In an earlier post, I referred to the long-running saga in Los Angeles as a soap opera.
Well, friends, it is time for another installment.
Howard Blume writes in the Los Angeles Times that Superintendent John Deasy has joined litigation against the state that puts him at odds with the board that he works for. This is a situation that Deasy relishes.
Blume writes:
“The goal of the litigation is to compel the state to eliminate non-academic periods that have hindered students from fulfilling graduation and college requirements. Those periods include “service classes,” which involve answering the phones and running errands, and “home periods,” during which unsupervised students are allowed to leave campus.
“The ‘classes’ are not designed to deliver real instruction or learning opportunities to students, but rather are no more than fillers to plug gaps where no genuine courses are readily available,” Deasy wrote. He asked the judge in the case to halt these “outrageous” practices at L.A. Unified and other districts. “I can’t think of a better gift to give this school district than to expose this indefensible practice that is antithetical to learning.”
“In an interview with The Times on Monday, Deasy called his declaration a matter of conscience.
“Although it is not unusual for superintendents to support student causes, Deasy has aligned himself with critics of the district he runs — on matters that he has the power to influence.
“I hope our superintendent would remedy untenable situations within his direct control immediately,” said school board member Monica Ratliff.
“A senior state official also questioned why Deasy didn’t remedy the problem on his own campuses.
“It certainly is befuddling that he would encourage the state to fix a problem that is within his authority to fix,” said Richard Zeiger, the state’s chief deputy schools superintendent. “If he doesn’t like these classes, he doesn’t have to have them. He and the school board can work this out.”
The board is supposed to evaluate Deasy’s job performance by October 21. Deasy seems to be picking a fight with the board or trying to demonstrate yet again that he is not accountable to the board. Whenever Deasy thumbs his nose at the board, he says he is doing it to defend the civil rights of students, implying that he cares more about students than the board does.
Blume writes:
“The superintendent has talked of possibly leaving the job; a majority of board members voted in closed session last week to begin negotiations over a possible departure agreement.
“An ongoing point of dispute is whether Deasy follows the direction of the board — an issue that also came up this year in a lawsuit over teacher job protections. Deasy became a star witness in that litigation, which eventually overturned laws that made it more difficult to fire teachers. Deasy never sought board guidance or assent for his participation. He characterized his involvement as fighting on behalf of student civil rights…..
“He’s entitled to his opinions,” said school board member George McKenna. “But if he testifies and it doesn’t represent the board, it would be a concern. Any superintendent should be working on behalf of the district and be working at the direction of the board.”
“McKenna, a former principal, said that in certain situations, for example, a student who works in the school’s office can learn responsibility and skills that could help land a job. Deasy’s declaration lacked that nuance, McKenna said.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Let’s hope that McKenna and Ratliff can influence Kayser and Zimmer, and that these four teachers can finally make Vladovic see that all must vote in unison to give Deasy his notice to leave. October 21 is a day when parents and community members should show up at the BoE meeting at Beaudry and make all voices heard that Deasy must go.
LikeLike
Deasy believes a teacher’s years on the job equates to the inches of that teacher’s height… in terms of its relevance to judging that teacher’s abilities, or deciding how much to pay that teacher.
Here’s a post that details this:
—————————–
Someone did a “Ten Stupidest Things Arne Duncan Said” a while ago.
Perhaps the same thing could be done for John Deasy. Here’s a good start. Go to
Deasy’s interview last month (Sepember 2014) with Tavis Smiley:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/interviews/john-deasy-2/
The quote is at —
03:52 – :
(the CAPITALS and () parentheticals are mine, Jack)
—————————————————–
JOHN DEASY:
“As far as Last-In–and-First-Out, I don’t support that in any fashion whatsoever… uhhmm… in the notion that when you have to make decisions to lay off faculty because of budget cuts—and we know here in California, we’ve been through a horrific situation, uhhh… in terms of lack of money for public education—the decision has to be made solely on the day the person is hired. Well, why don’t we use teacher HEIGHT? I mean, THAT’S objective… uhmm, you can easily determine the highest, the tallest teacher. You wouldn’t do that either. So why (base it on) some day (i.e. start day on the job)?
“You want to be able to make a decision on the contribution…”
—————————————————–
At this point in the interview, Deasy then deviously dishes out some disinformation and misdirection as he gushes about how wonderful some teachers and their “contribution” is, and and that “honoring” those good teachers’ contribution is the reason he’s out to gut all teachers’ job protections in backing the Vergara decision.
Gee, how nice of him.
Why MUST those evil teacher unions get in his way when all Deasy wants to do is “honor” teachers? What’s WRONG with them?
He fails to mention that it’s NOT just “BAD” teachers’ job protections he’s after, but “ALL” teachers’ job protections.
I was in an audience when Deasy gave a speech at Occidental College a couple years ago, and he said a teacher’s career should not last more than five years, before that teacher moves on to their “real” career. Deasy and his ilk view the veteran teacher—10 years or more—with undisguised contempt, seeing them as lazy, overpaid, and basically worthless. If you went to an LAUSD teacher jail, it looks like an AARP meeting, as the Deasy-ite principals were given a directive to doctor up and trump up false charges against as many veterans as possible—to lower the line of item of salary in the budget, not improve teacher quality. If the Vergara decision stands, they’ll all be instantly fired.
The truth is that Deasy—and more specifically, the moneyed forces backing him—wants to de-professionalize teaching, to make it more like a low-level service job like office temping, fast food, retail, etc., than a profession like law, medicine, engineering, etc. Of course this as being done…
1) to lessen the tax burden on business and ramp up their bottom line profits and the price of their shareholders’ stock;
AND
2) to make education a more profitable industry for privatization—where teachers can be more like Walmart workers with no job protections, little pay, etc.
