New Haven Independent

Union Chief: Don’t Blame The Teachers

by Paul Bass | April 1, 2009 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (33)

The school reform bandwagon is hurtling toward New Haven’s public schools. David Cicarella said he’s ready to welcome it — but worries about the fine print.

As president of New Haven Federation of Teachers (NHFT) Union Local 933, Cicarella will play a crucial role in coming months. He can either welcome and improve the proposals coming his way for dramatic changes in how the city’s schools operate and demand accountability from teachers, principals and top administrators. Or he can erect a formidable barrier. Unions have played both roles in other cities.

“It does have to be addressed. There’s no question about it,” Cicarella said in an interview about proposals for change. “There has to be accountability on the teachers’ part. We recognize that. The good teachers, they don’t like it any better. If the guy next to them is doing a crappy job, it affects what we do.”

But he’s concerned that he hears too much focus on test scores, and on scapegoating teachers. “That’s easy: Beat up on the teachers.”

Mayor John DeStefano plans to unveil in the next 30-60 days his far-reaching plan to reform the schools and boost achievement. After years of attacking critics of city schools and the achievement gap, Mayor John DeStefano has recast himself as the city’s leading reformer. He has been talking about it — to the practical exclusion of other issues — in informal conversations with movers and shakers around town.,

He and schools chief Reggie Mayo were in D.C. Tuesday to share ideas with school reformers DeStefano once dismissed and to start lobbying for a chunk of a $5 billion federal education grant pool.

New Haven runs 49 public schools with 20,759 students.

At this point, DeStefano has publicly said little about what specific reforms he’s considering, beyond closing failing schools. He has signaled that he may look to give more autonomy to principals at succeeding schools and an aggressive effort to help more students make it through college. (Read about that here.)

He’s remaining particularly cryptic about the specifics about increasing teacher accountability, pending his discussions with Cicarella’s union.

“We want to hold our teachers accountable,” he said Tuesday. “How do we reward teachers who exceed those standards, and how do we work with teachers who fail to reach those standards? That is a discussion that needs to involve teachers before we articulate a judgment on that would be.”

Enter Cicarella. In a wide-ranging discussion, he was asked about experiments in other cities: D.C.’s Michelle Rhee is pushing to create some schools where teachers trade giving up tenure for higher salaries as part of a “red-green” plan. (Unions are livid.) New York has begun a program to shut down schools where students persistently score low on tests, with an eye to handing some of the buildings over to charter schools. Hartford has been creating a four-tier system to grade schools: Principals at top schools get a free hand in making decisions; the next tier receives some outside help to improve; the second-to-lowest tier receives intensive help; and the bottom tier gets shut down.

Cicarella spoke from both personal experience as a teacher and the vantage point of a union leader. Excerpts of the conversations follow:

How do you feel about proposals in some cities to remove teacher tenure?

Good teachers want to be held accountable too. We all know we need to. The problem, though, always is: We always look at one measure. It’s the test scores.

The issue we have with that, myself in particular, if I’m a factory worker, they give me raw materials, they give me so many hours, at the end of the week I have to produce so many items. All the factors are under my control.

It’s a little different with education. You can be very qualified; you plan your lessons diligently. If the kids have poor attendance, or they don’t study, or they don’t do the work, you can’t make them do it. So much of it is out of their control. Yet you’re held completely accountable.

I used to teach algebra. If you sometimes go to class, you half listen, at the end of the week you score poorly on the test. I’ve tried to do everything I could: I’ve called the parent. The parent doesn’t call me back. Or there’s a non-working phone number…

We definitely have to look at test scores. But that can’t be the only measure, where we say the school, or the teacher or the principal is doing a bad job.

I did go to several conferences. There are some merit-type pay [proposals]; St. Francis, Minnesota, I believe. [Read about that here.] In Denver they have some pretty good things going on. They use test scores. They use other factors as well.

What other factors?

They’ll look at the students’ attendance, the parents’ involvement. When I was at Fair Haven [School] I had 120 kids each year, five classes. I would have more than half the report cards sitting in a drawer; [parents] never come to pick them up. Can you imagine that? A lot of people are working. We understand that. But they don’t even pick up report cards. They don’t call you back.

Student attendance. The involvement of the parent. The teacher as well, there has to be a checklist. What about teacher attendance? Certification — have they kept up?

