Monday, December 10, 2012

Susan Ohanian On L.A.'s Rubber Rooms

LAUSD Rubber Rooms Crowd Up

Susan O'Hanian

LINK
lausdprisoner Comment:

This is Deasy's LAUSD: Facts don't matter. The principal documents the teacher is innocent. So Deasy sends the "case" downtown where a "committee" confirms her innocence and unanimously recommends the teacher be returned to the classroom. Deasy then removes the case from the committee and forces the principal to issue a Notice of Unsatisfactory Act, Suspension and the initiation of dismissal proceedings (which means automatic dismissal despite the facts) for a non incident the principal him/herself has documented was a non incident.

Facts don't matter.

I was charged with a false, hearsay allegation. The police told me it was hearsay from kids not even in my class. They completely dismissed the case as without merit. LAUSD stuck with the hearsay. They have the statement of the child involved (according to the false hearsay) which totally contradicts the hearsay. LAUSD sticks with the hearsay.

Facts don't matter.

Deasy is bragging about firing clearly innocent teachers. Hundreds of them.

Facts don't matter.

An angry student accuses a teacher. A month or two later, the student issues a written apology saying he/she lied, that he/she was angry. Deasy orders the principal to issue (or not retract) the Unsatisfactory Act, Suspension and dismissal proceeding (which means dismissal) anyway.

Facts don't matter. Heil Deasy.

By Hillel Aron

On the outskirts of LAUSD's sprawling, mazelike Educational Service Center in Reseda sit seven long, shabby, peach-colored bungalows with barred windows and rotting wood, which all but scream Southern California public education.

In one of them is a roughly 35-square-foot room where 25 or so teachers (and a couple of teacher's assistants) sit at cubicles. They read, listen to music, watch Netlfix on smartphones, play scrabble on Facebook. One sits with his feet up and his head tilted back toward the pockmarked ceiling, fast asleep, snoring loudly through a gaping mouth. The other teachers laugh. His head jerks up and he looks around, takes a swing from a quart of Donald Duck orange juice and goes back to sleep.

They are teachers in teacher jail, known more popularly as rubber rooms, and the aim is to keep them out of classrooms while allegations against them are investigated.

Not everybody spends their time so idly during the average 127 days that each one sits, drawing full salaries that average $67,000 a year. One teacher practices the trumpet in the parking lot; another works on her dissertation for a doctorate in education. A Congolese immigrant who knows seven languages is using her time to learn an eighth — Korean.

But mostly, these teachers sit around and commiserate, a cross between a 12-step group and detention.

"A lot of us are good teachers," says Carrie Collier, a special ed teacher at Van Nuys Elementary who's been "housed" at the Education Service Center North since Sept. 10. "I know there's no reason for you to believe that — like, 'all inmates in a prison are innocent.' " She was accused by a teacher's aide of nearly closing a door on two rowdy special-needs students and of corralling another student against a wall using a wheeled table.

Some 300 LAUSD employees now sit in five rubber rooms scattered around L.A. First revealed in 2009 by the Los Angeles Times, the rubber rooms take their nickname from much larger facilities that house New York City teachers who have been accused of wrongdoing or serious incompetence.

The rubber-room day is short, 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. But some teachers now are being paid to simply stay at their own homes — because the number of L.A. educators under investigation is roughly twice that of a year ago.

The big explosion in rubber-room population came after popular Miramonte Elementary School teacher Mark Berndt was charged last January with 23 acts of molesting young LAUSD students — including feeding his students cookies covered with his semen. Just days later, LAUSD revealed that in October 2011, third-grade teacher Paul Chapel at Pacoima's Telfair Elementary School was arrested for abusing 13 small children from 2006 to 2011.

Berndt awaits trial, a symbol to many of what happens under California's byzantine state laws that make it hard to fire bad, or even dangerous, teachers.

Chapel, by contrast to Berndt — who refused to step down at Miramonte and could not be easily fired — agreed to a plea deal. So Chapel has already been convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

After Berndt made global headlines as one of the most horrific California teachers in memory, the district aggressively spread the word about what parents, students and other teachers should look for in "appropriate" and "inappropriate" teacher behavior. LAUSD general counsel David Holmquist says that, as a result, "We're seeing more reporting. We really see that as a positive thing."

Almost as shocking as Berndt's alleged sex perversion was the fact that LAUSD kept the Berndt scandal quiet. Instead of warning parents and moving to fire Berndt — a nightmarish process that could have let Berndt cling to his job for years — LAUSD quietly paid him $40,000 to go away.

A state audit released last week revealed that out of 429 cases of alleged misconduct, LAUSD failed to promptly report at least 144 to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which can revoke a teacher's license but rarely does. LAUSD sat on 31 of those allegations for three years. In one case, a teacher drew a student into a sex relationship but LAUSD officials failed to alert anyone for nearly four years.

LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy says that before the state audit came out, he had already reformed LAUSD's lackadaisical system. Now, Deasy says, accusations of teacher wrongdoing must be reported to parents within 72 hours.

When a teacher, administrator or assistant is accused -- say, of showing up to work drunk, or touching a child in an inappropriate manner -- that person is supposed to be immediately reassigned to a rubber room while district officials investigate.

It's a costly system in which teachers draw their full salary, plus free health care and other benefits provided under teachers union contracts, and a substitute teacher earning salary and benefits of $283 to $352 a day takes over their class for them.

Many of those at teacher jail in Reseda refused to give their names, saying the district might try to fire them, and that Deasy, who typically moves in a bold and decisive manner, is overreacting. One teacher, claiming that Deasy is stuffing the rubber rooms with teachers because he is guilt-ridden, remarks, "Mr. Deasy has decided that all normal human contact must be reported -- because he didn't report Miramonte."

Special-ed teacher Collier says Deasy, who has clashed repeatedly with the huge, 35,000-member United Teachers Los Angeles, is on a witch hunt to "thin the ranks of high-paid teachers."

Deasy denies this. But he does say, proudly, that more certificated employees are being fired for misconduct then ever, in a district where firings have been rare.

Deasy says that 96 certified employees, mostly teachers, were fired in 2011-2012.

Explains Deasy. "If there is suspected wrongdoing, we separate the employee [from the students], and then we investigate. Do [we] err on the side of safety? Darn right."

Holmquist concedes that innocent teachers have "been pulled" from their classrooms and then returned "with apologies." But, he says, "If the safety of our students is No. 1, we have to act like it."