Anyway, getting back to the above quote, Deasy says that a teacher’s length of service should be totally ignored when making personnel or compensation decisions.
THE REASON: basing such decisions on a teacher’s number of years of services is the same as basing it on a teacher’s number of inches in his height.
Really, John? Seriously? You’re in your mid-fifties now, and it’s possible you may soon or eventually need open-heart surgery (or some other high-risk surgery.) Would you prefer to be operated on by a surgeon who’s done it…
2 times before he operates on you?
20 times before he operates on you?
200 times before he operates on you?
2,000 times before he operates on you?
According to you, John, judging that surgeon on the prior number of times he’s successfully performed open-heart surgery is like judging him on the number of inches of his height.
What an asinine analogy. Let’s compare it even further.
INCHES OF HEIGHT: a teacher—or his supervising administrator(s)—has NO control over that, as it is decided in the womb.
YEARS OF TEACHING IN THE CLASSROOM: being able to survive this is totally dependent on the teacher’s innate abilities, persistence, drive to work hard, and his determination to perform the countless and highly-demanding requirements of the job… and survive administrator evalutions, and prove himself / herself over and over to an administrator that they deserve to be on the job—even AFTER being granted tenure.
The longer a teacher a teach, the greater the mastery of the subject(s) that he teachers, and the more skilled he becomes in teaching those subjects.
Bad teachers can and do get justly pushed out all the time… without actually going thru the technical process of termination or “being fired.”. The same goes for high-paid teachers who are unjustly fired, in order to save money.
What must a teacher do during that say, his first year of teaching, or 2 years, or 5, 10, 20, 30, etc., to remain on the job? What are some of the requirements that he must perform, or else, if he fails to do so, will get written up and eventually fired?
Well, let’s examine that.
Principals and other administrators come through our classes all the ding-dong day, folllowed by criticisms, e-mails and / or “conference memos” which demand and get immediate action.
Parents can be equally demanding, as evidenced during the scheduled parent-teacher conferences during the school year, and those unscheduled conferences resulting from a problem the parent demands that the teacher MUST address.
The students’ results on quarterly assessments—and annual standardized tests—in Language and Math are scrutinized to a fair-thee-well.
Accompanying these analyses are demands to address the needs of those students who are falling behind., and administrative monitoring as to whether we as teachers have done so. (And this is apart from the annual or bi-annual “Stull” evaluation that teachers go through)
Here’s more of what a teacher does:
— detailed report cards;
— lesson planning or all subjects (with a detailed lesson plan book with precisely stated objectives, methodology, etc— present and visible at all times);
— endless, constant grading & gradebook record-keeping that would tax any accountant;
— meticulously decorated and designed walls and bulletin boards ( with graded & finished student work corresponding to California Standards posted both in the classroom and in the hallway, and which must be changed regularly);
— mandated classroom environment with required centers (library, listening center, etc.); constant photocopying / prep for the upcoming lessons);
— I.E.P meetings for certain children with issues (with detailed documentation, writing, pre-planning, and execution of the I.E.P. plan itself);
— after-school “homework” clubs / tutoring that most teachers offer (unpaid and off-the-clock mind you);
— the grading of students’ writing (a very labor-intensive job by itself ) followed by individual one-on-one writing conferences with each student; regular after-school teacher meetings;
— intervening in and counseling regarding bullying, fights, or the often toxic dynamics of cliques; grade-level meetings;
— meetings of the entire faculty;
— after-school professional development meetings;
— the newly-mandated prep for the standardized tests;
— constant intervention with misbehaving children involving phone calls / meetings with parents; home visits;
— unpaid and emotionally-draining social work for children from distressed, impoverished homes with often-horrific personal situations;
— constant organizing and cleaning of the classroom itself;
— planning and executing of on-going projects;
— purchasing out-of-pocket supplies;
— the focused, on-your-feet performance of directed instruction itself; attending to children with special needs; and on and on…
— supervising extra-curricular sports (coaching) and clubs, and doing so for no, or very little compensation.
That’s only a PARTIAL list of what we are required to do.
Now according to Deasy, the length of time that a teacher has performed these and other demands SHOULD MEAN NOTHING when making decisions in:
paying that teacher (salary schedule);
or
not firing/continuing to hire that teacher.
Why? Well, because Deasy says that judging by the years on the job doing all this is the same as judging that teacher by the inches of that teachers’ height.
The unbelievable demands they constantly have to meet, and the challenging and trying circumstances in which they work mean nothing to this man—or again, more specifically, the moneyed forces backing him.
LikeLike
Try to imagine L.A. Police Chief Beck saying:
———————————————————
L.A. Police Chief Beck:
“As far as Last-In–and-First-Out, I don’t support that in any fashion whatsoever… uhhmm… where the decision on pay or continuing to hire that police officer has to be made solely on the day a police officer is hired. Well, why don’t we use police officer HEIGHT? I mean, THAT’S objective… uhmm, you can easily determine the highest, the tallest police officer. You wouldn’t do that either. So why base police officer pay or personnel decisions based on their start day on the job?”
———————————————————
Or a Fire Chief, or a leader in any branch of the U.S. armed forces… dumping on those who chose to make teaching, or fire fighting, or the military a career instead of a short-time gig, before they move on to—as Deasy puts it—their “real” career.
The morale would plummet.
Deasy says that he would prefer a system where a teacher’s career lasts five years max. Well, 50% of public school teachers ALREADY quit within five years. As far as career change teachers—those coming from other professions, that’s 50% after TWO years, and 75% after five years.