In general, do you favor moving to experiments where teachers agree to forgo tenure in return for higher salaries?

That one, you’re catching me off-guard.

What about giving principals more say over whether to keep teachers?

You would think there’s some validity to that. These people are responsible. They should have some say over who they have. But it starts to become arbitrary. That’s the fear: If you don’t do what I tell you to do when I tell you to do, they transfer you out.

In New Haven, you have schools like Worthington Hooker that are as good as any suburban school. Then you have some tough places at the other end. My concern is that you can arbitrarily push people around if you give them complete discretion. At the same time you do need some.

What about teachers not teaching — how do you measure that?

Again, that becomes part of the evaluation process. Principals are in the business. They should know [if someone’s not teaching].

But principals complain that it’s very hard to transfer or fire a teacher who’s not teaching.

Tenure, it gets confused with higher education, where that’s a guaranteed job. What teacher have in Connecticut, it’s due process.

There are five categories for removing a teacher. What happens is, they’ll try to remove a tenured teacher. You’ll look at it. You’ll see, they haven’t done any evaluations. Or they’re shoddily done. If the administrators use the evaluation process, there is a process for removing tenured teachers.

It used to be three years in Connecticut to get tenure. Now you have to serve four years [before obtaining tenure]. But the way the state law’s written, it’s very clear: In years one, two, three, or four, a school district can dismiss a teacher based on their discretion. We had 35 teachers not renewed for nonperformance issues.

It’s at the superintendent’s discretion. We can have a stack of letters from parents. We can have great test scores. They can say, “It’s just not a good fit,” and there’s no appeals process. They just can’t be arbitrary and capricious. They can say, “This teacher is not a good fit for our district.”

Once you grant tenure, you’ve had four years to evaluate the teacher’s work. Why all of a sudden in year 10 has the teacher become a bad teacher? There’s a shifting of the bar. The bar is incredibly low for non-tenure.

In my observation, sometimes it’s been the teacher who’s there a long time who gets bumped to a subject she doesn’t want to teach, or is just running out the clock. Adminstrators say it’s hard to deal with that situation. How should we deal with that?

They aren’t wrong about that. You have a teacher with 20, 25 years. Each year they’ve given a teacher a satifsactory evaluation. How can they say now we want to get rid of the teacher?

But what if the teacher gets burned out, or is shifted to a subject she doesn’t know?

They have to be certified for it. It is incumbent upon them to produce a quality lesson. One of the categories for dismissing a tenured teacher is incompetence. They have to show that. Tenure’s no guarantee of anything. It simply says you can’t dismiss the person arbitrarily.

So Dave, do you think there needs to be a change in accountability? Or do you argue administrators just need to make use of available tools?

That’s part of it. But teachers are in high demand. You can’t get people to do it. If you’re teaching 15, 20 years, and you have a masters degree, you’re going to make more money in business than in education. These are college-educated folks.

Specifically, how do we feel about the proposal [in D.C.] under which teachers can choose a school where they give up tenure for higher pay?

I have to think about that. We have third and fourth-year teachers in New Haven. They’ve gotten non-renewal notices. So tenure’s kind of a big deal. They work hard at it.

What about teachers who want to choose the other route [proposed in D.C.]?

I’m pretty big on free choice. I need to think about that.

What about closing schools that are failing?

How are you going to measure it? We look at test scores. They talk about tenure and the unions being the problem. We’ve got unions in Greenwich. We’ve got unions in Madison. Those kids score very well. Down South unions are nonexistent or are hardly a factor; those students score [poorly].

That’s easy: Beat up on the teachers. But look throughout Connecticut —

What about when people say Amistad Academy right here in New Haven gets the high scores, too?

It’s not a level playing field. They take who they want. They send the rest to us. We’ll never say, “We don’t want Paul Bass’s kid because he’s three years below level.”

They can put a child down two grade levels to catch up. They present you with an option you can’t take, so they’ll leave.

They do a good job. But they don’t do what we do. The severe discipline problems. The students with special needs. They have some of that. But they pick and choose their kids.

What do they do right that New Haven could emulate?

Gee, it’s hard for me to say. I think their biggest thing is the clientele.