California state laws are stacked heavily against firing teachers. A 2012 law by state Sen. Alex Padilla designed to more easily fire teachers who commit sexual, physically abusive or drug-related acts with students, Senate Bill 1530, went down in flames when four Democrats, fearing the power of the California Teachers Association and UTLA, infamously declined to vote, thus killing the bill.

Thanks to existing law, it costs LAUSD $500,000 in legal fees and salaries to oust a teacher who decides to fight back. It can cost up to $1.6 million to fire a single teacher.

In the rubber room in Reseda, most employees willing to talk said the charges against them were trumped up, or that they didn't know why they were there.

But one teacher seemed to have a pretty good case. She showed L.A. Weekly an Oct. 31 letter from her principal that stated, in part, "The conclusion of my investigation is that the allegation made by the parents is unsubstantiated." But she's still in the rubber room.

"I would have done the same thing that my principal did," the teacher says, because a parent accused her of spanking a preschool student, which is against state law. But the student and witnesses denied the student was spanked, according to the principal's letter. "I should've been here two days," the frustrated teacher said.

Of course, not every teacher in teacher jail is wrongly accused. Clay Geilfuss, 66, a kindergarten teacher, admits to improperly spanking a very young student "out of frustration." Says Geilfuss, "I blew it. ... Nobody's perfect. To think that teachers are beyond reproach is silly."

He'd like more counseling for stressed-out teachers. "In the past, if something had gotten to the principal, it would've been handled at his level. Now it's like the big shots are trying to micromanage things."

But the old way in LAUSD allowed horrible people who never should have been near children to remain in classrooms for years.

For now, it seems, the LAUSD rubber rooms will do a brisk business.

— Hillel Aron
LA Weekly

2012-12-06

http://www.laweekly.com/2012-12-06/news/rubber-room-lausd-teacher-confessions-denials/2/

Appellate Court Rules That ATR Status For A Tenured Teacher Does Not Violate Any "Clear and Unequivocal" Mandate

In re Diana Hrisinko, Petitioner-Appellant, v Board of Education of the City
School District of the City of New York, et al., Respondents-Respondents.
8752 110191/08

SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST
DEPARTMENT
2012 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8328; 2012 NY Slip Op 8431
December 6, 2012, Decided
December 6, 2012, Entered

COUNSEL: [*1] The White Rose Group, LLC, Jackson Heights (Jesse C. Rose of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Fay Ng of counsel), for respondents.
JUDGES: Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Moskowitz, Abdus-Salaam, Feinman, JJ.

OPINION
Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.), entered August 19, 2011, which denied petitioner's motion for an order holding respondents in contempt of an order, same court (Marilyn G. Diamond, J.), entered March 3, 2010 (the prior order), unanimously dismissed, without costs.

The 2011 order is not appealable as of right, as it was "made in a proceeding against a body or officer pursuant to [CPLR] article 78" (CPLR 5701[b][1]; see Matter of Storman v New York City Dept. of Educ., 95 AD3d 776, 777 [1st Dept 2012], appeal dismissed 19 NY3d 1023 [2012]). We decline to grant petitioner leave to appeal from that order in the interest of justice.

Were we to review the 2011 order, we would find that the motion court providently exercised its discretion in holding that respondents should not be held in contempt (see Storman, 95 AD3d at 777; Richards v Estate of Kaskel, 169 AD2d 111, 122 [1st Dept 1991], lv dismissed in part, denied in part [*2] 78 NY2d 1042 [1991]). Although the prior order declared that petitioner had "been a tenured teacher of Commercial Art'" since September 2, 2005, it did not reference the "Commercial Art" position, or any other specific teaching assignment, in its mandate, instead directing only that
petitioner be reinstated "to her position as a tenured teacher." "Any ambiguity in the court's mandate should be resolved in favor of the would-be contemnor" (Kaskel, 169 AD2d at 122). Accordingly, we find that, in reinstating petitioner to the position of tenured teacher and assigning her to serve as an absent teacher reserve, respondents did not violate any "clear [**2] and unequivocal" mandate (Storman, 95 AD3d at 777 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Department of Envtl. Protection of City of N.Y. v Department of Envtl. Conservation of State of N.Y., 70 NY2d 233, 240
[1987]).
Page 1
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION,
FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: DECEMBER 6, 2012

HRISINKO v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION LINK

Diana Hrisinko, Plaintiff-Appellant,Josefina Cruz, Andrea Shapiro, Diana Lee Friedline, Ismael Diaz, Anthony Ferraro, Elaine Jackson, Midge Maroni, David McMullen, Ram Narine, Geraldine Whittington, Gloria Chavez, Fitzroy Kington, Erica Weingast, Plaintiffs,v.New York City Department of Education, Graphic Communication Arts High School, Jerod Resnick, Dominic Cipollone, Edward Demeo, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis High School, M.S. 219, Eric Brand, Judith Silverman, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 08-6071-cv.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 11, 2010.

DIANA HRISINKO, pro se, New York, N.Y., for Appellant.

MICHAEL A. CARDOZO, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, New York, N.Y., for Appellees.

Present: JOSEPH M. McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge, KIMBA M. WOOD,^* District Judge.^**

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED in part and VACATED and REMANDED in part.

Plaintiff-Appellant Diana Hrisinko, pro se, appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Rakoff, J.), granting summary judgment to the Defendants-Appellees and dismissing Appellant's complaint brought pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 ("ADEA"), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, actionable through 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history of the case.

We review orders granting summary judgment de novo and determine whether the district court properly concluded there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Cronin v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.,46 F.3d 196, 202-03 (2d Cir. 1995).¹

As an initial matter, we note that Appellant has not challenged the dismissal of her § 1983 claim against the New York City Department of Education on the ground that her principal did not have final policymaking authority. Thus, we affirm this dismissal. See Losacco v. City of Middletown,71 F.3d 88, 92 (2d Cir. 1995).

The ADEA prohibits employers from refusing to hire, discharging, or otherwise discriminating against an employee with regard to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because of age.²See 29 U.S.C. § 623(a)(1). Historically, this Court has applied the burden-shifting framework of McDonnell-Douglas to ADEA claims. See, e.g., D'Cunha v. Genovese/Eckerd Corp.,479 F.3d 193, 194-95 (2d Cir. 2007) (per curiam). The Supreme Court recently held that under the plain language of the ADEA, an employee bringing a disparate treatment claim must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that age was the "but-for" cause behind the employer's adverse decision, and not merely one of the motivating factors. Gross v. FBL Fin. Servs., Inc.,129 S.Ct. 2343 (2009). The Supreme Court noted that it had "not definitively decided whether the evidentiary framework of [McDonnell Douglas], utilized in Title VII cases is appropriate in the ADEA context," id. at 2349 n.2, and did not apply its burden-shifting framework in holding that the ADEA does not authorize a "mixed-motives age discrimination claim," id. at 2350-52. In a recent opinion, this Court held that, although Gross changed the latter part of the McDonnell Douglas formulation "by eliminating the mixed-motive analysis that circuit courts had brought into the ADEA from Title VII cases," this Court remained bound by the burden-shifting framework previously employed in this Circuit. See Gorzynski v. Jetblue Airways Corp., ___ F.3d ___, 2010 WL 569367, at *11 (2d Cir. Feb. 19, 2010).

