Comments on: Walcott: City won’t wait for evaluations to tackle teacher quality

By: Tonioboobie

Tonioboobie — Mon, 21 May 2012 15:12:00 +0000

Wonderful idea….now tell me how principals will be kept from keeping their own personal vendettas and giving a bad rating to good teachers that they just want to get rid of? No one cares about that little dilema do they?

By: Save our school

Save our school — Fri, 18 May 2012 01:59:00 +0000

Hypocresy from top to bottom!

By: Save our school

Save our school — Fri, 18 May 2012 01:36:00 +0000

The quotas of rating veteran teachers U already started with those principals that have a chance to stay in those proposed turnaround schools. It has created a very bad atmosphere and TWEET is responsible for it.

By: Save our school

Save our school — Fri, 18 May 2012 01:28:00 +0000

All these U ratings to veteran teachers in Bryant High School started in february if this year. What a coincidence? They were all satisfactory for more than 15, 18, 20 or 25 years. And now after the famous mayor’s speech to close down 33 schools they are getting consecutive unsatisfactory lessons. Somebody from the first floor is ordering Us as pizzas. Is this what we call leadership?

By: Save our school

Save our school — Fri, 18 May 2012 01:22:00 +0000

In Bryant High School the principal is forcing APs to rate teachers she does not like, and these are veteran teachers who were never rated unsatisfactory. This is the type of principals TWEET likes. It’s all a sham….

By: I noticed that...

I noticed that... — Fri, 18 May 2012 00:21:00 +0000

Two U ratings does not mean an ineffective teacher. Did everyone forget Peter Lamphere, the Bronx HS of Science Chapter leader, who received two unnecessary u-ratings because of Principal Reidy? Did everyone forget the Iris Blige attack on teachers when she “forced” her assistant principals to u-rate teachers she did not like? So Walcott needs to fire those principals by u-rating them for misusing their power and for abusing their positions. Walcott should examine the validity of those u-ratings by those incompetent, never-taught-a-day-in-my life, principals.

By: The ATR can be YOU

The ATR can be YOU — Thu, 17 May 2012 21:52:00 +0000

The current system is the way to abolish Tenure in NYC. Do not forsake the forest for the trees. If NYCDOE can continue to close schools, then by the start of the 2013
to 2014 school year, we will have more than 2,000 ATRs. Remember, the
main reason the number of ATRs has fallen in the past two years is
because of the fact that many of them took early retirement. The UNION
must protect the ATRs in the next contract or TENURE in NYC will cease
to exist. Why not offer a compromise that protects our profession and
ensures continued growth: 7 years for Tenure on all new hires and
placement of all ATRs within the next three years. The UNION has
allowed the OPEN MARKET to continue unabated while the most qualified
and educated have to either take early retirement or shuffle themselves
from school to school every week of the school year.

By: Copernicus

Copernicus — Thu, 17 May 2012 21:48:00 +0000

I think what we can agree on is the fault is not in the system but rather in the faulty hiring and certification by the city/state and the lack of qualified administrators whose incompetence makes what would be an other wise fine system faulty.

By: The ATR can be YOU

The ATR can be YOU — Thu, 17 May 2012 21:34:00 +0000

If NYCDOE can continue to close schools, then by the start of the 2013 to 2014 school year, we will have more than 2,000 ATRs. Remember, the main reason the number of ATRs has fallen in the past two years is because of the fact that many of them took early retirement. The UNION must protect the ATRs in the next contract or TENURE in NYC will cease to exist. Why not offer a compromise that protects our profession and ensures continued growth: 7 years for Tenure on all new hires and placement of all ATRs within the next three years. The UNION has allowed the OPEN MARKET to continue unabated while the most qualified and educated have to either take early retirement or shuffle themselves from school to school every week of the school year.

By: nycdoenuts

nycdoenuts — Thu, 17 May 2012 21:16:00 +0000

Although the current evaluation system places way too much power in the hands of the principal -which may easily leading to an unfair U rating- the removal process that the chancellor is speaking of favors the teacher (because under the current system, the burden of proof in these hearings is on the DOE -and they are rarely organized enough to prove it) so I don’t see this as a very big deal.

What I love is that he didn’t even bother to look for a group of parents to introduce this plan to. Instead, he introduced it in front of a group of business leaders -I guess the business community the DOE’s most important constituency with regard to Ed policy? Curious to know what parent groups will think of this.