They have the long school day, the high expectations, the constant communication with parents…

Oh definitely. They get high marks for that. And they should. But use Worthington Hooker School. Worthington Hooker scores as high as any suburban school in the state. Same set of teachers. Same contract. Who’s there? The parents are in the Yale community, a lot in the school system. Those parents are highly involved. On the weekends they’re taking their kids to museums. They’re reading to their children at night.

At Amistad, even if they don’t have some of the toughest cases, they do have kids who sometimes aren’t being read to at night. Why do they have higher scores? Their kids come in scoring at a higher grade level…

There’s probably a much higher degree level of parent involvement.

So are you looking forward to talking about school reform?

It does have to be addressed. There’s no question about it. There has to be accountability on the teachers’ part. We recognize that. The good teachers, they don’t like it any better. If the guy next to them is doing a crappy job, it affects what we do. Most of the teachers, they’re not here for the money. It’s something they’ve chosen to do.

How would we acchieve accountability without scapegoating?

We have to set up a system of criteria that’s fair for everybody. “Teachers: Here’s what you have to do…”

What should that include?

I don’t want to talk off the top of my head… Adminsitrators. Parents. Everyone has to be held accountable by some reasonable, doable set of criteria, not just test scores…

When I was at Fair Haven, I had dual certification. I taught Algebra 1 to eighth-graders. The top eighth-grade group had Algebra 1. They all read on the ninth, tenth-grade levels. If you looked at the scores, you’d say, “Dave Cicarella, what a terrific teacher.”

I had a masters in reading. I taught seventh and eighth-grade remedial reading. If the kids were reading at level, they took a foreign language. If they read below level, they had remedial reading. I had eighth-graders who were reading on the fourth-grade level. Twenty kids, 25 kids. It was routine. If you were to take those kids, they take the test, you’d say, “Dave, what a lousy teacher. What’s this guy doing all day?” That’s my point at using just using test scores. I was putting in the same effort.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: Alphonse Credenza | April 1, 2009 12:46 PM

One of approximately 10 teachers my child encountered in the public system was extraordinary. 5 were good. 4 were absolutely miserable. The Union protects them all. The Union should be proactive and weed the poor teachers out of the union. Yes -- the union should be responsible for the quality of teachers, too. What are its standards, other than dues?

Functional illiterates pass go, in this public system. How many dopey youths have we encountered on the street, in the shops, at clubs? The kids are just as responsible for their performance as teachers. Start flunking children who don't measure up to a higher standard. That would be a start.

And if they don't get it, let their parents deal with it. The state shouldn't babysit. We are too soft. Who says there shouldn't be serious pressure on the students and the parents, as well, to achieve?

Posted by: Interesting | April 1, 2009 1:31 PM

This was a very interesting interview and leaves a lot of room for hope.

However Mr. Cicarella should drop the union talking point about Amistad. The Board of Education runs the lottery for Amistad so the kids assigned are random.

And Mr. Cicarella knows that there is no comparison between Amistad and Hooker. Hooker is filled with kids who are the children of Yale professors. Amistad is 99% African-American and Latino with the same poverty percentage as the rest of New Haven Public Schools.

But other than that, one has to be hopeful with Cicarella's comments, especially his perspective on how frustrated good teachers can be with those who are just punching the clock. As well his concern about arbitrary principals and the need to build a fair evaluation system is worth thinking through seriously.

Posted by: Seth | April 1, 2009 1:32 PM

Don't worry Mr. Cicarella, we all know that education begins and is enforced in the home.

Posted by: Seth | April 1, 2009 1:40 PM

"It's not a level playing field. They take who they want. They send the rest to us. We'll never say, "We don't want Paul Bass's kid because he's three years below level.""

I beg to differ. The lottery is the same across the board. Amistad has smaller classrooms and holds parents accountable for their children's actions. That can't be said by people who sit with half of their report cards in a drawer, even though the addresses are written on them. Amistad employees are not afraid to go into our neighborhoods to meet parents where they are. That is what distinguishes Amistad apart from traditional public schools.

Posted by: NHPS Teacher | April 1, 2009 1:57 PM

Mr. Credenza: I teach high school math, and I'm really frustrated with those miserable teachers you're talking about. They make my job quite difficult. I choose to teach pre-algebra, because I like working with kids who have had trouble in math and seeing them do well. However, I'd rather they have excellent teachers and every chance to succeed before they get to me.