If a plaintiff alleges a prima facie case of discrimination and the employer demonstrates a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for the challenged employment decision, the plaintiff must present evidence that would be sufficient to permit a rational jury to conclude that the employer's explanation is merely a pretext for impermissible discrimination. Id. at *10. In order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, a plaintiff must show that: (1) she was within the protected age group; (2) she was qualified for the position; (3) she experienced an adverse employment action; and (4) such action occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. See Carlton v. Mystic Transp., Inc.,202 F.3d 129, 134 (2d Cir. 2000).

Appellant challenges the district court's conclusion that she failed to establish an adverse employment action under the ADEA. An adverse employment action occurs when there is a "materially adverse change" in the terms and conditions of employment. A materially adverse change must be "`more disruptive than a mere inconvenience or an alteration of job responsibilities,'" and can include "`termination of employment, a demotion evidenced by a decrease in wage or salary, a less distinguished title, a material loss of benefits, significantly diminished material responsibilities, or other indices... unique to a particular situation.'" See Galabya v. New York City Bd. of Educ.,202 F.3d 636, 641 (2d Cir. 2000) (quoting Crady v. Liberty Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of Indiana,993 F.2d 132, 136 (7th Cir. 1993)). In Galabya,an excessed teacher was transferred to a different high school and was assigned a position teaching mainstream keyboarding, despite the fact that his previous teaching experience had been in special education. Id. at 638-39. This Court found that the transfer did not constitute an adverse employment action because he could not demonstrate that the change in responsibilities was a "setback to his career." Id. at 641.

Here, although Appellant's salary and benefits would have remained the same had she continued teaching at Graphic Communications Arts High School ("GCA"), she would have remained in the position of a substitute teacher — arguably a less distinguished title, involving diminished responsibilities — indefinitely, and there is no evidence that GCA would have attempted to find her a more permanent position. Thus, it appears that the only way Appellant could obtain a more permanent position was to seek employment elsewhere. In doing so, Appellant terminated her probationary period, causing her to lose the opportunity to receive tenure at GCA. Whether Appellant remained a substitute teacher or left to obtain a more permanent position, Appellant faced changes in the terms and conditions of her employment that rise to the level of an adverse employment action. See Back v. Hastings on Hudson Union Free Sch. Dist.,365 F.3d 107, 116-17 & n.3 (2d Cir. 2004) (assuming, without holding, that the termination of a probationary period was an adverse employment action in the employment discrimination context). Because, as the district court concluded, the plaintiffs in this case collectively introduced evidence sufficient to create an inference of discrimination, 561 F. Supp. 2d at 425, Appellant has set forth aprima facie case of age discrimination.

Defendants argue that they have articulated a legitimate, business reason for their decision to excess Appellant. They state that because of staff reductions due to a reduced student population there was no longer any demand for an instructor teaching under a Cold Type Composition license. Even assuming this is sufficient evidence on summary judgment to demonstrate a legitimate business reason for excessing Appellant, construing the facts in the light most favorable to Appellant, her assertion that several younger teachers had recently been hired at the time she was excessed could demonstrate that defendants' reasons were, in fact, pretextual.³ Thus, Appellant's ADEA and equal protection claims are remanded to the district court for further proceedings.

We have considered Appellant's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. For the reasons stated above, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED in part and VACATED and REMANDED in part for further proceedings in accordance with this decision.

* Kimba M. Wood, Senior Judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.

** The Honorable Rosemary S. Pooler, originally a member of the panel, did not participate in consideration of this appeal. The two remaining members of the panel, who are in agreement, have determined the matter. See 28 U.S.C. § 46(d); 2d Cir. Internal Operating Procedure E; United States v. Desimone, 140 F.3d 457 (2d Cir. 1998).

1. Appellant's motions to add legal precedents and to file a supplemental reply brief are GRANTED. We consider only the evidence submitted by Appellant that was before the district court.

2. The district court concluded that Appellant's equal protection claim brought pursuant to § 1983 is not preempted by the ADEA, and that her remaining § 1983 claim is properly analyzed under the same standards as a claim made pursuant to the ADEA. Shapiro v. New York City Dept. of Educ.,561 F.Supp.2d 413, 419-20, 422 n.2 (S.D.N.Y. 2008). The parties do not challenge either of these conclusions on appeal. Accordingly, our analysis of Appellant's ADEA claims, infra, also applies to Appellant's remaining § 1983 claim.

3. We note that the district court, in finding summary judgment inappropriate as to a co-plaintiff's discrimination claim, appears to have credited the allegation that "defendants have sought only to select and promote employees with newer teaching licenses (Commercial Art rather than Cold Type Composition), and that this adversely affects older employees, because only individuals over age 40 are likely to possess a Cold Type License." 561 F. Supp. 2d at 426.

Brace for lawsuit if ‘demotion’ involves less prestige, fewer opportunities

by THE HR SPECIALIST: NEW YORK EMPLOYMENT LAW on JUNE 20, 2010 1:00AM
in DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT,HIRING,HR MANAGEMENT,HUMAN RESOURCES

Employees who are transferred against their will often sue for discrimination—especially if the new job is less prestigious and makes the employee feel like she has to quit.

For example, in the following case, an older teacher claimed she suffered an adverse employment action when she was demoted to substitute teacher at the same time younger teachers were hired.

Recent case: Diana Hrisinko and other experienced New York City teachers with teaching certificates found out they were being moved into substitute teaching positions. The school system blamed the moves on declining student enrollment—and also said older teaching certificates were less desirable than new ones.

It said that’s why it hired the younger teachers.

Hrisinko sued, alleging age discrimination, and claimed she had no choice but to quit. She said that being a substitute teacher is less prestigious than having one’s own classroom and doesn’t offer the same opportunities for promotion and tenure.

