I am Eric Chasanoff and proud to be a teacher.
Today, we are all Eric Chasanoff -- or as JFK would have said: Ich Bien Ein Chasanoff
Eric Chasanoff provides a rigorous defense on his blog and points out the incredible poor reporting by these reporters. Point by point. The Daily News should be embarrassed to call itself a newspaper. And sorry reporters --- you signed your name to the article and I don't care what your editor did to it.
Today the Daily News joins the fray with the rest of the media in the assault on the 3020a process that protects teachers. Remember that hearing officers are jointly chosen by the UFT and the DOE.
Did you know that the most important factor in maintaining a democratic society is the quality of the reporters? Well, as legit as saying the most important factor in ed is the quality of the teacher.
Isn't it time to create RDR - Reporter Data Reports on how accurate they are? Who out there is challenging Bloomberg's ax murderer comment?
I urge teachers to refuse to speak to any reporter who gets stories wrong because no matter what you say it will be twisted.
JUST ADDED: I want to include a comment from Arthur Goldstein from the comment section because it further demonstrates the duplicity of the Daily News reporters and I don't want it to get lost:
I spoke to Ben Chapman yesterday, and my remarks were not included. Obviously they did not meet the low standards this piece demanded. I know also of someone who attended the 3020a hearing whose remarks were not included.
I thought it was the job of newspapers to report, not to ridicule and demean. Clearly I was mistaken. Rudimentary fact-checking would have told you the 2002 letter was thrown out, and yes they do that for a reason. That reason is that baseless nonsense, though favored here, is simply not acceptable everywhere.
In America, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. In this article, apparently, teachers are guilty even after they are declared not guilty. Here is what I said to Ben Chapman, among other things--I know Eric Chasanoff, and I would not hesitate to allow him to teach my 15-year-old daughter. In fact, if she falls behind in earth science, I will call him to tutor her.
Conversely, the writers of this article know him not at all, nor have they checked on what they wrote. I don't blame him for not having spoken with you. My having spoken with you was a waste of my time, and I can't blame him for not wishing to be part of the crystal-clear agenda of this piece.
I'm cross posting here to make sure the record is set straight in every venue.
I have read and digested the "highly inaccurate" Daily News article about me and realized that my decision not to be interviewed by their reporters was a sound decision. Despite assurances that the article would represent my view of the DOE's abusive investigation process, it turned out to be nothing but more teacher bashing "yellow journalism" by the Daily News. Let''s break down the article and show what was inaccurate.
Credibility Of The Student:
The Daily News knew from talking to a witness in my open 3020-a hearing that the creditability of the student was an issue. The student had made conflicting and contradictory statement at the hearing and even gave different statements to various people when asked about the incident leading up to the 3020-a hearing. However, the article did not seem to care about the student's credibility. Just what she claimed, depending on who she spoke to of course.
The Daily News used the student's original recollection that was used in the SCI report rather than the Arbitrator accepted statement of "I"m so proud of you passing the test I could just kiss you, of course I wouldn't do that because I would get in trouble". While the difference is not major, it still is different enough. I admit it is better than the deliberately changed DOE statement the Daily News attributed to me "If it's not going to get me in trouble I would kiss you" .
Touching The Student:According to the article, the student accused me of touching her shoulders with my hands. However, the student admitted at the 3020-a hearing that I used one hand to pat her clothed shoulder to calm her down. Yet the Daily News chose to use the now discredited statement by the student rather than the truth. Furthermore, I never grabbed the student's elbow and that charge was dismissed by the Arbitrator, still the Daily News chose to include it in the article. As for looking down her shirt? The Arbitrator dismissed that charge as well, yet again the Daily News chose to use it in the article.
The 2002 Reprimand:This is just another case of the Daily News failure to "fact check". The 2002 Reprimand was grieved by me and the DOE's favorite Arbitrator, Martin Schienman, threw out the reprimand as "unfair and inaccurate" and was removed from my file. That is why I didn't mention it in my previous post. The fact that the DOE chose to include it in sending my case to the Daily News speaks volumes about the DOE's failure to abide by the rules. The DOE are "sore losers" and this is just another case of them not abiding by the contract.
Failure To Include The "Probable Cause Hearing" Results:Was the failure to mention the "probable cause hearing" for alleged sexual misconduct which I won, simply negligence or was the omission done purposely? I guess if you want to keep the question about "sexual misconduct" alive, you would omit the "probable cause hearing" results.
The DOE's Insistence In Pursuing My Case Despite Their "Probable Cause Hearing" Loss.Once the DOE lost the "Probable Cause Hearing", they should have admitted defeat and that they had no case and end this travesty of justice. Instead the DOE wasted an additional quarter of a million dollars or more by dumping me back in the "rubber room" for two and a half years and hoping that something else would magically appear to change their losing hand.
No Mention Of The Biased SCI Investigation:
The article failed to mention how the SCI investigator was found to have lied about what I said and was caught on this by the "probable cause Administrator". In my experience, the SCI investigation process is unfair and when principals want the teacher out of the school, the SCI investigators will do what it can to accommodate the Principal's wishes.
Why Didn't The DOE Appeal The Arbitrator's Decision?
The answer was that they were lucky that the Arbitrator gave me a $2,000 fine. If the Arbitrator was truly fair, I should never have been given a fine at all but she had a reputation of giving the DOE something even when the facts show they have no case. Their appeal would have no chance of winning and they knew it.
Connection With Serial Axe Murders:
Including Mayor Bloomberg's idiotic statement that the Arbitrators would give "serial axe murders a slap on the wrist" as if I an a criminal sex offender, rather than a victim of a DOE persecution is really disgusting. My Arbitrator realized this when the DOE failed to provide real and relevant evidence that was needed to support their false accusations and ruled accordingly.
Please don't believe what you read in the newspapers, usually the truth is very much different and so it is in my case. By the way, somebody owes me $10.
I am Eric Chasanoff and proud to be a teacher.