The union has no power to hire or fire teachers. Principals hire and fire teachers. The superintendent can hire and fire teachers.

Parents of kids with miserable teachers should talk to their principals and to the superintendent, write letters, and enlist other parents to help them. In my experience, the folks at 54 Meadow Street listen and respond when parents speak up. This is accountability that we can enact now.

Posted by: Borist | April 1, 2009 2:34 PM

ALPHONSE you hit the nail right on the head,the union protects too many bums,and the teachers union is so strong there hurting the whole country

Posted by: almostdonewnhps | April 1, 2009 3:15 PM

"Once you grant tenure, you've had four years to evaluate the teacher's work. Why all of a sudden in year 10 has the teacher become a bad teacher? There's a shifting of the bar. The bar is incredibly low for non-tenure."

You really skirted the question regarding burnout, Mr. Cicarella. Some of my teachers have been teaching for decades, and using the same ideas and lessons throughout them. While the might have been considered good teachers in 1984, they have simply become complacent, out of touch, and. un-engaging. It's not to say that old teachers are terrible and young ones are great-- I've definitely had bad teachers from both categories, but when a teacher begins to show signs of senility, it's time for them to go.

Posted by: Whatsername | April 1, 2009 3:47 PM

I hate the idea that because Hooker has children of Yale professors that it automatically means that these Yale employees are in some way better parents than parents of other students. "They take kids to museums on the weekend." Maybe they do. But maybe some Yale professors are negligent of their children, as well. Who knows? Yale is not all good, being a Yale student myself that suffered through four years of a culture I wasn't accustomed to. Maybe the kids at Hooker do better because there are economic stressors at home. I don't know, it seems weird to put Yale kids on a pedestal.

Posted by: Bill | April 1, 2009 4:06 PM

The quality of education has been declining since the teachers unionized in the 1970's. Maybe a coincidence?

Posted by: 54412229 | April 1, 2009 6:01 PM

If these same sort of calls for accountability were applied to all professions, half of the American workforce would be fired. I am glad I work in the private sector where standards are lax, inefficiency systemic and you never have to suffer the public going bananas.

Posted by: lance | April 1, 2009 6:24 PM

there's probably some crappy teachers out there, but it's mainly the parents. Parenthood is a job, and a lot of parents don't show up for work. With so many of them sitting home collecting entitlements you'd think they'd have plenty of time to work on their kids learning process...guess not.

They probably know the name of every contestant on american idol an flava of love though.

Posted by: Get to the point | April 1, 2009 6:57 PM

Hey Borrist ... it is a management issue.Lance you are right on the money

Posted by: ms.mary | April 1, 2009 7:30 PM

Mr.Cicarella is right where he should be.He has been a teacher in the system and knows all the problems in our schools.He has a vantage point of being a union leader and I feel he will do a great job for the union and also for our children.When my four daughters went to Fair Haven he was just one of the great staff who taught me what I needed to do as a parent to insure that my girls achieved great tests scores on the cmts.Accountability should be on Teachers,Principals and also on kids and parents.I feel more on parents,it is our job to get into these schools and really get to know the people and get all the info we need to make sure our kids realize how important education is and should be to them.If we dont feel people our doing their job it is our right to speak on it.Reality is tests scores do measure our kids but it shouldnot be the only way we measure kids.We all need to stop playing the blame game and get together to help reform our schools and in doing so we can help our childrens future.

Posted by: urban ed | April 1, 2009 7:43 PM

Bill: Teachers unionized in the '70s because they were an exploited workforce.

The OTHER thing that has happened since then is the belief that EVERY kid should be ready at the end of 13 yrs of public education to succeed in a four-year college.

And our worship at the altar of high-stakes tests (now with sanctions attached) to measure our progress toward that expectation (and whether they actually do or not is highly arguable.)

So it is emminently predictable that school would seem to "fail" over the time since, given the new expectation, and suspect measurement, especially since the teacher workforce did not undergo a wholesale change, nor did the variety of pressures on students and families (oops..yes it did..it got WORSE) nor did the amount of additional traning/professional development for teachers, nor did anyone check in with teachers to see if their own beliefs and values meshed with the new paradigm.

The good news is that teachers coming out of teacher-prep programs over the last few years are up for the challenge. The bad news is there are folks in the profession who entered in good faith and worked hard their whole careers, only to have the ground shift under them.

