Lying Liars of the NYC DOE

 The APPR travails continue. 

When last I blogged I shared how my principal, XXXXXXXX XXXXX of PS XXX did an end run around me. I was refused to be observed and rated through Advance. But, however, thanks thus for to the
Bronx UFT this case shan't wither away. We will have a step 1 hearing come September and I am sure this will go further. That is in addition to the appeal for the bogus U rating I received. 

But I believe in getting all the information possible. And apparently others do as well. In my blog post of June 29 I posted just a memo with the agreement to Advance, who will be under it, etc... But it is just a memo. Or whatever. How much juice would it have?

Blogger NYCDOENUTS contacted me last week and suggested I look to the contract. OK. I looked. In Section 8J Part D Covered employees, Section 2 it states...

Same words, but in the contract. But codified. In the contract. But yet another method that our administrators pay no heed to the contract, to a legal agreement. Just because they feel they are above the law. McDonald's managers are more honorable. 

Thank you DOENUTS! You're a mensch.

So during one of my conversations with Principal XXXXXXXX XXXXX of PS XXX I was told; 

"I am not sure if you are on Advance. I will have to check."

I made this inquiry in February regarding my IPC. Wouldn't a principal be aware of this without having to check? A manager at McDonald's would know who is qualified to perform each task (I in no way am belittling working at McDonald's. I worked at McD's myself in 1980). 

But someone, way, way up in the NYCDOE got in touch with The Crack Team concerning how one gets on or off of Advance.

"Your principal has the ability to make teachers eligible or ineligible based on the eligibility requirements listed here (section 1.1.1)" (Remember, the above mentioned memo)

So why would Principal XXXXXXXX XXXXX of PS XXX be uncertain whether or not I was in Advance? According to information received by The Crack Team it is the principal that determines whether or not one is on Advance. 

Is it possible I was on Advance and when I started asking for an IPC Principal XXXXXXXX XXXXX of PS XXX summarily removed me? I mean it was February, who asks to be observed, especially APPR observation? I am sure it was common knowledge. Advance was advantageous to me and other teachers, in particular ATRs that got a bogus letter to their files. 

Even if the new contract is ratified, the unchecked, unfettered abuse by administrators will continue unabated. 

The Latest New Evaluation Riddle

So Chapter Leaders and I guess administrators are being trained on the new evaluation system.
Everything being crammed into a short time frame. I guess sooner or later teachers will be trained  as well.

But I've been thinking lately.

Think about this. Say you are a teacher and up until now, January 11, 2017 you have had say 2 observations in which were complete disasters. You have to ineffectives and on your way to end of year rating hell. And let's just say for arugments sake that the new evaluation system kicks in on February 1.

Do you get a mulligan? A do over? Like in Galaxy Quest when you get to use the Omega 13 and rearrange matter and get to go back in time redeem a mistake?  Or do the ineffectives get combined with the new method?

One should be able to get a do over. It is only fair. But we have yet to hear from anyone with knowledge to share this with us.

In fact, what about the four observations? Are the observation pro-rated to two observations are will the four observations be jammed into the last few months of the school year?

And one more thing.

Keeping the beginning date of the new evaluation system as February 1in place shouldn't all teachers observations/evaluations be then based on the old S/U system? Think about it for a moment.

Back in November when I was at the Bronx UFT ATR meeting it was shared with us that if we got a permanent position at that time we will be under the auspices of the, at the time, current APPR system. However, if we got a permanent position in the second semester will fall under the S/U nothing to do with Danielson system. Heck, this is even true for new hires if they started that late in the year that they would be under S/U as well.

Will new teachers that are hired in March or later be part of the newest evaluation system or will they fall under the older old version of evaluations/observations the S/U?

Inquiring minds want to know. Inquiring minds want to hear from someone, anyone.