The court agreed Hrisinko had endured an adverse employment action even if her pay and benefits were the same. The court also agreed that the system’s hiring of younger teachers might be evidence of age discrimination. The court reasoned that only older teachers held older certificates; thus they were the only teachers affected by the decision. The court sent the case to trial so a jury can decide whether discrimination occurred. (Hrisinko, et al., v. New York City Department of Education, No. 08-6071, 2nd Cir., 2010)

AFT Recommends an Entry 'Bar' Exam for Teachers

Randi Weingarten

By RANDI WEINGARTEN

How About a Bar Exam for Teachers?

Wall Street Journal

To become a lawyer, Abraham Lincoln was required by Illinois law only to "obtain a certificate procured from the court of an Illinois county certifying to the applicant's good moral character." That 19th-century standard, along with Lincoln's self-taught legal training, was sufficient for our extraordinary 16th president. Over the years, however, the legal profession saw the need to include formal training and establish a high standard for entry into its ranks, as did the medical profession.

Every profession worth its salt goes through such periods of self-examination. That time has come for the teaching profession.

We must do away with the common rite of passage whereby new teachers are thrown into classrooms, expected to figure things out, and left to see if they (and their students) sink or swim. Such a haphazard approach to the complex and crucial enterprise of educating children is wholly inadequate. It's unfair to both students and teachers, who want and need to be well-prepared to teach from their first day on the job.

Success in today's economy requires ingenuity and the ability to apply knowledge. Yet America's testing fixation stifles creativity and critical thinking, something that the rich, rigorous Common Core State Standards (which most states have adopted) can change. Raising the bar for students raises it for their teachers as well. To help teachers meet this challenge, the American Federation of Teachers has developed a proposal for an unprecedented leap in elevating the quality of the teaching profession.

Instead of the current hodgepodge approach to teacher certification and licensing, we propose that all prospective teachers in the United States take a rigorous bar exam that gauges mastery of subject-matter knowledge and demonstrates competency in how to teach it. The process could be modeled after the bar exam for lawyers or the board certification of medical doctors.

Teacher preparation is a high national priority in the countries that consistently top international academic rankings. It is past time for the U.S. to follow a similar path. Practicing teachers in K-12 and higher education should own responsibility for setting and enforcing the teaching profession's standards.

The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards could lead in establishing common professional standards, aligning teacher-preparation with those standards, and assuring that candidates meet them. The way to do that is through a teachers' bar process.

I have worked as both a teacher and a lawyer. I was utterly petrified the first day I taught my own high-school students, whereas I was quite confident the first time I represented a client in a courtroom. My legal training included three years of formal study, clinical experience with established lawyers on real-world cases, and passing a grueling bar exam that the legal profession had deemed demonstrated the knowledge and ability to serve successfully as a new lawyer.

As an alternatively certified teacher, my preparation consisted of condensed coursework and valuable but limited student teaching—far less than I needed. Surveys of teachers show that many who go through traditional teacher-preparation programs feel they aren't adequately prepared to manage and teach students early in their career. Alternatively certified teachers feel even less prepared. Yet teachers assume an enormous responsibility from day one. And when they struggle, the response is too often the threat of termination, not an offer of assistance.

Setting a bar for entry into the teaching profession requires strengthening and aligning many components. Standards for admission to and completion of teacher-preparation programs should be appropriately high. Curricula should address the specific knowledge and skills that competent beginning teachers need. Preparation must include extensive experience in actual classrooms working with accomplished teachers. Mastery should be demonstrated not just through a written exam but also through demonstrations of a candidate's ability to teach. High standards for entry into the profession should apply to all prospective teachers, whether they pursue traditional or alternative certification.

The teaching profession is full of dedicated, talented teachers, but much of their expertise is developed only once they're on the job. Better preparing teachers for entry into the profession will dramatically reduce the loss of new teachers—nearly half of whom leave after fewer than five years—and the loss of knowledge that goes with it. As widespread teacher retirements sweep across the nation's schools (1.6 million in the next decade alone), our proposal will help create a constant supply of well-prepared educators ready from day one to help children achieve at high levels.

Ms. Weingarten is president of the American Federation of Teachers.

AFT recommends an entry 'bar' exam for teachers

LINK

by Donna Krache, CNN

(CNN) The American Federation of Teachers has issued a report advocating an entry exam for all teacher candidates, like the bar exam taken by aspiring lawyers.

The test, which would be required of all future teachers nationwide, would be given to candidates regardless of whether they are entering the profession through traditional means or “an alternative route.”

The AFT report titled “Raising the Bar: Aligning and Elevating Teacher Preparation and the Teaching Profession” included a statement by AFT president Randi Weingarten: “We must do away with a common rite of passage, whereby newly minted teachers are tossed the keys to their classrooms, expected to figure things out, and left to see if they (and their students) sink or swim. Such a haphazard approach to the complex and crucial enterprise of educating children is wholly inadequate. It’s unfair to both students and teachers, who want and need to be well-prepared to teach from their first day on the job. At a time when we are raising the standards for students through the Common Core State Standards, we must do the same for teachers.”

The report suggests that the exam be multidimensional and include subject knowledge as well as pedagogical knowledge. In other words, in addition to having to know the subject they teach, teachers would have to demonstrate that they had the qualities to be “caring, competent and confident.”

The report also states the responsibility for setting professional standards and establishing quality teacher preparation programs should reside with K-12 educators and teacher-educators.

Currently, teacher certification is determined by the individual states in which the teacher will hold a license; requirements vary widely. Many states have different types of certification that require exams, practice teaching, and college courses. All 50 states require at least a Bachelor’s Degree and some clinical experience as minimum requirements for licensure.

The American Federation of Teachers is an affiliate of the AFL-CIO that represents more than 1.5 million members, according to the union’s website.

You can read the AFT report here.

We want to know what you think: Should teachers be required to take a standardized professional exam before being licensed to teach? You can post your comments below.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

3020-a Arbitration Experts

Contact me with a concern or issue

I assist anyone who needs help, so email me your problem to start the ball rolling! I am a teacher/parent advocate, and I am the editor/writer for this blog and the website parentadvocates.org. I also write about court corruption on my blog "NYC Court Corruption". I am interested in random injustice and the criminalizing of innocent people. If you want to chat you may email me at: betsy.combier@gmail.com and I'm on twitter and have a facebook page too. I'm not an attorney and do not give legal advice.

If you want to talk with me about your 3020-a charges, I consult and go over your case without charge. No fee.

And, in response to the lies of certain individuals who resent my work, the truth is that all conversations are confidential and I do not tape secretly.