Deasy—-and the moneyed forces directing him—-want to make it so that 100% of teachers quit withing five years…. that’s “public school” teachers, not the private schools where so many corporate reform billionaires send their own kids.
How many 2-years-and-out Teach for America corps members teach at Bill Gates’ kids’ private school up in Seattle? Or Michelle Rhee/Tim Huffman’s kids at Harpeth Hall in Tennessee? Or Obama’s kids at Sidwell Friends in D.C.? Or Rahm Emanuel’s kids at the Chicago Lab School?
When I talk to those career change teachers—who came from aerospace, or accounting, or entertainment, or from wherever—I hear something along the lines of… “I had no idea that this job was so hard, so demanding, so grueling, so full of stress, so time-consuming… yadda-yadda-yadda… ”
The ones who don’t wash out in five years or less, the ones who stay on longer—longer than Deasy’s preferred five years—are the survivors, the dedicated ones, the creme-de-la-creme, and as such, deserve a system of due process, and a pay system with step increases—where commensurately higher pay comes with a commensurate increase in years of the experience that more and more years on the job brings.
No doubt about it, teachers get better the longer they are on the job—it’s totally counter-intuitive and defies common sense to think otherwise. Their instincts on how to handle the myriad of situations that arise—both academic and non-academic—become second-nature. Through trial and error and repeated practice, they improve in their ability in how to teach specific concepts—i.e. the dreaded “rounding” lesson in Math for the little ones, up to Calculus for the high schoolers.
The constant ongoing evaluation from administrators—both formal and informal—sharpen all of their skills.
In short, they’re professionals, and should be treated with the respect that professionals deservce, and not have their years of experience equated to inches in their height, and essentially told that those years MEAN NOTHING. What a slap in the face!
If the idea that teachers improve with experience were not so, the websites of the expensive private schools would not tout the decades of teaching experience that their staff brings to the job.
Deasy taught two years at a military school back in the 1980’s. That’s the sum of his own experience, so perhaps he’s intimidated by those with decades of experience… as well as carrying out his corporate masters’ marching orders in targeting veteran teachers.
LikeLike
This video stirs my indignation. I know the type of person Deasy is, and I hate that type of person.
LikeLike
Ellen, a better solution is to make that deal and get him out before the Oct 21st board meeting. The BOE does not like confrontational meetings but believe me, the 21st meeting will be a doozie. If the BOE does’t see that this rogue superintendent does not have the best interests of Los Angeles Unified in mind when he testifies against the district he supposedly runs, then the BOE is crazy. This is the second time he has testified against LAUSD. The BOE should know he has to go and the public should not have to emphasize this obvious fact. He is vindictive, mean, and bullying. BOE, he just slapped you in the face and is daring you to do anything about it. Don’t be wussies.
LikeLike
As ususal…I agree with you Paula.
LikeLike
I haven’t been here in a while… and
wow, things are kinda heating up…
Did Deasy really compare the length
of a teacher’s career to “height”?
And during a TV interview no less?
Wow… what a complete imbecile!
This is an example of the caliber of
Deasy’s intellect? I can’t believe
this “height” comparison hasn’t gotten
more coverage, or an article about it
all by itself.
Is that one of “Dr.” Deasy’s brilliant
insights that guides him as transforms
education in Los Angeles?
I guess what they say about him is true…
He really did get his PhD. out of a
Crackerjack box.
That host was no Mensa candidate, either.
He should have jumped all over that.
PBS must be hittin’ the skids.
Good arguments refuting him, Jack…
LikeLike
BREAKING – Radio show about Deasy’s future that just aired
PANEL:
— Karin Klein, Editor, L.A. Times
— Steve Zimmer, LAUSD Board Member
— Alex Caputo-Pearl, UTLA President
— Antonia Hernandez, Pres./CEO California Community Foundation
Link and listen to a replay of it here:
http://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/which-way-la/will-superintendent-john-deasy-pass-or-fail?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+kcrw%2Fww+%28Which+Way%2C+LA%3F%29
LikeLike
Jack Covey, please stop cluttering the comments with multiple postings of the same thing and with long comments that you posted previously many times. If you continue to clutter the comment section with these duplicate comments, I will have to block you.
LikeLike
Deasy is out of control. Please, LAUSD board, do the right thing and send this grotesque packing.
LikeLike
OMG I you are right, he escaped from the psychic landscape of Flannery oConnor . You are brilliant. I thought maybe Dickens meets Nathaniel West ,post madern Fagen in the Day of the Locust
a good superintendent is hard to find…
LikeLike
Here’s some video showing how LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy “honors” his LAUSD teaching staff:
LAUSD Substitute Teacher Patrena Shankling’s job required her to follow the lesson plans that the permanent teacher—for whom she was subbing—left for her. Indeed, failing to do so would lead to her being written up and fired, a fact that Superintendent Deasy ignored when Ms. Shankling later pointed it out to him.
Superintendent Deasy came in unannounced while Ms. Shenkling was doing what was required of her and following the plan. Superintendent Deasy did not announce himself, or who who he was, of what he wanted. She couldn’t recognize him from Adam… so after he was verbally abusing her and upsetting her students for a while, she did what she or any teacher—permanent or sub—was allowed to do as the head of the classroom with any stranger who wanders in to the room and starts raving like an a—hole:
She asked him to leave.
Public humiliation is barred by the UTLA contract. No administrator—not even the Superintendent—can reprimand someone in front of students, staff, parents, and/or whomever, and a grievance can be filed against that person, which, if upheld, will remain permanently in that person’s file as a formal admonishment.
