In Response to The Previous Comment...

Dear Chaz,

First let me say, that I think you misinterpreted my posting. I am very pro-public-school. I have never expressed support for voucher programs or even charter schools, and I fully support the efforts of public schools, having spent the last 3 years teaching in 2 very challenging inner city public schools. What I meant by my remarks about my sixth graders who attended a private school SUMMER program [on scholarship] is that it is a shame that these amazing students that I have taught do not have access to small class size or a classroom ALL THE TIME where behavior is under control merely because they are not able to afford to live in an area where the PUBLIC schools are better and that PUBLIC schools should be able to provide an environment like the one they experienced this summer. I don’t know where you teach, but the conditions in the public schools which I have taught are certainly not ideal for any student. I was not saying that all children should go to private school, but that public schools are frightfully inadequate and in need of improvement, and that this will be very apparent to students who attend a private summer program [which, btw, is designed for public school students from low-income areas as an enrichment program] who return to their public school in the fall.

Secondly, any teacher who claims that tenure is having a positive effect on the public school system is out of their mind, or has been very lucky to work with a great staff. While tenure does protect teachers against malicious and unfair principals [like my first school], it also protects inadequate, lazy, abusive, and ignorant teachers from having to do any work at all. I am not just imagining this—it is a perspective shared by the 50 or so teachers I know personally, who are teaching in hard-to-staff public schools through out NYC. Teacher tenure would be very different if the evaluation process of teachers was not so entirely superficial and subjective, and if it didn’t take insanely egregious violations of the rules in order to be fired. From what my last principal explained, you need to get three “Unsatisfactory” ratings in a row in order to be fired! That means three years of general incompetence to lose your job or face any kind of consequences! I am tired of teachers who cannot string together basic sentences, arrive to school late every day, and live by the motto of “that’s not in my contract” in order to avoid doing anything they see as a less than desirable task. In no other line of employment would an employee get away with such significant neglect to the responsibilities of their job without getting fired.

Finally, I take personal offense to the fact that you called me a “three year teacher” as if I am forsaking education for a posh job somewhere to sit on my ass and do nothing—I am not leaving teaching because I don’t like it or “can’t handle it”—I’m leaving with the intent of getting an education degree that will qualify me to work in policy and work to reform a broken public school system and plan to stay involved in public schools for the duration of my career.

I am not trying to argue with the struggles that the union goes through for quality teachers who are victims of the system, but I find it hard to believe that you have not worked with teachers who are protected by a union who do not deserve to even be called "teachers."

I don't know what a "blogroll" is but you can certainly feel free to take me off of yours.