My Thoughts and Raison d'etre

This blog is about the denial of Constitutional rights by the Mayor, the New York City Department of Education and the Chancellor, New York State and Federal Courts, New York State legislature, and the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), as well as PACs and all parties participating in the business of public school education in New York City, to harm and in neglect of parents, children, and staff of public schools in the five boroughs. These thoughts are not simply mindless conclusions reached out of thin air, but a result of 14 years of research into the NYC DOE and the Courts as a reporter and paralegal. I am an advocate of Unions and union rights, public schools and charters, and learning online as well as outside of the classroom. I cannot and do not support anyone, whether they be union management, government, private members of the political or legal system, or simply retired teachers with an agenda, if he or she tramples, discards, or rebuffs anyone's individual civil rights. As a reporter, journalist, advocate, researcher and paralegal, I have created this blog to inform the public about my experience working for the UFT and being the parent of four daughters who went through the public school system in NYC, as well as examine issues that flow from the massive denial of due process rights that I saw and have documented. The two most important points you should remember: first, everyone at the New York City Board/Department of Education and all Union bigs are motivated by power and money, and looking good. If anyone dares to blow the whistle on these racketeers, retaliation follows, so be a strategist; second, I am not an Attorney and nothing I write or say is legal advice, simply my thoughts. Take 'em or leave 'em. Betsy Combier, Editor NYC Rubber Room Reporter http://nycrubberroomreporter.blogspot.com New York Court Corruption http://newyorkcourtcorruption.blogspot.com Parentadvocates.org http://www.parentadvocates.org Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/betsy.combier Twitter: http://twitter.com/BetsyCombier The NYC Public Voice http://nycpublicvoice.blogspot.com/ betsy.combier@gmail.com Lawline July 27, 2011 http://www.teachem.com/lawlinetv/learn/lawline-tv-teachers-unions-the-last-in-first-out-rule/

The E-Accountability Foundation

The E-Accountability Foundation brings you this blog which highlights issues that have or should be read by people interested in civil rights, and accountability. The E-Accountability Foundation is a 501(C)3 organization that holds people accountable for their actions online and, through the internet, seeks to bring justice to anyone who has been harmed without reason. We give the 'A for Accountability' Award to those who are willing to blow the whistle on unjust, misleading, or false actions and claims of the politico-educational complex in order to bring about educational reform in favor of children of all races, intellectual ability and economic status.

Testimonials From Some of Our Clients

“Dear Betsy,
I am forever indebted to you, Betsy, for your expert advice throughout a horrific ordeal. You worked tirelessly to prove my innocence in a 3020a proceeding that was instigated by a corrupt school district and fueled by lies. My proceedings ended with my complete exoneration, my record expunged and my immediate return to the classroom. We didn’t even need to file an appeal! Thank you, Betsy. I am now eligible to retire and enjoy the benefits you helped me to protect. God bless you and the work you do protecting the innocent.
Maria G;

Debbie B.

Betsy is willing to be a go to person for you, if there are anyone else in a situation that you feel would require someone with years of experience in 913 and 3020A, she’s a great source and contact for us. Believe me she was like finding a needle in a haystack. I can tell you first hand that I have researched many people that claim they do this work and was very disappointed with the contacts I made. I had to fire my NYSUT attorney who only wanted to settle, and the terms made me sick. Betsy is smart, knowledgeable, and nonjudgmental regarding these cases. I was completely exonerated at my 3020-a due to her research and diligence. She was an absolute necessity to help me go through a dreadful experience.

David P.

To whom this may concern, I want to recommend Betsy Combier as the best person you could have in your corner. From the first day I met Betsy I felt secure. I had the misfortune of having to go through a 3020a hearing and with help of Ms. Combier my job was secure, I don’t know where I would be without Betsy’s help and support. She is still assisting me with my federal case. I could not recommend Betsy any higher, she is a person of her word, and her expertise is important and necessary for everyone without any problem. David P.

Laura B.

I was charged with a 3020A in October 2016 after receiving three developing ratings in a row. I called numerous law firms as well as my union. Most people who I talked to said that I should settle because I was fighting a losing battle. A lawyer told me that anyone that says you can win a 3020A is a liar. I heard about Betsy from a teacher placed in my building who was going through the 3020A process. I hired Betsy and one of the Attorneys who works with her and her company, and won my case! Betsy saved my job and saved my life because she was emotionally supportive at a time when I needed it the most. Betsy goes above and beyond for her clients. She is readily available day and night for her clients. Betsy’s knowledge of education law is exceptional and she was a great help to my attorney. Betsy is relentless and fights hard for her clients.

Jason R.

I met Betsy Combier approximately about 5 years ago, as a result of a recommendation from a colleague. Since then she has been an advocate of mine ever since, and has worked above and beyond my expectation. Betsy fights against the wrongdoing of public education officials in New York City. Throughout the extremely difficult arbitration, Betsy fought for my unalienable rights, even though my former principal did everything in her power to tarnish my name and damage my career. Betsy is not an attorney yet she has the experience and knowledge that is above and beyond that of an attorney and follows through on all issues. She is truly an angel from heaven above, and a quality public defender.

Alexandra F.

Dear Betsy,

I just wanted to reach out and say thank you for CONSTANTLY being there for me throughout such a tumultuous time in my life. I have been battling severe harassment at my place of work for months now, and you have advised me through every single second of it. I would not have had the strength or confidence to battle such an evil administration without your help. You have answered my phone calls from 7AM through nearly midnight with any and all of my concerns. I have called you countless times to just vent, or even cry, and you have been there with open arms to pivot my negative anticipations into positive advocacy. You have gone above and beyond your line of duty to help me, and for that, I can never repay you. You have changed the outcome of my life, and led me to justice. More importantly, you have led me to happiness again, for which I am eternally grateful. As I am getting older, I am realizing that there are many bad people in this world, but you are TRULY one of the good ones. When one finds a great person in life with their true best interest at heart, they should hold onto that and take their word as bond. My last statement truly defines you, an expert in what you do, as well as a 24 hour support system. You are amazing Betsy, and my life would truly not be the same if you had not stepped into it!!!!!

Thank you again for EVERYTHING you have done for me. Your advisement and care will be carried in my heart for the rest of my life.

Alexandra F.

Performance Management - Office of Labor Relations

From Betsy Combier

The NYC Office of Labor Relations, with the support of the UFT, has issued to principals a document called
"Performance Management" on how to get rid of an incompetent teacher. Who is an "incompetent teacher"? Anyone the NYC Department of Education wants to remove from the system because he/she is too senior (makes too much money), is disabled (and therefore cannot be deemed factory-perfect) and/or is other impaired (is a whistleblower, cannot be intimidated, is ethnically challenged - not the 'right' race, etc).