By: Frustrateddoe

Frustrateddoe — Thu, 17 May 2012 19:01:00 +0000

I found this little quote of particular interset “More than a quarter of these teachers have been disciplined for bad behavior.” Is Walcott confusing the ATR’s, most of whom are teachers who have been excessed due to school closings, budget cuts and program closings with teachers assigned to the “rubber rooms” (which supposedly do not exist anymore, but actually do exist, just scattered further afield)? By saying this he reinforces the smear campaign of Klein that basically told principals to NOT hire ATRs. As for the job fairs, they are a huge joke — send some cameras in, unannounced, and see the circus.

By: cj

cj — Thu, 17 May 2012 19:00:00 +0000

Of course we know what comes with all this…

1. Quotas from the emperor. After all, we have cops giving out bogus summonses all over the place to meet the Emperor’s quotas. We also saw how they established quotas last June for denying tenure. Each Principal will be told he or she has to rate 10% or more of his or her teachers “U”.

2, /we gave Orubcuoaksm the vast majority of whom lack the proper experience to be Principals rating teachers. The Emperor uses his radio show all the time to indicate it doesn’t matter namely that the word of the Principal must be taken at face value.

3. The ignoring of basic teacher rights to a fair 3020A hearing before dismissal. Never let the law get in the way of destroying somebody’s career without any proof or evidence that indeed the person is incompetent.

It will be a sad day, a very sad day, if the UFT for one second drinks this latest kool aid from a mayor and his lackey who know nothing about education and care little about the law.

By: support us!

support us! — Thu, 17 May 2012 17:07:00 +0000

The question should not be if I am doing a good job, the question is how do
I do better. The current system is a checklist that does not hold our principals accountable for supporting teachers.

By: Jodama Dama

Jodama Dama — Thu, 17 May 2012 16:52:00 +0000

I don’t agree. What’s so bad about the current system? Don’t you rely on yourself, your own integrity to know your doing a good job, or do you have to have someone spell it out for you?

By: Support Us!

Support Us! — Thu, 17 May 2012 16:17:00 +0000

Hopefully this will create pressure that results in a meaningful evaluation system being implemented that recognizes and supports teachers. i think we can all agree that the current system is not helpful.

By: Great Leaders Go National

Great Leaders Go National — Thu, 17 May 2012 15:10:00 +0000

SOME PRINCIPALS GET TO GO NATIONAL.
CONGRATULATIONS!!!

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/05/16/ny-principal-accused-of-creepy-oral-sex-comments-to-be-reassigne/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl8%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D161722

By: Eastsider

Eastsider — Thu, 17 May 2012 15:05:00 +0000

Chancellors have an obligation to bring charge against teachers “who should not be teaching,” the UFT and the City negotiated an expedited process two years ago … the fact that the Department has failed to move forward is disgraceful … the problem is not the union, it is Department of Education that has failed to bring charges against “bad” teachers … yes … the teacher is entitled to a due oricess hearing before a neutral arbitrator … what the Department fears is that arbitrators will not agree with the Department … shame on Walcott.

By: Titanic?

Titanic? — Thu, 17 May 2012 15:01:00 +0000

signs of a sinking ship? -I thought Walcott was a classier guy when first chosen—-now?

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Thu, 17 May 2012 14:40:00 +0000

Give it up, Walcott. With the cost of those 25/55 pensions, the next Mayor will be begging for a return to “you will pretend to work, and we will pretend to pay you,” particularly for minorities.

And you can bet a state arbitrator will agree with the UFT on raises in exchange for layoffs, school cuts, and a $25K starting pay for new teachers.

That deal wrecked the future of the schools for 15 years. And after 15 years, hoepfully no one will be suckered into the idea that increasing funded will lead to anything other than earlier retirement.

By: B

Thu, 17 May 2012 14:37:00 +0000

The one aspect that made me sick to my stomach about Walcott’s speech is him throwing ATRs under the bus. “… instead of wasting it on teachers who probably chose the wrong profession.” Who are you to speak of ATRs, who most of them lost their jobs due to budget cuts (a circumstance out of the teacher’s control), and say that they probably chose the wrong profession?

Also, maybe this is my misreading of the lede in the article, but it seems that Walcott is putting ATRs and U-rated teachers in the same category. Putting ATRs who have had satisfactory ratings consistently, but are out of a job due to reasons out of their control, in the same category as teachers who receive U-ratings for two+ years in a row is dishonest at best.* Is there a study or statistics to prove how many of the 800 ATRs left (according to Walcott) aren’t trying to find jobs? Statements taken as just facts like the “bad ATR” without any evidence to back it up is common place, but still just as dishonest.

*I understand the notions of U-ratings being invalid for some due to principals/administrators ganging up on a teacher, but I’m just speaking about it at face-value.