(Since Ms. Shenkling was fired that same day—unlike permanent teachers like myself, subs can be fired at will—she no longer had any standing to file such a grievance. Speaking at this Board meeting was her only recourse at this point.)
That’s why then-UTLA-president Warren Fletcher (who subbed for about half of his 30 year teaching career, by the way) brought up Ms. Shankling, a fellow substitute, to recount her story at this public and televised Board meeting.
One other subtlety that needs mentioning.
At the time of Ms. Shankling’s testimony, Superintendent Deasy was engaging in a smear campaign against Dr. Richard Vladovic, the LAUSD Board president, and also a former teacher/administrator who was an opponent of Superintendent Deasy and much of what Deasy—and Deasy’s corporate backers—wanted Superintendent Deasy to execute.
Initially, Superintendent Deasy heard Vladovic was likely going to be voted in as the next LAUSD Board President—due to the results of spring 2013 elections where Monica Ratliff and Steve Zimmer defeated their corporate reform-allied opponents.
Upon learning of Vladovic’s imminent ascendancy to the LAUSD Board Presidency, Superintendent Deasy threatened to resign (Deasy does that a lot, by the way… though strangely, he never follows through). This signaled Superintendent Deasy’s corporate backers to pressure the Board not to vote in Vladovic as president.
When this fake resignation threat ploy and resulting pressure failed, Deasy leaked confidential documents of investigations of Vladovic for Vladovic’s alleged verbal abusive treatment of his staff, and another for sexual harassment of other staff. These occurred years earlier, and the investigations had were shown to be without merit, and thus, should have remained sealed.
Here’s the kicker: the woman—then and now—making the accusations was Deasy’s current personal secretary… a fact that leaked out.
Pure coincidence?
Anyway, this slime job failed as well, and the Board voted Vladovic in as president.
Here’s the deal—the ones beating the drum loudest that Vladovic was an abusive harasser and unfit to be Board president—were Deasy’s two allies on the Board, corporate reform stooges Tamar Galatzan and Monica Garcia. In doing so, these two are ostensibly standing up for the rights of employees to be free from workplace abuse, and for those victims to be able to speak up for themselves after they’ve been abused.
Well, when a vote comes where these two will decide whether Ms. Shankling will be allowed to speak up FOR HERSELF, about the abuse she suffered AT THE HANDS OF DEASY, and the chair Vladovic asks…
at 02:45
“All opposed?”
Ms. Galatzan and Ms. Garcia then thrust their hands up without blinking an eye. Apparently, their principles in support victims of harassment don’t extend to victims of Superintendent Deasy.
(For reference in the video, Vladovic the chair, is dead center. Superintendant Deasy is to Vladovic’s immediate right. Just to the right of Deasy are his corporate reform allies, Ms. Garcia and Ms. Galatzan. Watch as these twi thrust their hands up at 02:46 in opposition to Ms. Shankling being allowed an extension to speak.)
For Ms. Shankling to confront Deasy right to Deasy’s face required a lot of courage, as this is a very scary, intimidating person, with that reputation preceeding him. (Ask anyone who works in LAUSD’s Beaudry Building, its downtown headquarters.)
Also, Vladovic, citing a time constraint a moment earlier, is not going to allow Ms. Shankling to speak more than 3 minutes, but asks to see if anyone will make a motion to allow her an extension.
at: 02:30
Instantly, Monica Ratliff—the teacher on leave to serve on the Board, and who had just left the classroom three months earlier to serve on the Board—quickly says, “Ill make a motion. I want to hear the story.”
(Ratliff barely won her election by about 1,000 votes out of 80,000… even though she had only $44,000 to spend, and her corporate-reform-allied opponent spent $3 million that he got from his backers… Thank God for democracy, as her opponent, had he won, would have been under strict orders from his corporate masters not to say what Ms. Ratliff said and did in this circumstance.)
The late Marguerite LaMotte—this opponent of corporate reform passed away just a month after this meeting—seconds the motion.
LaMotte further points out that, throughout the meeting, countless astroturf / corporate reform spokespersons were allowed to speak on behalf of keeping Deasy… and allowed to go beyond the 3-minute limit for speakers, so those Board members sympathetic to Ms. Shankling should think it fair that Ms. Shankling be allowed the same opportunity.
Watch this video again at:
LikeLike
Watching and listening to Shankling’s testimony strikes a chord:
01:45 – 04:53
————————————
PATRENA SHANKLING:
“Before I could respond to his question, he began with what amounted a tirade of statements, including that ‘the assignment was a total waste of instructional time!’
“He said that ‘the assignment was disrespectful to our students!’ and that ‘I should be ashamed to give such an assignment to these students!’
“He was extremely agitated. and I felt that it was very important to de-escalate the situation, not escalate it. We were in a classroom with students. I was trying to calm him. It seemed everything I said to calm him was just escalating the situation, and this was in front of the students.
“In addition, I was really trying to understand how and why this was happening. I mean, it made no sense at all.
“… ”
“… it kept going on and on. This was ridiculous. I then reminded him that I was sub teacher, and that I was following the actual teacher’s instructions.
“He abruptly interrupted, scolding me even louder than he had before, stating that “it did not matter that I was a substitute teacher!”, nor that “the teacher had left this assignment!”
“He resumed the tirade, re-stating that “this was a total waste of instructional time!”” that I was “disrespecting students!”, that “the students must be respected!”, that I should “be ashamed as a teacher to give such an assignment to seniors!”
“At some point, he asked “Why aren’t the students doing actual work?”
“He immediately followed this question with the statement that “we had wasted two days of instruction!” This was the second day of class.