Do we just throw those good people away?

The Union's role, as I see it, is to protect teachers' due process and collective bargaining rights. And ALSO to help the administration in bringing the entire teaching force up to speed.

I was a teachers' union rep once and too often the reaction to a new initiative was "That's just not the way we've done it."

Unacceptable.

But those new ways to do things need to come with lots of support, understanding, and never, EVER, any "Blame."

Posted by: vatar.simpson | April 1, 2009 8:03 PM

FIX,
You're unusually quiet on this issue.

Posted by: Tom Burns | April 1, 2009 9:12 PM

Seth,
How many students enter your school during the school year?
Ms. Mary,
You know the great job we did at Fair Haven and you were a big part of it---thanks for all you do

Urban Ed--you are right on

And to everyone---Dave Cicarella knows what he is doing and is the ultimate professional---he is open to any ideas to improve the education of our children---this union works for the whole school community, not just the teachers--Tom

Posted by: NHPS_Teacher | April 1, 2009 10:36 PM

Our schools don't work well - it's time to give hard working teachers in the system a voice in school reform. We need to listen and learn from our effective classroom teachers. Teachers need to play a central role in creating professional development for each other.

I fear our mayor has taken a recent interest in reform only because of the possibility of government money. Dr. Mayo demonstrates longevity, but not competence. I would like to know (from him) why he thinks he should keep his job. I'm not holding my breath for a response.

In many cases, NHPS leadership does not lead. 54 Meadow Street, with some exceptions such as Mr. Therrien, are not tackling real issues that face teachers.

Yes, we do need to emulate Amistad! We can realign budgets and make a longer school day for children who fall behind their academics. We should look into mandating school attendance with welfare payments, as was done in the past. We need a sensible behavior plan that does not suspend students for minor infractions. We need community service IN the school to help students learn to respect the million$$++ schools they are so fortunate to have. We need to walk the "child-centric" talk. Kid's First? How insulting.

We need brave, smart, hardworking, efficient administrators who recognize the essential importance of staffing their schools with the very best teachers. Yes, the ground is shifting and it's time to shore up the foundation of our society. Administrators must approach every teacher evaluation with rigor and care, for these evaluations are the basis for removing nonperforming staff. We do not, nor should we, enjoy a "job for life". There are many bad teachers in my school who should have left or been removed years (even decades) ago by honest job performance evaluations. It's time to get honest - and this applies for administrators and district managers as well.

By the way, does the New Haven Public School District still forbid teachers from directly contacting the press? It would be useful if these discussions @NHI could be more school-specific to help the public understand the sometimes shameful reality inside our walls.

Posted by: Jeremiah | April 2, 2009 6:58 AM

Take a look at the administrators, many of whom are appointed through political patronage. They are incompotent, crude, and semi-literate. This has got to change, but as long as DeStefano and Mayo are in charge- it won't!

Posted by: juliaroberts | April 2, 2009 7:42 AM

Having worked with Dave for many years, I know that he is a fair, objective and open-minded person. He calls it as he sees it. The union is very lucky to have Dave as president. This is a great interview!

Posted by: Bill | April 2, 2009 8:29 AM

Urban Ed: All those unionized, so called exploited teachers, are teaching in parochial schools. They produce quality students at a fraction of the cost of the public system. That's why the liberals are afraid of giving parents school vouchers, because they know they cannot compete.

Posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS | April 2, 2009 12:20 PM

I hope readers realize that we have an amazing opportunity to lift up the entire public school teaching profession right now and right here from New Haven. I am not kidding. The eyes of the country will be on us if we are innovative, ambitious, and if we are ultimately successful in closing the achievement gap in 7 years time.

But before we can ask the teachers to willingly drop the regressive protections embedded in their agreement and all the side letters, the BOE must first show us that they are cleaning up their own house. This is what leadership is all about. And it has to be done soon.

The Mayor has been doing lots of talking lately. And its good talk, its exciting. But right now it's just talk. The Mayor and the Supt. would like to become the agents of change. OK, they have that chance. But for the rhetoric to become reality, they need to take courageous and concrete steps to show us that they are serious about reform.