ATR CONNECT

Tenured Teachers who are found to be guilty of misconduct or incompetency at 3020-a but are not terminated, who have blown the whistle on the misconduct of politically favored NYC Department of Education employees, and/or who are simply disliked for any reason can suddenly find themselves in the ATR ("Absent Teacher Reserve") pool - employees without rights or voices, and without chapter leader union representation.

This new group of people are the "new" rubber roomers without representation at the UFT and denied the protection of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, because basically they have been pushed out of their jobs unfairly and under color of law by Mayor Bloomberg and the Chief Executives of the Department of Education who call themselves "Chancellors", "Network Leaders", "Superintendents", etc., consistently without any facts or evidence to support the false claims.

A group of teachers who are, or were, made into ATRs, ATR Polo Colon, and I, Betsy Combier, an advocate for transparency and labor/employment rights, have joined together to expose the denial of due process, civil and human rights by chiefs of the NYC Department of Education (NYC DOE), certain arbitrators at 3020-a, leaders of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the "investigators" -agents who work for the Special Commissioner of Investigation (SCI), Office of Special Investigation (OSI), and the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) - and the Attorneys who work for the New York United Teachers (NYSUT), and the New York Law Department (Corporation Counsel).

In order to protect the safety of those who join this group to promote an end to the "Rubberization" process described on this blog since 2007, names of those who tell their stories will, for now, remain anonymous if the person so desires, and Polo and I will be the gatekeepers. So if you are an ATR, or know a story involving an ATR or someone re-assigned or about to go into a 3020-a, please use the email address advocatz77@gmail.com and give us your contact information. We will protect your anonymity and hold onto your privacy.

Betsy Combier and Polo Colon, Editors

The Re-Assignment Overview by Betsy Combier

The New York City Board of Education decided in 2002 to rid the public school system of staff who interfered with their takeover and control. The criteria for a "good teacher" is now, more often than not, a "silent teacher", a person who never asks questions, is younger than 40, is making a salary below $50,000, does not care about kids and what they learn, or whether or not money (books, supplies, equipment, etc) is missing. When a teacher or staff member of a school dares to do the right thing and speaks out about wrong-doing - this person is often called a "whistleblower" or "flamethrower" - or, simply is not liked for any reason by the Principal/NYC personnel, suddenly he/she is accused of something by somebody ("given a label of "A", "B", "C", and so on) and whisked away to a drab room called a temporary re-assignment center or "rubber room". Members of the offices of the Special Commissioner of Investigation or the Office of Special Investigations then start work on building a case against the person to justify their being thrown in prison, declared "unfit for duty", or, as Mr. Joel Klein has said, characterized as "guilty of sexual activities and corporal punishment" against the children of New York City.The stories of the people I have met who sit every day in the 8 rubber rooms of NYC prove to me that Mr. Klein is very wrong about his assessment, and this blog is created to prove it to you.

NYC EdStats You Can Use

New York City Schools by the Numbers
By John Tarleton
www.indypendent.org

$12.5 billion: Annual New York City Department of Education (DOE) budget (2002)

$21 billion: Annual New York City DOE budget (2009)
1,719: Number officials employed by the DOE central administration in June 2002

2,442: Number of officials employed by the central administration as of November 2008

2: Number of DOE officials earning more than $180,000 per year in 2004.

22: Number of DOE officials earning more than $180,000 per year in 2007.

5: Number of DOE public relations staffers in 2003.

23: Number of DOE public relations staffers in 2008.

944: Number of contracts approved by DOE in 2008, at a total cost of $1.9 billion.

20: Percentage of contracts that exceeded estimated cost by at least 25 percent.

$67.5 million: Annual budget of Project Arts, a decade-old program that was the sole source of dedicated funding for arts education. It was eliminated in 2007.

86: Percentage of principals who said in a 2008 poll that they were unable to provide a quality education because of excessive class sizes in their schools.

100,000: Number of seats DOE plans to provide for charter school students by 2012.

25,000: Number of seats DOE plans to build under 2010 to 2014 capital plan.

66,895: Number of K-3 school-children in classes of 25 or more during the 2008-09 school year.

15,440: Average number of seats per year built during the last six years of the Rudolph Giuliani administration.

10,895: Average number of seats per year built during the first six years of the Bloomberg administration.

27.2: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2001-02 who were Black.

14.1: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2006-07 who were Black.

53.3: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2001-02 who were white.

65.5: Percentage of newly hired teachers in 2006-07 who were white.

76: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Latino students in 8th grade English Language Arts (ELA) in 2003.

75: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Hispanic students in 8th grade ELA in 2008.

77: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Hispanic 8th graders in math in 2003.

81: Percentage of white and Asian students who performed better than the average Black and Hispanic 8th graders in math in 2008.

54: Percentage of New York City public school parents who disapproved of Mayor Bloomberg’s handling of education, according to a March 2009 Quinnipiac poll.

Sources: New York City Council, New York City Comptroller’s Office, New York Daily News, New York Post, Eduwonkette, Quinnipiac Institute, Black Educator, Class Size Matters, New York City Schools Under Bloomberg and Klein.

NYC Whistlers, Winners of the NYC Whistle Award

...are those individuals in New York City who are willing to whistleblow unjust, misleading, or false actions and claims of the politico-educational complex in order to bring about educational reform in favor of children of all races, intellectual ability and economic status. Whistlers ask questions that need to be asked, such as "where is the money?" and "Why does it have to be this way?" and they never give up.

These people have withstood adversity and have held those who seem not to believe in honesty, integrity and compassion accountable for their actions.

Congratulations, and keep up the good work!

Betsy Combier

A great teacher

After being interviewed by the school administration, the prospective teacher said: 'Let me see if I've got this right.

'You want me to go into that room with all those kids, correct their disruptive behavior, observe them for signs of abuse, monitor their dress habits, censor their T-shirt messages, and instill in them a love for learning.

'You want me to check their backpacks for weapons, wage war on drugs and sexually transmitted diseases, and raise their sense of self esteem and personal pride.

'You want me to teach them patriotism and good citizenship, sportsmanship and fair play, and how to register to vote, balance a checkbook, and apply for a job 'You want me to check their heads for lice, recognize signs of antisocial behavior, and make sure that they all pass the final exams.

