See at least one experience
Good Evening, February 5, 2015
AP Falzone (2014 – 2015) gave me an unsatisfactory formal observation September 24, 2014 (no informal observation’ I do not consider the introductory meeting on September 3, 2014, to be an informal observation). Ms. Falzone has told me several times that I may receive an unsatisfactory marks for upcoming formals and informal and is in danger of receiving a June 2015, unsatisfactory rating and being fired by the NYCDOE.
Last Thursday, Ms. Falzone dropped in on a 8th grade art class that I was covering. The teacher had left a writing prompt requiring the students continue their research on abstract art. The writing prompt had been written out on chart paper by another teacher who had received the art teacher’s plans earlier. I posted the chart paper on the smart board and had text books available for the student to collect their research from. Ms Falzone arrived during the class and
felt the lesson, which was not mine, was unsatisfactory, that I had failed to distribute the art notebooks, instead I had provided them with paper to do the research on, to be collected at the end of the period. She then told me that I would have a formal observation, but that the post observation meeting we had after the informal observation would serve as a pre observation meeting for the formal observation. I am a social studies teacher, the art teacher’s writing prompt is not a reflection of the kind of lesson planning I do. It is certainly not my work. I insisted that we have a pre observation prior to the formal observation. She says she will be visiting sometime this week or next. I am in a new school now and it is a “turn around school”. Every day is a new adventure.
Falzone was fair with me.
Falzone was very good to me, and I have to say something in her defense. I was constantly being thrown into district 75 classes and self contained special education classes. Amy Arundel did nothing when I constantly emailed and called, so I told Ms. Falzone. I got more help from my ATR supervisor than I got from my union rep!!
AMMY URENDELL AND ALL UNION PEOPLE SUPPOSEDLY REPRESENTING ATRS ARE A BUNCH OF CORRUPT ASSESS. AS A UNION EMPLOYEE WHO HAPPENS TO BE A FRIEND TOLD ME: THE UNION SOLD OUT THE ATRS TO DOE AND PUT THEM HANG OUT TO DRY.
Falzone likes to tell ATR’s that they are getting
U’s for the year! Likes to create stress for the ATR’s
Thry are told to harass ATRs so thry csn hire newbies.
The observations of ATRs in rotating assignments is unprofessional and unacceptable on several counts:
*The ATRs often don’t know the students.
*The ATRs often have been covering a class out of license, with or without the regular teacher’s lesson plan.
*The ATRs are told to differentiate lessons for the students, but they have not met them or have not been provided their IEPs or other personal data such as ELL status.
* There are no consequences for these Supervisors to lie. Most of them are falsifying the dialogue.
*All a setup for engaging in age discrimination. The observation system used as a weapon to make an experienced teacher look like incompetent.
* The rating officer is someone an ATR never met.
It is all about discrimination and harassment. Thank you Mulgrew.
The DOE with our union leadership’s blessing, is trying to reduce the ATR pool, not by putting the ATR back in the classroom where they belong, but instead by thinning the herd with these “flyby observations” and unfairly giving the ATR a “U” rating. It is definetly age discrimination.
Comments are closed