First, there needs to be a strong, unambiguous, and transparent system of accountability within the BOE administration. The Supt should no longer feel that he can make a joke in the Advocate about not making his goals. This is not acceptable. If the Mayor wants to establish credibility with the teachers and the public, he needs to say that the buck stops with him and that he and the Supt. should and will be held accountable for results.

Second, he will have to show that this is not just tough talk. He will have to demonstrate that the administration IS changing. This will involve new people in positions of power. This will involve people with successful track records from places other than just New Haven. This is a world-class challenge and we need world-class talent to take this on.

Only after we see the Mayor back up his talk by transforming the way that BOE/Gateway operates, will the teachers feel compelled to change the way that they view themselves and their roles.

Posted by: RichTherrn | April 2, 2009 4:07 PM

I'll repeat my comments from the original article on Mayor Destefano and Dr. Mayo's visit.
I'm not sure that quick out of context quotes fairly characterize the district attitude towards student achievment, as many responses to that Advocate article indicated. A better measure would be to examine the District Improvement Plan which DOES set some top down goals. But each school develops its own improvement plan as well. This is the detail and the part that needs to be balanced in the system of school reform.
Teachers are instrumental in developing curriculum as well as assessments and professional development as mentioned, but ultimately their instruction is the key for improving student achievement.
I have to admit I'm confused about the perception of school and district administrators as less than competent and committed. I look around the table and see many of the subject supervisors and district leaders having come from out of district and here less than five years and making a dramatic impact. I see new principals promoted from within AND without the district, as well as experienced principals being recognized for their leadership and">http://www.newhavenindependent.org/archives/2008/02/stakes_raised.php">and vision. And I see the district already moving in the direction of accountability/support as mentioned in the Cambridge Report just one year ago and monitored monthly by the CT State Dept of Ed.
New Haven is fortunate to have committed educators, as well as community leaders and partners that can work together as individuals and organizations and they all need to be both recognized and challenged as we move forwards.
-Richard Therrien
-NHPS Science Supervisor

Posted by: Rev. Samuel T. Ross-Lee | April 2, 2009 4:15 PM

"First, there needs to be a strong, unambiguous, and transparent system of accountability within the BOE administration."

What a bunch of crock from ppl who support, defend, and advocate for the Acheievement First program which backdoor creaming of students from the Charter Schools. "Transparent"?!? Are you kidding me!

You take kids in the lottery through the front door, and push out the ones you don't want through the backdoor when the public is not looking or aware of this practice, and THEN you dishonestly claim that you have the same students as the non-charters.

PRACTICE what you preach! DO as you SAY! BE the change you advocate for!

And as long as you are in cahoots WITH media outlets like the Advocate, it will always be suspect for you to use some out of context media reference in your attempt to smear the Supt.

P.S. Notice the use of my Real Name to post and respond to the prevalent pseudonymns.

Posted by: 7774433000111 | April 2, 2009 11:44 PM

One things NHPS do not need are overbearing know-it-all know-nothings making sweeping statements about things they know little about. Reminds me of the neighboring drunks I witnessed tonight commenting on Joe Torre's coaching. The internet may indeed be democratic, but it is clearly far from wise. Randolph Bourne is rolling in his grave.

Posted by: Former Employee of NHPS | April 3, 2009 2:27 AM

Lemme see the type of abritrary leadership that permeates all of NHPF.

True story,

A kid from Fair Haven Middle bring a gun to school. An alert teacher takes the gun (a real an functional weapon) from the kid and turns it into the main office with his report of the incident. The then principal of the school, calls the teacher in to his office to accuse the teacher of having said something to have provoked the student to come to the school armed.

This same principal's brand of leadership get's him all but fired from a great job in a Hartford suburb, because parents have quickly become leary of his inappropriate and suggestive behavior towards children. And yet he is allowed to return to New Haven as a consulting supervisor after he is forced to resign from that job.

The problem with accountability is that this is the type of behavior that Reggie likes and rewards. He is single handedly responsible for the disfunctions that you are seeing throughout the city's schools and the criminal activity in the city's youth. Nobody trust him, certainly not enough to budge on accountabilty issues. If anyone in this district district needs to be fired - its him. ...

Posted by: seen it all | April 4, 2009 12:00 AM

a basic requirement of the a union is to protect the JOB. unfortunately, it often gets confused with protecting the bad employee, because they pay dues, and therefore must be 'defended'. union leadership needs to make clear that dues go toward bargaining, and if you 'eff up', or are a bad employee, it's on you. if the employee loses thier job, the union must ensure the job is backfilled. this premise is what UAW so strong for so long---protect the job.