“At this point, I recognized that explaining the purpose of this assignment AGAIN was NOT going to get through to him, again was not going to get through to him, and that any further attempt to de-escalate the situation was futile… ”
AND ON IT GOES…
————————
ANY person who has EVER been in an abusive relationship (with an abusive spouse, parent, boyfriend, etc.)—or in close proximity to an abuser in full tirade, as either the victim or a bystander—knows and can recall EXACTLY the scenario Ms. Shankling is describing.
This is textbook abusive, controlling, vicious behavior. It’s sick.
As with an abusive husband, the bullying abuser has no desire whatsoever for the victim to achieve her goal of “de-escalating the situation.”
Where’s the fun in THAT?
That would prevent the abuser from getting off on the abuse and control the bully that enjoys meting out so much.
Also, in invoking the feeling of “shame”… “You should be ashamed of yourself!”… is one of the abuser’s favorite tools in his arsenal. It pushes the victim’s “Guilt Button”. It’s what’s called and “thought-stopping cliche” or “thought-terminating cliche,” to mentally pummel the victim into submission.
As to Ms. Shankling’s attempts to calm Deasy… well, survivors of abusive people know that nothing will calm an abuser who’s “in the zone”, so to speak. They have a need to inflict emotional pain that must be satisfied, and they will cease abusing until it is.
Deasy must go.
LikeLike
Wow… that’s video is a stunner…
What’s really sad is the example that Deasy set
for those children in the classroom. Kids copy
adult behavior, both consciously and unconsciously…
the good that we do… and the bad that we do…
The idea that kids witnessed that from the
highest official in LAUSD is truly horrifying…
and to use the words of that Vergara judge…
Deasy’s abominable behavior “stuns the conscience.”
LikeLike
The L.A. Times even covered the incident with Ms. Shankling and Superintendent Deasy:
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/apr/10/local/la-me-0410-banks-20120410
In the article, Shankling is described as:
————————-
“One of the teachers she’s subbed for wrote a letter of support that reads like a report card: “Ms. Shankling is … conscientious, committed, competent … punctual, well-groomed … an excellent record-keeper who understands the importance of accuracy.”
————————————–
Here’s more (NOTE… when prompted, Deasy doesn’t apologize in the least, or even acknowledge that his abusive behavior violates LAUSD’S Code of Conduct against public humiliation):
———————
“If Deasy thinks the exercise shortchanges students, ‘he could have asked me to step outside to talk about it,’ (Ms. Shankling) said. “The problem was not the assignment. The problem was his behavior.
” ‘He’s a bully, to walk in there and disrespect a teacher the way he did. It’s so easy for him to talk about what students don’t have. A lot of what they don’t have is respect.’ ”
“Deasy’s not apologizing for his reaction. His frustration had reached the boiling point:
” ‘I’m sitting with students who have not dropped out, who have not quit, who are the most likely to go to college. And I’m watching them copying rules that were handed to them into a notebook. I struggle with that. I struggle with it a lot.’
” ‘We have a shortened school year, and so many [other] issues,’ he said. ‘This is not the way we want to use the time for students. Teaching the conventions of writing might have been a better use of their time in class.’ ”
—————————-
LikeLike
Jack…I was there and sitting only feet from Mrs. Shankling as she gave her painful testimony….with Warren Fletcher standing at her side. The BoE tried to quiet them, but he insisted she be heard.
LikeLike
Jack…all the hard faces behind Ms. Shanklng, including the yellow daisy woman, were the bussed in actors who got to spend over 15 minutes each to tell the BoE how wonderful Deasy it. They first spoke about 5 minutes in Spanish, and each had an interpreter who spoke and translated in great detail for about 10 minutes. It was all sham. I was in the second row, in shock that this display of phony testimony was taking place. These same women spoke to me in good enough English as we waited on the sidewalk for hours before the meeting.
I fear greatly that it will happen again on Oct. 21 if teachers and others do not come en masse to the BoE meeting and demand to be heard. Last year only about 6 anti Deasy folks bothered to show up, and if Warren Fletcher had not DEMANDED that the Board hear Shankling, they would have tossed her out. The Bd. police chief stood in front of me the whole time and I thought he was going to escort her to the exit. There was a phalanx of police lined up to see to it that there was no interference with this major FIX as the speakers forms were handed only to the actors. A situation so ugly and so obvious.
I cannot imagine how anything could have been more undemocratic and wrote about it point by point, on this and other blog sites. it was a disgrace and the BoE members should be ashamed to have participated.
Sadly today, many teachers are pissing and moaning online amongst themselves about the big bad union. They seem unable to stay focused on thier enemy, Deasy, and fighting in unison to get him removed, and I am wondering if there are shills among them who are trying to deflect away from the issue of firing Deasy.
LikeLike
Not all the Board members embarrassed themselves.
Vladovic unilaterally asked for a motion to hear the lady…
LaMotte made the motion, and Ratliff insisted
on hearing her… and I guess seconded LaMotte’s
motion…
Those two who opposed the lady speaking,
however, were a disgrace.
Also, I think Deasy has a military background,
or taught in military school, or both. I forget.
That might explain things a bit…
Perhaps Deasy thinks he’s R. Lee Ermey from FULL
METAL JACKET.
If I were in charge, I’d discipline Deasy the way
Anthony Hopkins did as Captain Bligh did
in THE BOUNTY.
“Mr. Deasy, you will now kiss the gunner’s
daughter… Take him below for the makings… ”
What’s “kiss the gunner’s daughter”? What
are “the makings”?
