Unfortunately, Mayor Mike was not happy with what his Tweedies negotiated, and therefore it was left to Reformy John King to decree what city teachers would have to do in order to be fired. Unfortunately, Reformy John is not remotely objective, despite his much-ballyhooed single year of teaching public school.
That's why, if you look at page 77 of Reformy John's Manifesto, you will note that a city teacher needs 15 of 20 to be regarded as "effective" in both local and state junk science measures. In fact, you need 13 of 20 to be regarded as even "developing." 12 and under is "ineffective," and kindly go screw yourself, thank you very much. This suggests many questions.
For example, is it true, as Gary Rubinstein suggests, that you must score only 2 out of each 20 to be rated "ineffective" overall? Well, if you did score that low, you would be certainly without recourse. But if, as the law says, scoring ineffective in the "objective' section, which they generously label the junk science part, you could score 12 on each part and still face Reformy John's wrath. It's a question of interpretation.
And yet, if you actually look at the statute, on page 47 it states 9-17 is effective. In fact, Reformy John's Manifesto is in direct violation of NY State Statute.
So, here is my question. Where oh where is the UFT leadership on this? Are we going to allow working teachers to be rated "ineffective," and face dismissal charges, likely as not with the burden of proof on the teacher, in abject violation of New York State Law? I keep reading about how fair this plan is, and while I've never found it remotely so, it's time for our leadership to stand up and say the law applies to all of us.
Even the lofty Reformy John King, who wisely sends his kids to a Montessori School where none of this nonsense applies.
Thanks to Carol Burris. Read her right here.
Posts