Posted by: teachergal | April 4, 2009 12:46 PM

Former employee of new haven.........that is definitely NH's brand of administration. The teachers are all at fault never the student. And that's why the students know they can do whatever they want. There is no discipline or support of teachers when they try to administer discipline. Additionally, students know they will be promoted despite their grades because their parents have the final say! Believe me...I have watched and seen much over my thirty years teaching in New Haven.

Oh, and for those of you who might say that it is because I have taught for 30 years and need to retire and this is why I feel this way, I say "no way!!!!!!!" Talk to a few of the younger teachers who are looking for new professions, they'll share my sentiments although they are afraid to speak out. Why? Because we have a bullying superintendent and administration to be afraid of.

Posted by: RichTherrn | April 5, 2009 5:54 PM

I've tried commenting several times. I hope this goes through.

I'll repeat some of what I stated on the earlier article about the Mayor and Dr. Mayo's visit, and provide some examples. I'm not sure that quick out of context quotes in the Advocate fairly characterize the district attitude towards student achievment, as many responses to that Advocate article indicated. A better measure would be to examine the District Improvement Plan which DOES set some top down goals, as well as adult actions. But remember, each school develops its own improvement plan as well, which is the most important factor.

Teachers are instrumental in developing curriculum as well as assessments, but ultimately it is their instruction that is the key for improving student achievement.

Posted by: RichTherrn | April 5, 2009 5:56 PM

one further comment:

I admit I am confused by the characterizations of district and building administrators and their motives. The district has high goals and has been recognized in the Cambridge Report, as well as monitored and held accountable by the CT State Dept. I look around at district level supervisors and leaders and see many from outside the district here less than five years who have made a dramatic impact. I see new building leaders promoted from both within and outside of the system and schools who engage parents. I see experienced principals who lead their buildings with effectiveness and vision.

Change WILL come, to both people and structures, at all levels. Innovations and reforms are needed and welcome. However, let us tone down the rhetoric about the teachers and principals. I have visited a dozen schools in the last week and been impressed at every single one. We need those educators who have dedicated not just two or three years, but their lives and entire careers, to improving public education.
-Richard Therrien
-NHPS Science Supervisor

Posted by: teachergal | April 6, 2009 5:08 PM

I'm sorry but i just have to comment. Richard, while i do not know you, you seem to be a very commnitted science supervisor and that's great! Where are the rest of your colleagues when it comes to sharing local news on a website like this?

I can see how you would not understand the perception of many of new haven's supervisors as you are sitting at the adult table now and getting a limited perspective. I will leave it at that.

I am a new haven teacher completing 30 years. I've always loved teaching in New Haven but it has become increasingly difficult for a variety of reasons. I am working with seventh and eighth graders now that are quite the challenge but i love it.

And,by the way, how about rotating those coaching jobs and giving other experienced teachers another type of job, like coaching. There are many us, like myself, who are very gifted teachers and well educated, yet we are never provided an opportunity to do something different, like coaching. The coaching jobs seem to be for a select few, who never go back into the classroom to teach and therefore loose touch. I've seen it happen,it's real, and administrators should look at this.

Ciao!
New Haven Teachergal

Posted by: teachergal | April 6, 2009 5:15 PM

Dave Cicarella,

Dave you're an awesome Union leader. Thanks for your ongoing committment to New Haven Teachers. You have proven yourself to be a trustworthy, loyal representative of NH teachers. Thanks for all you do!

Posted by: City Hall Watch | April 6, 2009 8:51 PM

If there was no potential for new money to the city, there would be no discussion and no hope for school reform. It's cynical but true.

Posted by: Jeremiah | April 6, 2009 10:05 PM

Teachergal is right but perhaps out of politeness or fear of reprisal leaves out some points. Administrators and quasi-administrators, (i.e. those who are not certified administrators but who are awarded plum positions out of the classroom) are frequently relatives or patronage appointees of the political machine. Many talented teachers were and still are not allowed to become administrators because they don't have the right "connections". Go and ask retired NHPS teachers about this- listen to what they have to say.

Union Chief: Don’t Blame The Teachers

Comments

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed