The following statistics are taken from UFT Executive Board Minutes from a recent meeting.
- We are waiting for the final number of discontinued teachers. Of the number of teachers who were on probation and had it extended 261 have reached out to us.
- The numbers of teachers rated ineffective are between 650-700.
- Teachers rated developing are between 5500-6000.
- ATR’s are approximately 1600 which are 200 less than last year at this same time. (bullets were added by me)
The first questions I have on these figures:
-What, if anything, did the UFT do for the teachers who had their probation extended?
As only261 reached out to the UFT, it is clear the rest - many more than 261 had probation extended - are resigned to their fate and know the UFT will do little or nothing to help them.
-Are teachers covering temporary vacancies and leave replacements counted as ATRs?
-Why can't teachers rated developing appeal?
As the UFT neglected to negotiate a procedure in the law to appeal developing ratings, the Union should now consider grieving as the basis for the ratings is junk science test scores and an observation process that both management and labor admitted was flawed and have hanged.
-How many of the ineffective ratings came from so called troubled schools?
We complained to UFT High School Vice President Janella Hinds about the unfairness of the rating system for teachers in Jamaica HS, a closing school. Hinds was able to convince the DOE to change the two ineffective ratings from Jamaica. Both ineffective ratings were totally unjustified
Since 91 is 13 % of 700, 91 teachers can appeal their ineffective rating to a neutral three person arbitration panel. The rest will appeal to the Chancellor (and lose) and then hope for the best with validators in what is now called year two status for someone rated ineffective. Another ineffective will lead to the burden of proof shifting from the DOE to the teacher in a tenured teacher dismissal hearing and more than likely the end result will be termination.