'You also want me to provide them with an equal education regardless of their handicaps, and communicate regularly with their parents in English, Spanish or any other language, by letter, telephone, newsletter, and report card.

'You want me to do all this with a piece of chalk, a blackboard, a bulletinboard, a few books, a big smile, and a starting salary that qualifies me for food stamps. 'You want me to do all this and then you tell me. . . I CAN'T PRAY?

Joel Klein's famous statement about rubber room teachers and staff

On November 27, 2006, temporarily re-assigned teacher (TRT) Polo Colon asked Joel Klein, the "pretend" Chancellor of the NYC public school system, if he had voted to terminate teachers at the secret Executive Session held just before the public meeting of the Panel For Educational Policy.Mr. Klein answered,
"We did not vote to terminate you. We did vote to terminate a teacher in executive Session...in fact, we voted to terminate two teachers. It's perfectly consistent with the law.Many teachers have been charged with sexual activities and some are charged with corporal punishment...I have no interest in removing people who are qualified to teach, I can assure you, because I dont get any return...and in fact, I have complained publicly about how long this process drags out. But our first concern will always be and, as a former lawyer and somebody who clerked on the United States Supreme Court I will tell you, there is no violation of due process whatsoever..."- extracted from the audiotape of the PEP meeting bought by Betsy Combier after filing a FOIL request to the NYC BOE

Teacher, what do you make?

The dinner guests were sitting around the table discussing life.

One man, a CEO, decided to explain the problem with education. He argued, "What's a kid going to learn from someone who decided his best option in life was to become a teacher?"

To stress his point he said to another guest; "You're a teacher, Bonnie .
Be honest. What do you make?"

Bonnie, who had a reputation for honesty and frankness replied, "You want to know what I make? (She paused for a second, then began....)

"Well, I make kids work harder than they ever thought they could. I make a C+ feel like the Congressional Medal of Honor winner.

I make kids sit through 40 minutes of class time when their parents can't make them sit for 5 without an I Pod, Game Cube or movie rental.

You want to know what I make?
(She paused again and looked at each and every person at the table)

I make kids wonder.

I make them question.

I make them apologize and mean it.

I make them have respect and take responsibility for their actions.

I teach them to write and then I make them write. Keyboarding isn't everything.

I make them read, read, read.

I make them show all their work in math. They use their God given brain, not the man-made calculator.

I make my students from other countries learn everything they need to know about English while preserving their unique cultural identity.

I make my classroom a place where all my students feel safe.

I make my students stand, placing their hand over their heart to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, One Nation Under God, because we live in the United States of America.

Finally, I make them understand that if they use the gifts they were given, work hard and follow their hearts, they can succeed in life ( Bonnie paused one last time and then continued.)

Then, when people try to judge me by what I make, with me knowing money isn't everything, I can hold my head up high and pay no attention because they are ignorant.

You want to know what I make?

I MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

What do you make Mr. CEO?

A Review of Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools by Betsy Combier

Lydia Segal's book puts the NYC, Chicago, and California Departments of Education on notice....we who have read this book know more about how the system is not there for our kids than "you" want us to know.
Lydia Segal's book Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools changes the public school reform movement forever. We can no longer assume that more money allocated to our schools will "fix" the disaster that is our public school system.

Lydia Segal draws on her 10 years of undercover investigation and research in over five urban school districts, including the three largest, New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago, and the two most decentralized, Houston and Edmonton, Canada, to provide, in her new book Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools, the details of the corruption, theft, fraud, and patronage that has overrun our public school establishment for several decades. There is no question that anyone who is interested in school reform -this means anyone who pays taxes, is a parent or guardian of a child attending school and/or who works toward a goal of establishing an education system that puts children first - must read this book. Ms. Segal's research and information on the education establishment's 'dark' side outrages the reader, and incites us to demand change. Her book therefore, is much more than a book, it is a call to action. We cannot be bystanders any longer to the systemic abuse she so vividly describes, and we will never be able to listen in the same way ever again to school Principals, Superintendents, school custodians or district board members as they request more money "to help the children."

The book's detailed reports on the corruption and crime in our public schools, supported by 52 pages of interview notes, references and specific examples, provide irrefutable evidence that the current failures of our nation's public schools are not due to the lack of money but the impossibility of getting the money to the children who need it and for whom the money is allocated in the first place. Recent statistics show that students of all ages are not learning what they need to know, schools are overcome with violence, teachers are demoralized, and yet billions of dollars are literally shovelled into the system every year. The New York City school system receives more than $16 billion every year; Los Angeles, $7 billion; and Chicago, $3.6 billion. Where does this money go? We have all asked this question as we have walked through school hallways dodging the paint falling off the walls and ceilings, watching our children sitting on broken chairs, using bathrooms without running water or toilet paper, and struggling to achieve their personal best without the services and resources they are supposed to have. Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools is the first book ever to systematically examine school waste and corruption and how to fight it. Ms. Segal, an undercover school investigator turned law professor, documents where the money goes, how waste and fraud embedded in the operation of large school bureaucracies siphon money from classrooms, distort educational priorities, block initiatives, and what we can do to bring badly-needed change. She describes in detail how only a small percentage of the money allocated to students in our public schools actually gets used by them due to corruption and waste, and how city school systems scoring lowest on standardized tests tend to have the biggest criminal records and most payroll padding. Coding problems, the procurement process, compartmentalization and opacity of information leave administrators with only two options: good corruption (which ultimately helps the kids) and bad corruption (which never helps anyone but the perpetrator and his/her allies and accomplices). Indeed, the system fights those who try the good corruption route.

Ms. Segal argues that the problem is not usually bad people, but a bad system that focuses on process at the expense of results. Decades of rules and regulations along with layers of top-down supervision make it so hard to do business with school systems that they encourage the very fraud and waste they were designed to curb. She tells us about how the "godfathers" and "godmothers" (the school board members) obtain jobs for their "pieces" in order to protect the systemic waste and fraud from being dismantled or exposed. Fortunately, she writes, there are good people involved in the corruption as well who must violate the rules in order to get their jobs done. Nonetheless, absurdities abound: school systems following rules to save every penny spend thousands of dollars hunting down checks as small as $25; it takes so long to pay vendors for their work that some have to bribe school officials to move their checks along; caring Principals who want to fix leaky toilets may have to pay workers under the table because submitting a work order through the central office could, and often does, take years. Meanwhile, those who pilfer from classrooms get away with it because the pyramidal structure of large districts makes schools inherently difficult to oversee. What makes Battling Corruption in America's Public Schools a must-read is not only the fascinating - and depressing - details of the systemic wrong-doing but also Ms. Segal's suggestions for reform, based on the proven track records of school systems across North America that have successfully reduced waste and fraud and have pushed more resources into schools.