Chancellor Farina is Enabling the Incompetency of Bronx Bridges AP Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall

For those who have read my blog posts (here, here, here, and here) about my former AP at PS 154 in the Bronx, Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall there was one more thing I had wanted to add but couldn't find the proper way to segue into it. Until now.

It was either May or June of 2013, about several weeks into the reign of DR Alison Coviello; Principal and Ed.D of PS 154 in the Bronx when Mr J said something quite revealing to me.

DR Alison Coviello; Principal and Ed.D of PS 154 had decided that mass preps in the auditorium were no longer to be accompanied by a movie but rather the children were to sit there, sometime for several hours, reading books. Good idea, poor implementation.

So one day, at the end of the day, I am covering the mass prep along with The Bow Tie, Mr J. The entire 2nd grade was in the auditorium when a student came up to me with a question. Now this student had a lot of issues, had been a holdover, and was quite challenging. I knew how to handle him and I had gained this young man's respect. Anyway, he came up to me and I was standing next to Mr J. and asked me something or was kvetching about something. Anyway, I got him to go back to his seat and as he was walking back Mr J turned to me and said;

"We'll see him in jail in a few years."

I was incredulous. I wish I had said something then, I should have. But as we know if a teacher makes an accusation against an administrator there better be witnesses.

So last night I get an email from a former teacher at Bronx Bridges High School. She knows The Bow Tie all too well and shared her story. A story that she has sent to Chancellor Farina, only to be ignored time after time.

Here is her story of her brush with The Bow Tie, Mr J (We added and/or deleted/edited some and highlighted the good stuff!)

Last June, I met with my principal (NELSIE CASTILLO) for my final conference. I wondered if she would mention that I had only had 5 of my 6 observations. Instead she informed me of my score. I then wondered how the calculation was made. 

Upon looking online, I found that one of my observations had been duplicated---DUPLICATED! The date and class period were changed and it was submitted as the foregone observation report; everything on it was exactly the same as another observation report previously submitted. To make matters worse, it just so happens to be my lowest scoring observation that now counts twice toward my MOTP rating. It all seems a little too deliberate to me.

Had I made my observer (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) angry? To be honest, probably. But what a petty way to retaliate. Fire me if you find me insubordinate, because at least then it might sting. Sabotaging my teacher rating is low, immoral, and incredibly unprofessional.  

Having received an Ineffective MOTP rating the previous year and undergoing the incredibly meaningless appeal process, I was incensed. If I had to go through another appeal, I would surely quit. You see, an APPR appeal is about a year long process where you amass evidence, present it to the UFT, they review it, you review it again with a lawyer, and finally you have a hearing. I didn’t win my appeal. In fact, no one did according to my assigned lawyer. The appeal process seemed to me more of a way to keep a few senescent lawyers and NYCDOE personnel on the books. I had a solid case and I am sure a great percentage of the other appellants did too. 

It turns out, even if I wanted to appeal this year’s rating, I cannot. My MOSL score came back Effective and since my MOTP is Developing, my overall score is Developing too. According to inane rule, you may only appeal a rating if your overall score is Ineffective. 

The fact that I had received an Effective for my MOSL score is evidence enough for me that I deserve to have received my final observation. I teach at an all English Language Learner (Bronx Bridges) school. One hundred percent of my students are ELLs. Every student had arrived to the country within the last four  years. A number of them are Students with Interrupted Formal Education (SIFE), having left their war-torn countries or the fields on which they labored in search of a better life. The vast majority of them might as well be SIFE students, having attended very poor quality schools their entire lives. Most of my high school students arrive to my classroom with the reading and writing skills of a third grader--in their native language. As far as skills in English, numeracy and logic, there are rarely any to speak of. It has been said that “education is not the filling of vessels but the lighting of a fire”. What is left out of this popular quote is that there has to be something in the vessel to fuel the fire, a spontaneous combustion requires ingredients. The teachers at my school are starting with empty vessels and are evaluated based on whether these vessels, which on most occasions take twelve years to fill to the required level, can be filled in four. 

I got nearly 30% of my students to pass on the first try. That may seem like a low number to you, but not compared to similar students within the district. In my classroom, every single one of the students tested grew statistically--between 4% and 98%. These numbers alone stand as testament to the fact that I am not a developing teacher and that I should not have been the victim of someone else’s lack of responsibility, or as it seems based on the observation he chose to duplicate, maliciousness. If anything, he should have fought to keep me as one of his teachers. 

My observer (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) just so happens to not be the very best assistant principal out there. Why can’t I rate him (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) as ineffective as he is? He (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) is the same man who on several occasions said that our students belonged in prison, who lost the Earth Science practicums back in January and cost my students 15% on their exams through no fault of their own, who, after having broken up a fight between two boys left them inside his office, to which the door automatically locks, by themselves, only to be found practically killing each other moments later by teachers who ran to pull them apart.

When asked about the duplicated observation, he (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) said that the principal was supposed to do the fifth and sixth observations. He (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) grabbed my file to see if I had signed the observation, as though if I had, that would save him from the repercussions yet to be seen. No, I never signed that I had received it, and no, it wasn’t in my file. 

I doubt anything will happen to him. The UFT says he should be fired, but then no one answered a single email all summer. I emailed Farina twice and have yet to hear back. Its as if it's all a big conspiracy. 

The evaluation system is meant to put teachers on a bell curve. Its supposed to tell hiring principals and parents how you stack up as a teacher against other teachers teaching the same population the same subject. Someone has to be on the left side of the bell curve, right? After all the bell curve isn’t going away no matter how great all teachers are. The problem is not that this is the goal, the problem is that it is impossible to take into account circumstances out of your control--like lost exams and made up observation reports. This and so many other stories is why the evaluation system is flawed. More so, its why my assistant principal (Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) should be fired. How is this not illegal? 

WHOA! Some takeways.

One, as far as The Crack Team is concerned, it appears as if The Bow Tie, Mr. J had engaged in criminal activity by falsifying public records, the teacher's observation. Read it again. He never did the 6th observation as he should and instead of being a man, decided to just copy the previous observation verbatim.

According to New York State Penal Law S 175.30 Offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree; 

A person is guilty of offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree when, knowing that a written instrument contains a false statement or false information, he offers or presents it to a public office or public servant with the knowledge or belief that it will be filed with, registered or recorded in or otherwise become a part of the records of such public office or public servant.

Offering a false instrument for filing in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.

Not good. Seems that there might be a possibility that Mr J and his bow tie might be looking at some time in Rikers. Maybe there he might meet some of his former students, you know, the ones he had so much faith in. But think about it. What a self-fullfilling prophecy if there ever was one. One wonders how many Newports Mr J would fetch for.

Leaving two boys locked inside your office so they can duke it out Raj? Come on. Even a TFA teacher knows not to do that. Was Mr J written up for that? Doubtful. As he said under oath at my 3020-a hearing, he is a good friend of Nellie Castillo. Ms Castillo looks the other way apparently. Hey Nellie, isn't this putting minors in harms way? A criminal offense?

Losing instructional material? Isn't this something to be written up for? Not if you are an AP and buddies with the principal.

So meanwhile The Bow Tie, Mr J had the audacity to sit in judgement of me and to criticize me and not assist me. When I complained I was looked at as if I am a liar or crazy. Looks like the Karma Fairy has snapped Mr J's bow tie.

But who is really to blame for this? DR Alison Coviello; Principal and Ed.D of PS 154 in the Bronx and former and currently exiled District 7 superintendent Yolanda Torres. They both had no problem conspiring attempting to separate me from my direct deposit and actually succeeding with several of my colleagues, but to pass the buck onto others at the expense of the students and teachers at Bronx Bridges HS is beyond the pale.