I’ve always wondered what-the-hell Bligh met
by those euphemisms for a disciplinary
punishment.
Anyone got a clue?
Also, maybe there’s a racial component to this.
Somebody on here said Deasy hails from Boston.
Boston has a lot of white racists/ (and non-racists,
too, so go easy on me, any Bostonians out there.)
Perhaps Deasy’s white privilege, or his auto-pilot or
or true self kicked in when he saw an African-American
lady with dyed hair and extensions in charge of
something. How uppity! And what poor breeding
and low class deportment and grooming. Someone
who looks like her has no plaice in a classroom.
(That’s in Deasy’s mind, not mine. I think she
looks fine.)
His default entitlement might have indicated
that she was fair game, so Deasy felt that he
could just figuratively beat up on for fun.
LikeLike
Can this guy already!! Of course the fear is then that he could end up the Superintendent of some other school district, like mine.
LikeLike
If LAUSD is anything like my Calfornia urban district/school, the reason that these “service periods” exist is that there is not enough money to fund a full schedule for every student. I have six– SIX!! teaching assistants this year. Many of them wanted another academic elective. We are not offering a 3rd year of Spanish this year due to budget constraints and there aren’t enough spots in other electives. I try to give my TAs, all good students, tasks that will give them some responsibility and help them bolster their skills. Some are routine clerical jobs that I would otherwise be doing myself like filing, but others are things like doing research and writing to help keep my “careers in science” and “science in the news” bulletin boards up to date and helping the younger students in class.
TA periods should not be eliminated. I learned a lot about teaching doing that as a top student in high school (taking 4 AP classes as a senior, taking college classes in the afternoon but needing a 5th class to be considered a full-time student.) But the fact that with overcrowded classes I have come to rely on TAs to help me with things because I don’t have enough time to do them myself, and the students don’t really have any other class choices. We used to have even more proliferation of TAs when the day had 7 periods but we were only funded for 6 classes/student. We fixed it through changing the schedule to 6 periods which also increased instructional minutes per class, and it worked out. Creative scheduling is one solution to not enough academic offerings for students, but it would be far better to reduce overcrowding/increase funding to hire more teachers to offer more classes rather than taking away the legitimate chance for some students to learn skills or volunteer in the classroom. But obviously one of those things requires money and the other just requires an opinion.
LikeLike
They also exist for medical reasons. When students cannot do 7th, 8th, 9th, or 10th grade PE, they sometimes stick them in one of these classes. Or they exist because students take a zero/seventh period (before or after school) and during the middle they need a class filler so students are not wandering around on or off campus.
I suppose if parents didn’t want these types of classes, they would say something. However, from my personal experience parents and the students appreciate it when the school tries to work around their scheduling conflicts or health concerns. I guess Deasy doesn’t really want what parents and students want here.
LikeLike
So, sounds like Deasy could deal with this in-house, but what’s the fun in that?
This dude just loves to waste taxpayer money. Looks like he found another opportunity. I am simply cannot wait to hear what a Hero the Man is tomorrow in the Opinion of the LA Times.
Ick ick ick. This all stinks to high heaven. Will October 21 make it stop?
Or are these childish theatrics a prelude to one more year of horror?
Does anyone on the BOE care about children?
We will find out what they are made of soon.
LikeLike
Let’s get a huge turnout at the BoE meeting on Oct. 21 and raise all voices of the real educators, students, and parents…and taxpayers. No more manipulation by Broad and his other Wall Street cohorts Like the Editorial Board of the LA Times.
This time the BoE should heed the advice of the rapidly growing, and angry, group of citizen acitivists who will not put up with them again colluding to scam and over rule the people, as they did last Oct. 29…. NO more orchestrated street theater, NO more bussed in actors with daisies behind their ears taking up all the speakers forms so no one who was anti Deasy had a voice at that infamous BoE meeting.
This time we must have a real protest against the Broad/Deasy regime of mismanagement for profits to sweetheart connections. Deasy wasted hundreds of millions of tax dollars and was a destructive leader. He MUST go.
And NO more Eli Broad, mandated hiring of misfits like Deasy.
Many of us want to see Jackie Goldberg appointed interim superintendent. Her sterling academic creds, teaching experience, BoE membership, elected City Council membership, and her good sense and fortitude, make her an excellent person to start cleaning up the filth that permeates LAUSD.
LikeLike
Jackie would be great. She’s taught, served on the BOE, been in Sacramento, and worked in teacher training. She’s hugely knowledgable.
LikeLike
The man is a fraud and a crook. The children and taxpayers of Los Angeles deserve better.
LikeLike
In case you didn’t see this spot-on commentary on Vergara by Carl Cohn:
http://edsource.org/2014/whats-wrong-with-the-vergara-ruling/68077#.VDQ-UvldXeI
IMO, Cohn would be a fabulous Supt for LAUSD.
LikeLike
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cynthia-liu/why-didnt-lausd-perform-a_b_5916486.html
Read this well documented article on Huff Post by Cynthia Liu…another coffin nail for Deasy
LikeLike
Ellen I am in LA that day lI have a hearing in the morning but should get out before noon . I will bring refreshments .
LikeLike
You’re on, Rene. We can meet and talk afterwards.
LikeLike
And now…here is a note to me today from Robert Skeels about Broad/Deasy and the LA Times choice for Ca. State Superintendent, Marshal Tuck.
“Ellen: If you’d like to forward this to your various lists and networks, feel free to do so.
