The Stewart team never shared this with CTU delegates or members--and, in fact are lying in the press by calling it a less controversial “peer mentoring” program. Any changes to our agreement must be ratified by CTU members.
This secret deal goes even further by jointly agreeing to change the tenure law in Springfield. The following are just a few quotes from the document PACT received under a Freedom of Information Act request. It is signed by Ms. Stewart (on 5/30/06) and Michael Scott (on 7/25/06).
"Whereas the Board and the Union wish to amend the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) and the Fresh Start agreement to provide for a pilot peer review teacher evaluation and retention system…the Union and Board’s joint mission and purpose are to…fairly and respectfully identify, remediate and/or discontinue the services of teaching personnel…the parties recognize this as a radical departure from existing teacher evaluation and teacher removal methods…In or before the Fall 2006 veto session the Board and the Union will jointly sponsor legislation to amend Articles 24A and 34 of the Illinois Code…to allow the Board and the Union to create pilot alternative evaluation, remediation and dismissal procedures for teachers who have completed the probationary period…a tenured teacher intervention program shall commence on July 1, 2007...”If this is a priority for the UPC team, why the secret deal? Why not run on it as a campaign issue and be open about it? I just don't get it.
What is the sense of the members out there?
Would you vote in favor of having colleagues in on decisions to fire you or not?
UPDATE: Check out TeacherX's thoughts here.
6 comments:
This sounds like it would allow both CPS and CTU to determine which schools it may cover. When Debbie started the Partnership Program she did not envision the partnership being limited to ten schools. The plan was always to incorporate more as the program grew.
It would not be wise to create an agreement limited to the current “Fresh Start” schools. This would always then require an amendment every time a new school was added. That being said, it is not unlike either party to make an unwise decision.
Victor’s problem with this is still valid regardless of how many schools are involved. Even if it only applies to a small group of schools under the CPS/CTU agreement, the CTU House of Delegates should vote on it. There must be some sort of checks and balances in CTU. Someone needs to tell this leadership they represent their members and have no right to make side deals on their own.
While we are on the topic, is it really that easy to fool people? Is that all you have to, change the name of a program and then claim credit for it? Is anyone ever going to call the UPC on this?
I was privileged to be a part of Debbie’s Partnership Program. Her creativity and vision created a concept and a partnership that never existed in this country. UPC voted against it and now they’re swaddling it like their newborn baby. They realize this is the only good thing they have going.
Speaking of new ideas: I have created a new holiday called WinterRamatm ! It will be an annual celebration held on December 25th. I hope you all enjoy.
Wishing you a Merry WinterRamatm and a Happy New Year,
Marty McGreal
The was originally subscript.
Marty (Mr. NcGreal) meant that the "tm" at the end of WinterRamatm should be subscript (indicating trademark).
I was asked to fix it, but unfortunately, I can only delete the comment or let it stand.
There are limits to even the blog administrator.
So, can we safely assume your new holiday is titled "winterama"?
Is there an exchange gifts? Are there any special drinks for the season? (Like hot toddies or mulled cider, etc. I ask because my specialty - mojitos - are more summer drink than winter.)
I have more to say in the next comment.
I originally posted this, not because I am opposed to peer review per se, but because I was troubled by the furitive nature of how UPC was going about it.
If this is something you support (and there are good reasons to) or not (and there are good reasons for that too) then simply state what you support openly and make it a campaign issue...or not.
If you want to do this, why do it in such a way that only way the rank and file find out is by filing a freedom of information act request?
Who are the UPC? Are they affiliated with John Ashcroft's FBI? Is a freedom of information act really necessary?
Personally, I have more faith in my colleagues than in anyone selected by CPS to be a principal to judge/evaluate my instructional capacity.
That said, I have recieved many phone calls about this. They have asked things like:
Who picked the evaluators? (I have heard those selected get an extra $5,000 a year to do it.)
Not that I was looking, but did anyone see these positions on the CPS job site? Seriously, since we are spending the public's money on everything we do, how were people selected to be evaluators?
Even better, who selected what schools and why? any chance the schools were picked based on previous voting records for a certain faction in the CTU?
That is a question worth finding the answer to.
I meant McGreal, Not NcGreal.
Woe is me, there is no spell check in blogger comments.
Word to the wise, if spelling is an issue or concern, copy and paste into a word document to check your comments before posting.
Sorry Marty, I do actually know how to spell your last name.
Despite what you say about the principals selected by CPS in your comment, there are some very good principals out there. I have experienced them.
On the other hand, I worked for a principal last year who on paper would appear to be an ideal candidate to lead a school. She is very educated, has considerable experience in the classroom, has been a part of the development of a number of schools, and is a member of one of those new principal programs (New Leaders), but is absolutely incapable of running anything more complicated than her car or maybe her stereo provided it has a remote control.
My question is, what can you do in a situation like that? The pedigree is beautiful, but the results are incredibly poor. The school she runs is a disaster especially for the children. Extremely violent, abusive in every way for all who enter with little learning going on in the classrooms. The good teachers who worked there, intially fooled by her seemingly strong background and sweet disposition, have nearly all left. Most of those that are still there are looking to get out. I guess the school is gong to have to completely fail for CPS to make any changes and when they do, she'll probably get a promotion.
Post a Comment