I am dying to find out about Mr J and what happened with him at PS 154 during his last year there in 2013-2014. Soon I will. We are awaiting discovery from the DOE and soon we will be deposing both DR Alison Coviello; Principal and Ed.D of PS 154 in the Bronx and Yolanda Torres. In fact, I think we should depose both Mr J and his bow tie as well.

This man is a waste of human life. He is self-serving and all for himself. He couldn't handle 1st graders, what the hell is he doing in a high school?

For those reading this at Bronx Bridges, keep on sending the stories.

Does John Didrichsen of PS/MS 291 in the Bronx Have Flaming Pants?

One of the witnesses who testified against me was former literacy coach, John Didrichsen from the failed "Maverick Education Partnership," CFN 407. John currently tolls away at PS/MS 291 in the Bronx as a literacy coach.


John has quite the impressive resume. After graduating with a degree in theater John took Hollywood by storm. John soon, somehow, got into education and taught for three years before becoming a literacy coach.

So after months and months of asking for a demo lesson, John was sent to my class. Not to do a demo, but rather to observe me. Funny thing is I found out at the hearings that John had been at the school since mid-November and for some reason even though I was asking for assistance since before that time John was never sent to me.

But to make a long story short, the day John came to visit me was when I had a re-scheduled 1st grade class. Now mind you, the little ones usually had their preps before noon but this day a most rambunctious class was scheduled for me at 12:20 PM, two hours after they had lunch. Strange.

Here are some of John's testimony along with my retorts;

John claims; What are they going to know at the end of this 50 minutes that they didn't know before? And it should be clearly articulated. I did not see that in this lesson.

Yes, he did. We were talking about how to make and keep friends. Was he not there as I gave them an example of how I made a friend in 4th grade? The book I read on how one can make a friend? Or the turn and talk the students had about making friends? I am confused since John said I had the Workshop Model down.

John shares how my management could have been better;  there were several disruptions, students getting up, Mr. Zucker asking them to come back. There were phone calls from the phone near the door, and Mr. Zucker had  to get up to answer that. Students had to get up to get pencils and/or sharpen pencils.

There was one student who was a major disruptor and most came from attention seeking and whining. Let's call this kid Schmuel Rabinowitz. See, I know this young man, John didn't. If John did he would have known that Schmuel was born addicted to drugs and was not wanted by his biological mother. Schmuel had been in several foster homes by the time of 1st grade. 

Yes, I warned a couple of times that I would change their cards and didn't, but the card system used by the school that year was an utter failure and was to be scrapped the following year. Besides, I like using the countdown to zero to get the students attention and also quieting my voice which works as well. But you need to know your audience to know what works, and I did and John did not.

As for the phone calls. How the heck is that my fault? Students getting up to sharpen pencils? I didn't allow them to. But here is another kvetch; 

Even within this group of special- needs students or students with IEPs, I believe all the students were special-needs students in the class.

John didn't know, it was general ed class. Should he not know his audience? More on this later. 

the fairly easy task that he gave them to do at their desks in a very short period of time, but then they really didn't--they weren't given anything else to do, so a lot of them had quite a bit of time where they

Easy task? They were to start a book on how to make a friend. The first page was about why it is important to have a friend. Easy? This was a very low functioning class, I got them to write, to come up with ideas we shared. To be on task, somewhat, which is good for them. And when some finished early, what did they do? They went to the library to get a book to read. That is what I was told to the classroom library was for. We came back to the carpet and shared. JEEZ!!

See, it is really strange that he testified to these things even thought his write up to me suggested to use more rigor and mentioned that things that were completely out of my hand led to an unevenness of the flow. Oh, but I did not get the feedback from him until June 3. About two and a half weeks later. But there is one more interesting thing he blabbered; 

When you do observations, with Danielson what you like to do is find one competency that you would like to concentrate on more than others.

Say what? That's what this is all about? He even asked me to concentrate on 1-E of Danielson. Even though Danielson does not include the Workshop Model? Under cross John blithered;

Well, they would be judged and observed formally and informally the following year on those competencies, and I wanted them to be prepared for that. It was something--I made it my duty to have teachers know.