It’s a big thing, and I had totally forgotten it. When I was running for school board an AIDS group reached out to me and explained the whole situation with health classes. PLAS, ahem… Marshall Tuck wanted the funds to be used for some software thing to improve math scores. To Tuck wringing a few AYP points out of students was more important than their very lives. When I saw the CA Syphilis #2 sign on a bus bench by People’s College of Law, it reminded me of Tuck’s stupid #CAbytheNumbers campaign where he rails against the state of CA schools (not mentioning his were among the worst of course). Suddenly I remembered that he had shuttered all health education at PLAS, and I knew what I needed to do. I’m supposed be studying for my contracts formation test and reviewing for negligence torts, but I had to run with this idea when it was still fresh in my head.
He defends his vile actions in this LA Times piece http://articles.latimes.com/…/la-me-lausd-health-20120521″
” California #2 in Syphilis. Banker Marshall Tuck shut down all PLAS Health Classes! #LAUSD #CAbytheNumbers pic.twitter.com/fUGiAw8GS0
04:21 AM – 05 Oct 14
https://twitter.com/rdsathene/status/518617032820944896 ”
“At a time with Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD) running rampant, business banker Marshall Tuck shut down all HEALTH EDUCATION classes at the schools he managed, putting students’ health at serious risk. Tuck says he has a “kids first agenda,” but his actions proved otherwise. When bankers run schools, students‘ lives take a back seat to corporate profits. Stop banker Marshall Tuck’s agenda! Vote for the teacher instead.
http://j.mp/TUCK_FAIL | http://j.mp/TUCK_FACTS | http://j.mp/TUCK_TRUTH | http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/20/local/la-me-lausd-health-20120521”
——————————————————————————————
Note from me…..Robert Skeels is the best historian of the shambles that is LAUSD. He will be a great Civil Rights attorney when he graduates from law school.
(Hang in Robert….I remember my first year, and contracts and torts were two of the toughest courses. All down hill next year with criminal law, wills and trusts, and legal ethics. Ellen)
Vote for Tom Torlakson.
__._,_.___
——————————————————————————–
Posted by: “Robert D. Skeels”
LikeLike
“Negotiate a departure agreement”? Doesn’t the board simply have the power to fire him? If I caused my employer that much of a headache, they would not be negotiating a departure agreement with me.
LikeLike
For your convenience, here’s the text of the two
the two union presidents’ letter TO THE 7
LAUSD SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS,
expressing their outrage over Deasy’s
defiance of the Board’s directive:
(those union presidents are then-President
of the UTLA teachers’ union Warren Fletcher,
and his equivalent for administrators/principals/
asst. principals, Judy Perez, President,
Associated Administrators of Los Angeles”
(AALA)
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“July 10, 2013
“Honorable Richard Vladovic,
—President, LAUSD Board of Education
“Honorable Marguerite LaMotte,
—Board Member, District 1
“Honorable Monica Garcia,
—Board Member, District 2
“Honorable Tamar Galatzan,
—Board Member, District 3
“Honorable Steve Zimmer,
—Board Member, District 4
“Honorable Bennett Kayser,
—Board Member, District 5
“Honorable Monica Ratliff,
—Board Member, District 6
“Dear Board Members:
“We are writing on behalf of the members of our two
organizations: United Teachers Los Angeles, which
represents the 36,000 classroom teachers and health
and human services professionals of LAUSD, and
Associated Administrators of Los Angeles, exclusive
representative for over 2,300 certificated and
classified administrators within the District.
“We wish to raise a concern about recent statements
by Superintendent John Deasy, related to his
obligation to abide by the policy positions and
directives of the Board of Education.
“On June 20, the ‘LA School Report,’ published a
story entitled, ‘Defiant Deasy Says He’ll Push
Targeted Spending Plan Anyway.’ In that article
Mr. Deasy clearly indicates that it is his intention
to circumvent the Board vote on use of new state
LCFF monies.
“Specifically, Mr. Deasy is quoted as stating that,
” ‘The Board voted down the directive. . . ,’ referring
to Ms. Galatzan’s recent local spending resolution,
” ‘[But] they can’t stop me from doing it; we’re doing
it anyway.’ ”
“To date, we have not been able to locate
any report that Mr. Deasy has disavowed these
public statements, nor has he indicated that he was
misquoted.
“The Superintendent is an employee of the District,
and is legally required to operate ‘under the
control of the Board.’ The California courts have
recognized that a Superintendent does not
‘exercise independent powers’ (Main vs.
Claremont, Unified School District, 161
CalApp 2d189, 204).
“As the presidents of two organizations charged
with representing and bargaining for a large
proportion of District employees, we do not
expect that Mr. Deasy’s statements and policy
positions will always align with those of our
respective organizations.
“However, as both District employees and as
taxpayers, we do expect that the
Superintendent will, at all times, discharge his
duties in a manner that is consistent with his
role as the District’s chief executive officer.
Statements and conduct to the contrary can
only erode public confidence in the Board
and the District.
“California law clearly places both the power
and the responsibility for ultimate leadership
of the District in the hands of its elected
governing board. Regardless of Mr. Deasy’s
motives or intentions, no district, and no
community, is served when this democratic
authority is undermined.
“Please contact either of us if you have any
questions. We are thankful for your time and
attention to this matter.
“Respectfully,
“Warren Fletcher
President,
United Teachers Los Angeles
“Judith Perez
President,
Associated Administrators of Los Angeles”
————————————–
————————————–
Did this letter have any impact on Deasy’s
defiant refusal to lower class size?
Nope… it never happened to this day.
LikeLike
Does anyone know the details of the ACLU lawsuit regarding Jefferson High’s scheduling problems that Deasy is supporting? I met a teacher who taught at Jefferson last year. She lost her position this year and said that they made big staff changes and replaced the admin who she really respected and she didn’t know why. I would think if the district made those staffing changes, then Deasy would be responsible for the chaos created by clearing house.
