Written and edited by Norm Scott:
EDUCATE! ORGANIZE!! MOBILIZE!!!
Three pillars of The Resistance – providing information on current ed issues, organizing activities around fighting for public education in NYC and beyond and exposing the motives behind the education deformers. We link up with bands of resisters. Nothing will change unless WE ALL GET INVOLVED IN THE STRUGGLE!
Little is "equal". Some people were given plum jobs like literacy coaches. Speaking of unequal, principals' pets will get the plum class, principals' enemies will get the class from ... Tweed. This will determine the class performance and teacher "performance".
As it said here: http://gothamschools.org/2012/02/16/uft-wins-third-party-review-for-some-ineffective-teacher-ratings/#more-77578, teachers only have lawyers as a recourse.
Here is a comment I picked up off a listserve: Today’s agreement on teacher evaluation appeals wasn’t a complete loss fo...
In order to evaluate this plan, one needs to analyze all the information given and compare it with what we have now.After doing so,it appears this plan is not bad. Under the present system, a teacher could be given a u-rating by the principal for even one unsatisfactory observation.It was unfair because the rating was very subjective and at the principal's whim. In addition,a teacher can not grieve an observation or letters in file under most circumstances. The new plan provides a panel to hear appeals that are deemed by the Union to be related to principal retaliation and harassment. I don't like the 13% limit of these appeals but it is better than nothing. During the second year, after a teacher is rated ineffective, an independent third party will also evaluate the teacher's performance. Even though this sounds like PIP plus, it does provide a safeguard against a principal scapegoating a teacher and can help the teacher during the 3020a process.Presently,the teachercan only appeal to the Chancellor and the decision goes against the teacher 99% of the time.
It is important to remember that the 3020a process is still in place if the DOE attempts to fire the teacher after two ineffective ratings. I don't believe test results should be used to measure teacher effectiveness, but at least it is not the major factor. Unannounced observations are the norm in High School except for new teachers.
Another comment: Anyone who believes that this evaluator will really be impartial needs to look into the DOE's (not UFT's) peer intervention program. They come in, design a plan for you, and observe you ten times during the year, systematically rating you unsatisfactory each time...I have seen this program in action. A former coach with no administrative experience was the evaluator and, yes, they worked for an outside vendor. The vendor, however, was (and will be, in this case) paid by the DOE. How bone fide do you think it was?
4 comments:
How is this going to be equal when a good number a teachers are not in testing grades or are "out of classroom" teachers?????
Little is "equal". Some people were given plum jobs like literacy coaches.
Speaking of unequal, principals' pets will get the plum class, principals' enemies will get the class from ... Tweed. This will determine the class performance and teacher "performance".
As it said here: http://gothamschools.org/2012/02/16/uft-wins-third-party-review-for-some-ineffective-teacher-ratings/#more-77578, teachers only have lawyers as a recourse.
Here is a comment I picked up off a listserve:
Today’s agreement on teacher evaluation appeals wasn’t a complete loss fo...
In order to evaluate this plan, one needs to analyze all the information given and compare it with what we have now.After doing so,it appears this plan is not bad.
Under the present system, a teacher could be given a u-rating by the principal for even one unsatisfactory observation.It was unfair because the rating was very subjective and at the principal's whim. In addition,a teacher can not grieve an observation or letters in file under most circumstances.
The new plan provides a panel to hear appeals that are deemed by the Union to be related to principal retaliation and harassment. I don't like the 13% limit of these appeals but it is better than nothing. During the second year, after a teacher is rated ineffective, an independent third party will also evaluate the teacher's performance. Even though this sounds like PIP plus, it does provide a safeguard against a principal scapegoating a teacher and can help the teacher during the 3020a process.Presently,the teachercan only appeal to the Chancellor and the decision goes against the teacher 99% of the time.
It is important to remember that the 3020a process is still in place if the DOE attempts to fire the teacher after two ineffective ratings.
I don't believe test results should be used to measure teacher effectiveness, but at least it is not the major factor. Unannounced observations are the norm in High School except for new teachers.
Another comment:
Anyone who believes that this evaluator will really be impartial needs to look into the DOE's (not UFT's) peer intervention program. They come in, design a plan for you, and observe you ten times during the year, systematically rating you unsatisfactory each time...I have seen this program in action. A former coach with no administrative experience was the evaluator and, yes, they worked for an outside vendor. The vendor, however, was (and will be, in this case) paid by the DOE. How bone fide do you think it was?
Post a Comment