Saturday, November 11, 2017

MULGREW-FARINA LETTER ON LESSON PLANS

FYI


Dear Colleagues,

The Department of Education and the United Federation of Teachers recognize that lesson plans are a professional responsibility.

Everything about our evaluation and development system is based upon the understanding that a constructive, professional process is the best way for colleagues to collaborate to help children learn. We all know that effective teaching requires authentic and thoughtful planning.  The development of lesson plans by and for the use of the teacher is a professional responsibility.  A teacher’s lesson plan is not the lesson itself. A lesson unfolds in the classroom as a teacher works with his or her students. Planning may be evaluated through observation of a lesson being taught, by the professional discussions that take place between teacher and supervisor and, of course, through discussion and review of the plan used to teach an observed lesson. The lesson plan cannot be evaluated in isolation but as a part of the planning cycle of the observed lesson.

Lesson plans are but one part of the process of creating and delivering quality instruction that engenders learning. How well students learn is what is most important.

Although a supervisor may suggest elements to include in a lesson, lesson plans are by and for the use of the teacher. Their format and organization, including which elements are to be included, and whether to write the plans on paper or digitally are appropriately left to the discretion of the teacher.  If the teacher was Ineffective, the supervisor and teacher will collaborate about different strategies. Lessons should be taught in a manner consistent with the school’s educational philosophy.

Lesson plans are part of the instructional planning process. As has long been the case, supervisors may continue to request and collect lesson plans; however, they may not be collected in a mechanical or routinized manner.

We know this clarification will help us work together to provide the best education for our students. We will continue to work toward our shared goal of making New York City’s public schools the best in the country.
Sincerely,

UFT President Michael Mulgrew and Schools Chancellor Carmen FariƱa

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hmmm, Mulgrew is talking about lesson plans now? Could this be a possible breakthrough in regard to actually getting us a sane and fair evaluation system?

Anonymous said...

This is old news, this letter was written years ago

Anonymous said...

Keep dreaming.

Anonymous said...

If you do your lesson plans digitally do you still need to print them? Is it acceptable to say to a supervisor ill email you it if they ask for one and it's not printed out?

Anonymous said...

As much as teaching for the DOE sucks, in all my years I have literally only been asked by an admin to see my lesson plan book twice. (For formals and informals, I do have to show them) The UFT has much bigger fish to fry in regards to fixing our evaluation system. Kill Danielson and kill the 4 observations is the best place to start.

James Eterno said...

The problem is the UFT leadership loves the evaluation system. They think it is just fine. Maybe needs a tweek or two but it's great according to Mulgrew.

Anonymous said...

This statement does not deal with what has happened in many schools....lesson plans that require hours and hours to prepare. In elemantary school it means 5/6 lessons for each day with commom core standards listed for each and details of every part of the lesson. It took me most of my weekend including inputing test results for each child (frequent tests in math, social studies, etc.).

Anonymous said...

The reason Mulgrew and the UFT honchoes love the evaluation system is because THEY DON"T GET EVALUATED BY IT. UFT reps are still on the "S" and "U" system and are not evaluated by Danielson. Once Janus goes through and Mulgrew is back in the wood shop, we'll see how much he likes the current evaluation system he put in place. The UFT are a bunch of hypocrites at best, and backstabbing scumbags at worst.

Anonymous said...

Post Janus-stop paying dues and enjoy your welfare fund benefits paid for by the city.
We won't need the UFT any longer. Maybe we can join the fdny or nypd union.

Anonymous said...

My principal makes us stay late for free, CL sits there and says nothibg. Forces jupiter grades, 4 page lesson plans, etc. Dont need to pay 1400 bucks for the uft to ignore the contract.

Prehistoric pedagogue said...

Don't expect your chapter leader to solve your problems if you are not willing to put your name on a grievance. Insist that he file one and if you refuses take it to your District rep. But it all begins with you having the guts to grieve. It's strictly put up or shut up.

Anonymous said...

Do not get anyone started on chapter leaders. Remember the days where the chapter leader got wind of something and automatically put a stop to it before UFT members, rank and file, would be exposed to it. Chapter leaders were real LEADERS.

Anonymous said...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a Chapter Leader. Most UFT members are apathetic and they expect everyone else to stand-up for them while they let the principal ignore the contract.

Anonymous said...

The letter was reissued in Friday's CL update because principals are violating the lesson plan agreement and are mandating elements of a lesson and requiring paper copies of lesson plans be kept in folders or baskets. Mulgrew asked CL's to e-mail him if this is happening. I wonder if anyone will.

Anonymous said...

The Union is denying all grievances.

Anonymous said...

You mean the DOE is denying grievances? How can UFT deny a grievance?

Anonymous said...

Teachers become Chapter Leaders for the same reason they take any, useless, comp time position- one less class top teach. Any COSA, push in/ pull out teacher, dean, chapter leader, IEP teacher, etc are simply trying to escape the current torturous climate of being in the Danielson-rated classroom.