Recent records show the city often does not get its way when it tries to fire misbehaving teachers. (Post)
One teacher who was fired had affairs with two students and gave them drugs and alcohol. (Post)
Three students from two elite schools were named finalists in a national science fair. (Post, Daily News)
SUNY’s charter school board concluded it cannot block schools because of location concerns. (NY1)
SUNY trustees voted to support the DREAM Act to provide financial aid to undocumented students. (NY1)
A proposal by a PEP member would make it possible for more students to get bus service. (Daily News)
Concerns about a charter school’s planned expansion are percolating in Riverdale. (Riverdale Press)
President Obama wants states to make it illegal for students to drop out before they turn 18. (Times)
Researchers argue that the cost of enacting that proposal would be borne out by later savings. (Times)
Philip Nobile
I’m waiting for the Post story on teachers who were falsely accused, corruptly investigated, unfairly prosecuted, and finally acquitted without any consequences for the perjurious witnesses, thuggish investigators, and mean-spirited, disingenuous prosecutors. This is the reason we need independent arbitrators like the one in my corporal punishment and discrimination case. The arbitrator ruled that (a) the main witnesses lied, (b) the investigators messed up (i.e., they planted damaging evidence and/or excluded exculpatory evidence), and (c) the prosecution’s theories were nonsense. He even cited the Supreme Court in my favor. The prosecution was so desperate to convict that the trial attorney even refused to retract a detrimental misstatement of fact in her summation until I threatened to inform the arbitrator of her dishonesty. Within hours she emailed the arbitrator: “The Department stands corrected.”
Nevertheless, independent arbitrators are not truly independent. Since their rich annual the contracts can be vetoed by either the DOE or UFT, their verdicts tend to be split. For instance, my arbitrator unambiguously acquitted me of corporal punishment and discrimination, yet recklessly fined me $10,000 for conduct never charged by the DOE because the conduct was not chargeable in the first place.
By the way, I represented myself at the hearing because the NYSUT wimps declined to go after the corrupt investigators or the inevitable perjurers.
Jim Devor
As someone who was present at the public session of the SUNY Trustees’
Education, College Readiness and Success Committee, I can attest that the NY1 report buried the lede. At that meeting, the Charter School Institute’s General Counsel clearly stated that the Committee had the authority to table (i.e., delay pending further
study) the Charter School Institute’s approval of the proposed co-locations being presented to the Committee (or at least to recommend such
action be taken by the full Board of Trustees). On that advice, the Committee passed a motion tabling the Charter School Institute’s approval of the proposed co-location of Success Academies in Cobble Hill and Williamsburg.Then, two hours later (when the public had left the premises), Chairman Noguera suddenly announced that “after discussions with legal staff” in
“Executive Session”, the Committee determined to rescind its motion its motion to table. In doing so, Chairman Noguera claimed, the SUNY Trustees had no authority to overrule the decisions of its own agency (i.e., the Charter School Institute).
Not only is this position nonsensical on its face, engaging in such an Executive Session (at least
for the purpose articulated by Chairman Noguera), violates the
strictures of the Open Meetings Law. Indeed, with all due respect, the
sudden turnaround gives the appearance of the kind of “back room deal” -
or worse, illicit intimidation – that the Open Meetings Law was meant
to prevent. Further, it is an unwarranted insult to those of us who
observed and presented at the initial session (including Assembly Member Millman and Congress Member Velasquez’s staffer).
Pedro Noguera should not be given a free pass on this. He has been in a position to take affirmative action to defend the interests of “at risk” children for whose benefit the Success Academy Charters were ostensibly granted. Instead, he erroneously (and unlawfully) claims impotence in responding to the egregious “bait and switch” engineered by Eva Moskowitz and her cynical abandonment of the children Pedro Noguera loudly claims to champion. By this action, Chairman Noguera has publicly chosen sides. At a minimum, he committed an act of cowardice yesterday.. More accurately, it was a betrayal.
Pogue
Very disappointed in Anna Phillips Times’ article, “As Evaluation Talks Resume, Teachers Press for a Resolution”.
I wanted to see what teachers would look forward to such a poor/error-filled evaluation system and lo and behold, “…many of the teachers are members of Educators 4 Excellence”.
More Kool-Aid anyone?
Guest
Of course the Post article is written from the assumption that all of those teachers are guilty without proof or a fair hearing, so there’s that.
Vote NO!
I’m very disgusted that those teachers sign off as if they speak for all of the teachers in the 33 PLA schools. I can assure you..they do NOT!
bee
I concur. I particularly dislike that someone quickly skimming the headline, as many of us do, is left with the assumption that Ms. Phillips’ teachers refers to a majority of teachers, not the tiny, wee, little subset of “real teachers,” from the tiny, little, absurd E4E club. I also don’t like that, in order to comment on School Book articles, one has to use facebook.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.