SLT's were set up as a means of teachers and parents to have a share in making basic decisions at the school level. But BloomKlein believe in all power to the principals and since most principals resent input, they are happy to go through the sham of SLT's, and often manipulate them.
I started posting comments from the listserve thread in a post "Incompetently yours" pointing to incompetence as the reason. I was wrong. It is all intentional to keep parental involvement at a minimum by feigning incompetence.
The local and national press, so enamored and apologetic of the BloomKlein political agenda for the schools, have ignored this undercurrent of parent unhappiness, which Bloomberg has generally derided as dilettantish (I don't have the specifics here but if you do leave them as comments.) Of course, dictatorships don't want anyone questioning them or having any real input.
Klein cynically appointed Martine Guerrier, a mild critic in the past, as the CEO of parent engagement at $150K a year on Feb. 28, 2007, the day of the massive rally of parent, teachers and communities organized by (and later sold out by the UFT). I know and like Martine but was very disappointed at the loss of her voice, but, hey 150k is a 150k. I wrote about it ("Say it Ain't So Martine") back then (search for her name on the blog to read stories I wrote.) I also got a weird critical email from NY Times ed reporter at the time, David Herzenhorn, after I accused the Times of writing puff pieces on BloomKlein generally, and the Guerrier appointment in particular, by praising Klein for choosing a severe critic in Martine. Not true, as I pointed out to Herzenhorn. (He has since left the NYC ed beat to cover Congress in Washington and we hope there are no repeats of the Judith Miller fiasco. NY Times ed reporters should be required to take a course in investigative reporting from the NY Sun's Elizabeth Green.)
Martine's rep has suffered since then as seen by....
This post by Jane Reiff President of (PTA) Presidents Council D25 in Queens exposed some of the underbelly. Here are just a few excerpts:
Dear Chancellor Klein and Ms. Guerrier,
You, Ms. Guerrier, personally told me that the training was set up for teams when I argued that holding a training from 10-12:30PM on a school day was not conducive for teachers and administrators and obviously the OFEA training was not meant for teams. Why on earth and how disrespectful can the DOE be to turn around and say that the teachers who were present were not supposed to be sent to this training. First of all your notice that you sent to Principals clearly stated mandated training for all teams. You expected the schools to pay for subs for a 2 and a half hour training minimum ( this does not include travel time back and forth) and the people were thrown out after 45 minutes after enduring a worthless training. The DOE staff then proceeded to say that remuneration would be for the full time of 2 and 1/2 hours. If you did not want the Principals to comply with your notice you were not clear and then of course that would also mean you lied to me. I started posting comments from the listserve thread in a post "Incompetently yours" pointing to incompetence as the reason. I was wrong. It is all intentional to keep parental involvement at a minimum by feigning incompetence.
The local and national press, so enamored and apologetic of the BloomKlein political agenda for the schools, have ignored this undercurrent of parent unhappiness, which Bloomberg has generally derided as dilettantish (I don't have the specifics here but if you do leave them as comments.) Of course, dictatorships don't want anyone questioning them or having any real input.
Klein cynically appointed Martine Guerrier, a mild critic in the past, as the CEO of parent engagement at $150K a year on Feb. 28, 2007, the day of the massive rally of parent, teachers and communities organized by (and later sold out by the UFT). I know and like Martine but was very disappointed at the loss of her voice, but, hey 150k is a 150k. I wrote about it ("Say it Ain't So Martine") back then (search for her name on the blog to read stories I wrote.) I also got a weird critical email from NY Times ed reporter at the time, David Herzenhorn, after I accused the Times of writing puff pieces on BloomKlein generally, and the Guerrier appointment in particular, by praising Klein for choosing a severe critic in Martine. Not true, as I pointed out to Herzenhorn. (He has since left the NYC ed beat to cover Congress in Washington and we hope there are no repeats of the Judith Miller fiasco. NY Times ed reporters should be required to take a course in investigative reporting from the NY Sun's Elizabeth Green.)
Martine's rep has suffered since then as seen by....
This post by Jane Reiff President of (PTA) Presidents Council D25 in Queens exposed some of the underbelly. Here are just a few excerpts:
Dear Chancellor Klein and Ms. Guerrier,
How on earth can one make sense of this? I clearly stated and requested that the training Presidents council of D25 set up with the UFT be counted as valid training and you clearly told me it would not be as thorough as the OFEA training. By thorough do you mean incompetent because I cannot think of another word that comes to mind to describe what was told to me. Not only have you not reached out to the parents to find out what time would be good for them you apparently have a lack of content to your training. I am copying and pasting some of the comments forwarded to me by the variety of people who attended and other comments about your training in other Districts. Martine, although you basically accused me of trying to put words in your mouth about beating a dead horse and how you do not want to see that in the press (another insult as you have no idea who I am and the extent of my involvement in the schools but Chancellor Klein does), I do not have to make up any of this information.
Subverting critical parent and community voices by giving them jobs??? How quaint!!!! that's been happening since the 60's
ReplyDelete