The pathology of the corruption suggests the remedy, Ms. Segal says, which is decentralization of power into the schools and the hands of the Principals. Distilling what successful school systems have done, Segal advocates new forms of oversight that do not clog up school systems and recommends giving principals more discretion over their school budgets as well as holding them accountable for job performance. She argues for "autonomy in exchange for performance accountability" as part of a bold, far-reaching plan for reclaiming our schools. Her conclusion is logical and convincing. Everyone who reads this book will find his or her perception of public school education changed forever. We cannot accept any longer that a generation of children has been abused by a system that is so full of greed and corruption without screaming "stop!" and "Your game is up!"

Segal reveals how systemic waste and fraud siphon millions of dollars from urban classrooms and shows how money is lost in systems that focus on process rather than on results, as well as how regulations established to curb waste and fraud provide perverse incentives for new forms of both. Anyone who is interested in school reform--this means anyone who pays taxes, is a parent or guardian of a child attending school, and/or who works toward a goal of establishing an education system that puts children first--must read this book. --

Lydia G. Segal is Associate Professor of Criminal Law and Public Administration at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York.

Disclaimer

This page states the general terms of use under which you, the blog visitor (hereinafter "you", "user", or "visitor") may use NYCrubberroomreporter.blogspot.com. By reading this blog, you agree to all of the terms set forth below. You may reprint, copy, and use any article on this website as long as you do not sell or change the article and you cite this blog as your source. This blog reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to change any or all of the provisions of this "Terms of Use & Disclaimer Agreement" at any time; the agreement in effect at the time of your use shall govern your use and your use after the effective date of any changes to these Terms will be deemed acceptance of your acceptance of the changes. We have followed what we believe to be the guidelines of US Code TITLE 17, Chapter 1, Section 107: FAIR USE: "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phone records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." We will, if asked with good reason to remove any material from our site that the original owner feels may jeopardize their standing before the Law, do so. We oppose violence of any kind, disrespect, verbal or physical abuse, and any kind of theft or hurtful behavior toward anyone at any time, and expect all users of this blog to be mindful of these values and use the information we have collected in good faith. We have made every effort to describe the actions, not motives, of public people, and we have supported everything that we post with documents to prove the validity of what we say in order to not make any fraudulent or false claims. We believe that it is a civic duty to expose wrong-doing, and we have the legal right to name the perpetrators who pursue illegal activities as defined by the respondents to their actions. If a public official or employee writes, says, or does anything that is against the Laws of this country or that falsifies data which leads to the intentional infliction of emotional distress, harassment, verbal and/or physical abuse of a student/parent/teacher, we claim license to post the acts of such people on our website, with the name of the perpetrator. The truth is not defamatory. We claim that we are not "out to get" any particular person.You agree that you do not acquire any ownership rights in any downloaded content. You further agree that all rights in the site and any of the content found on the site not granted to you under this agreement are expressly reserved to the editor. You agree to not extract any content in order to repurpose or resell the site's content or tools, and you agree to not "scrape" and/or reformat any information without the written permission of the editor. This blog protects and enforces copyrights for its' own creative material and respects the copyright property of others, as well as our right to "FAIR USE". We do not permit materials known by us to be infringing on the copyright of others to be on the site, and we ask that you notify us promptly if you believe that any materials infringe upon a third-party copyright. Upon receipt of a proper notice of claimed infringement under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) we will respond promptly to remove or disable access to the material claimed to be infringing that is in our direct control, assuming that there is also infringement of FAIR USE. This agreement and any policies and rules posted on this blog constitute the complete and exclusive and final expression of the agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. No waiver by the editor of this blog or you of any breach or default under this agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any preceding or subsequent breach or default.This blog provides as a service homepages of websites we believe may be helpful to the user; we provide these links and resources solely as a convenience to you, the user, and we do not endorse the content of these sites. We are not responsible for the content of any linked sites and make no representations regarding the content or accuracy of materials on these sites. If you visit any sites linked to this site, you do so at your own risk. We will not assume any responsibility for the servicing or replacing of equipment or data, or any costs for either. This site and its material are provided on an "as is" basis without any warranties of any kind. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE, SHALL THE EDITOR BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES THAT MAY RESULT FROM THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE SITE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION USE OF OR RELIANCE ON INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THIS BLOG - WHETHER BASED ON WARRANTY, CONTRACT, TORT, OR ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY AND WHETHER THE EDITOR IS ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES - INTERRUPTIONS, ERRORS, DEFECTS, MISTAKES, OMISSIONS, DELETIONS OF FILES, DELAYS IN OPERATION OR TRANSMISSION, NONDELIVERY OF INFORMATION, DISCLOSURE OF COMMUNICATIONS, OR ANY OTHER FAILURE OF PERFORMANCE. THE EDITOR OF THIS BLOG DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, INCLUDING THE WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THIRD PARTY RIGHTS, AND THE WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. YOU AGREE THAT ANY RECOURSE FOR DISSATISFACTION OR PROBLEMS WITH THIRD-PARTY GOODS OR SERVICES WILL BE SOUGHT FROM THE THIRD-PARTY PROVIDER DIRECTLY.To the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, you will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless The EDITOR OF THIS BLOG (and any of her subsidiaries, affiliates, directors, officers, employees, agents, distributors, third party providers, and licensors) from and against all claims, liability, and expenses, including attorney's fees and legal fees and costs, arising out of your use of the site or your breach of any provision of this agreement. The Editor reserves the right, in her sole discretion and at her own expense, to assume the exclusive defense and control of any matter otherwise subject to indemnification by you. You will cooperate as fully as reasonably required in the defense of any claim.This agreement, your performance under it, and any disputes arising under it shall be governed exclusively by the laws of internet usage as stated by the federal courts of the United States. You agree to pay all legal fees incurred by any legal action filed against the Editor of this blog in any action in which she as the defendant prevails.Any information collected about your visit to the web site is non-personal in nature and used solely for the purpose of helping us to assess the areas of our site that are most useful to visitors, and therefore need to be as complete and user-friendly as possible. In the area of listserv sign-ups, contribution data, and/or any other email or membership sign-up option now or in the future on our site, all information is collected on a strictly voluntary and confidential basis, and will not be sold, used or released for any third-party purpose. We do not permit any transactions from or by any person who is 13 years old or younger.

NYC Rubber Room Reporter and ATR CONNECT