If that is not made enough, the worse was yet to come.

Under cross John was asked under oath if he had met with me formally after the period. John said it was just informally for "like about 5 minutes in the doorway". Gee, I remember it differently. I remember sitting with John for almost the entire period after that lesson, a period which was cleared for me and John denies it? I remember getting my lunch and asking him if he minds me eating it in front of him. In fact he was asked under oath if I ate lunch in front of him, he said, "No." Maybe this will refresh John's memory.

Or what about the part where he is asked under cross;

Do you remember telling Mr. Zucker during that conversation that you saw someone who could teach?

John responded;

"Saw someone who could teach?" No, I don't remember saying that.

Hmmm. John might need some help with his memory.

This might not fall under the level or perjured testimony (We here at SBSB don;t have any formal legal training) but it sure smacks of untruthiness or John just might have the proverbial pants on fire.

I understand. John has his SBL license and wants to play with the big boys. Screw ethics and morality. What matters is how you get to the top.

Tune in tomorrow when it is shared about the time John comes to do a demo lesson and the complete and utter train wreck that ensues.

Has DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal Secretly Recorded Formal Observations?

DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal of PS 154 in the Bronx has a hidden, well not hidden, rather a special talent that not too many know about.

Apparently, it seems that DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal is not only an educator but a court reporter as well. Yes, you read that right, a court reporter.

It's not being implied that she moonlights as a court reporter, but rather she has the skills of a court reporter and these skills have come across in how she conducts (Or has conducted in the 2012-2013 school year) formal observations.

Back in 2012-2013 when DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal had pre-planned how many observations I was to have, as well as the diabolical plot that I would be found incompetent before the school year started, DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal had a very unique method of observing.

She would enter the classroom with her trusty laptop, sit her self down, and when you started teaching she did what she had to do. No, not taking copious hand written notes, but rather transcribing the entire 50 minute lesson onto her laptop.

How can this be done you ask? Yes, DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal is super duper smart and like James Bond knows it all. But did DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal, while earning her doctorate, also attend some of the finer schools in Manhattan for court stenography? Better yet, does she have the skills were court reporting?

A good court reporter must be able to type about 180-22- words per minute using what is known as a Stenograph (Take a look at this video) on a 22 key unmarked keyboard. Now remember, this is a hard job, even though most of the time there are mostly two people talking, or even one.  Yes, there is a lot of interaction amongst judges, lawyers, witnesses, but not like having 25 kids and 1 teacher.

DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal was able to take these skills as a court reporter and transfer them to the classroom. Not only was she able to transcribe the entire 50 minute lesson, supposedly verbatim, but in the transcription have the name of every child who has spoken, the inflections of the voices, and the movements of all in the class. She was able to do all this while being able to concentrate on the lesson being taught as well.

Now, there were some mistakes made in the transcription handed back. Large chunks of the lesson were missing and comments, inflections, interactions that never happened in the lesson were on the transcript.

Now for the readers of this blog who say, "IMPOSSIBLE!", well, you must put away your cynical hat for just a moment. As my dad said, "Anything is possible, the question is, is it probable."

Hmm, let's put my dad's theory to use.

Can DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal actually type as fast as a court reporter? Anyone can, even a monkey, but type that fast with accuracy or DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal's idea of truthiness? 

If DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal can type that fast, she would have to be spot on accurate with who said what to whom as well as the correct inflection used in each speaker's voice. 

If DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal can type that fast and accurate surely it must take some amount of concentration, concentration that is not used to properly follow the lesson, no? 

If DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal can type that fast and accurate along with the needed concentration wouldn't she not miss out on some of the small intricacies of the lesson? Perhaps even unspoken moments? 

Can DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal truly type that fast and accurate and if not, dare it be said...? That she covertly recorded the lesson on her laptop only to transcribe it later and purposely omit exculpatory evidence to quality teaching?

If DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal was audio recording observations, does this then not explain why (To transcribe the audio) it took almost a month to get feedback, the rating, and the transcription of the observation back?

At anytime, if the observations were being recorded, had DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal informed or gotten permission from the teacher being observed for the lesson to be audio recorded? 

In a previous 3020-a hearing, DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal when asked if she had audio recorded observations denied she had. Was this the truth or a fib?

In a controlled setting, would DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal be able to replicate such skills as she exhibited during formal observations? 

These are all questions inquiring minds would like answered. If these observations were audio recorded it would be a serious breech of trust and of ethics on the part of DR Alison Coviello, Ed.D and Principal.

Formal Observations Pre-Determined by Principal Alison Coviello PS 154 Bronx

Remember the PreCogs in the movie Minority Report? They were able to predict a murder before it happened. DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal of PS 154 and her BFF AP Jessica Cruz canpredict how many formal observations a teacher will have before that teacher as their first one.

When we last left our intrepid conspirators on these pages last month it was shared how on August 24, 2012  BFF AP Jessica Cruz emailed DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal on proper English language use on the upcoming (PreCog abilities again?) write-ups for my file.

This email by BFF AP Jessica Cruz was in response to the email from DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal on how DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal  can find me incompetent in August, 10 days before the school year even started.

So it becomes even curiouser that before I had even my first formal observation of the 2012-2013 school year I was scheduled for two formal observations on a schedule that DR Alison Coviello Ed.D and Principal and BFF AP Jessica Cruz shared only amongst themselves (And assuming AP Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall) which came out in November. Take a look.

   DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal of PS 154 Observation Schedule by Popeye2112

Now of course names of other teachers are redacted. Those redacted names with a (2) next to them are non-tenured and marked accordingly, and those non-tenured are marked and so on (All redactions and whether or not tenured or non-tenured added by The Crack Team).That is all except one.

As you can see the week of December 3rd, under then AP Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall observations is a tenured teacher. This tenured teacher was to have a a second observation, scheduled before even the first one was complete, to be observed by BFF AP Jessica Cruz the week of March 4.

I was scheduled to have my first observation in the presence of DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal the week of December 3. But AP Rajendra Jimenez-Jailall was supposed to observe my second observation the week of January 28 but he didn't, but did informally observe me on January 30 and only judged me on my "learning environment," not my pedagogy.

DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal did email me and share with me on February 17 that I was on the schedule for an pre-observation for me on February 21and the observation for me for February 22. This during the abbreviated February break of 2013.

See the fix was in, not only for me, but for others as well (In a way).

Coviello that year did not let anyone take advantage of Part A of the formal observation;

 The first model, known as Annual Performance Options (Component A), offers an individual teacher, in consultation with his/her supervisor, the opportunity to set yearly goals and objectives and to choose the met hods for demonstrating professional growth.

But as with me and one other staff member she decided that even before our first observations we were to have two.

Now I have always been under the impression that a tenured teacher, though can be informally observed as often as an administrator wishes, received only 1 formal observation, unless that observation was a U. And that once having a U, they can be formally observed 2 more times.

Even if I am wrong, why then were most of the tenured teachers (Other tenured teachers received more than one observation) not made to be observed a 2nd time? Was DR Alison Coviello's; Ed.D and Principal mind made up in November 2012 who was to receive or not receive a U rating in June of 2013, which was more than six months away?

Moreover, did I and others, have the same opportunity, the same chances to succeed as other teachers had? Were we all at the same starting line or did some have to start from the back of the pack? What other teachers and staff have fallen out of favor with DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal and how were they then treated? What about those who consider themselves safe for the are favorites. Surely they are aware how easily they can go from being a favorite to an enemy of DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal.

Bigger question. Has  DR Alison Coviello; Ed.D and Principal acted in a ethical and professional manner engaging in what appears to be an alleged conspiracy to ruin my career as well as others? If no, should there be any repercussions?

When does this behavior end?