could_ be asked to leave at the end of the year, but no one could have forseen that thanks to a single memo, even after all of the great feedback that I’ve gotten, I would be _required to_ leave. This is really through the looking-glass here…

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

From Our Jobs Board

Featured Employers
Recent Jobs

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

20 comments so far today

Archives

June 2013
M T W T F S S
« May  
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930