LikeLike
But Deasy believes in no excuses. That means that if he scrambles the staff and implements a defective computer program that puts kindergarteners on high school rosters that is no excuse for the underlings on the school site. None of it is his responsibility!
LikeLike
I taught at Jefferson for 17 years, leaving in 2002. The kids face many challenges, but are great. That said, the district does not value them or their families. I often said that the school faced malign neglect from Beaudry. An example: the campus riots about a decade ago occurred shortly after an emergency meeting at the school between staff and “suits” from Beaudry, because those on campus knew trouble was brewing, fomented by outside gang forces. Staff begged for more security aide hours, but were dismissed. The district then blamed the school for the riots. Deasy has starved Jefferson. Despite its proud heritage (Ralph Bunche, Alvin Ailey and others), LAUSD wants to offload Jeff. Of that I am sure.
LikeLike
Oh… and here’s the earlier L.A. SCHOOL
REPORT article that includes the
comments from Deasy about defying
the board (and includes Deasy’s
asinine “hire every human being on
the West Coast” line:
http://laschoolreport.com/defiant-deasy-says-hell-continue-to-push-local-spending-plan/
————————————————
“Defiant Deasy Says He’ll Push
Targeted Spending Plan Anyway
“Posted on June 20, 2013 1:28 pm
“by Hillel Aron
“During Tuesday’s seemingly endless meeting, the LAUSD School Board postponed Board member Tamar Galatzan’s resolution to have new State education funds flow to schools with large numbers of low-income and English language learning students and approved Board member Bennett Kayser’s resolution calling for the district to hire more staff across the board.
“The votes seemed like a loss for LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy, who had floated the idea of having new funding flow where it was needed most (along the lines of the Galatzan resolution) and had opposed the idea of hiring more staff.
“But on Wednesday a defiant Deasy told LA School Report that his plan for future spending will include the spirit of Galatzan’s resolution anyway:
“ ‘The Board voted down the directive to have me come and do it,’ said Deasy, referring to Galatzan’s local spending resolution. ‘ [But] they can’t stop me from doing it; we’re doing it anyway. If they had voted to prevent me from doing it… well they didn’t think of that.’
“The Superintendent explained that the future spending plan the Board ordered him to produce will comply with the Board-passed Kayser resolution regarding staffing (or as Deasy derisively called it, a ‘directive to hire every human being on the West Coast’ ) but will also include some form of the local spending plan he and Galaztan have been advocating.
————————————————
There’s a great COMMENT from Robert Skeels
accompanying and BELOW this article:
—————————————————–
ROBERT SKEELS:
“Once again this Superintendent proves he values profits over pupils. Rather than address the abjectly overflowing class sizes that have students sitting on the floor and windowsills, Deasy chooses to direct funds to Rupert Murdoch’s DIBBELS®, Laurene Powell Jobs’ iPads, and John Fallon’s textbooks. Students need access to books and the world of literature, not distracting toys designed for playing Angry Birds.
“Deasy was already shunting Title I and Title III funds to corporate profits, and LCFF essentially gives him a blank check to stuff more money into the pockets of the people that put him in power. Meanwhile LAUSD students are denied an education that would provide them the critical thinking skills to change a sick world that would allow a former Gates Foundation executive to run an urban school district.”
—————————
… followed up by another great comment
from one “Chance LaRue”:
—————————————
CHANCE LaRUE:
“This is all true, Mr. Skeels, but Deasy wants to destroy LAUSD. This is his agenda, because Gates, Broad, Walton and the rest of these greed corporate thugs have more than trillion dollar signs .in their eyes as they commandeer public education. They see a next generation of compliant consumers and wage slaves. Everything these people do is about enriching themselves. They sport black holes, where their souls ought to be.”
LikeLike
So is it a 2% increase in graduation or a 12% increase?
Do all districts and states and the federal government just NOT count the kids who go to alternate schools/programs when they’re not on track to graduate? Is this a common practice, excluding them? When Duncan says “80%!” is it really 70%, as a practical matter?
LikeLike
Chiara: the charterites/privatizers often use numbers & stats with a casual disregard for their ethical use.
An extensive excerpt from comments I made on this blog, 10-4-14, referencing an article by Howard Blume in the LATIMES. Said article can be accessed at—
Link: http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-1004-lausd-grad-rates-20141003-story.html
[reprint of previous comment START]
From the article linked by the owner of this blog, Deasy “hailed ‘a historic high.’” Except when you take 77% and make it 67%, then a 12% increase becomes a 2% increase.
Think I’m exaggerating? From the article: “The district’s graduation rate of 77% for the 2013-14 school year was 12 percentage points better than last year, the largest one-year increase under a tracking system that dates from the 2006-07 school year.” Immediately following is the assertion that “[t]he improvement is especially impressive because ongoing statistical gains typically become more difficult to sustain and surpass year after year.”
But the numerical house of cards now collapses:
[start quote]
But the good news comes with a substantial caveat. The rate is calculated based on students enrolled in comprehensive high schools, and it leaves out students who transfer to alternative programs — which frequently include those most at risk of dropping out.
For example, Bernstein Senior High in Hollywood had a graduation rate of 62%; Alonzo, the “option” school on the corner of that property, had a graduation rate of 5.2%. Santee Education Complex, south of downtown, had a rate of 68%; Kahlo High School, the alternative campus on its perimeter, had a rate of 10%.
Once the alternative campuses are factored in, L.A. Unified’s rate drops to 67% — much less impressive but still surpassing what the district has accomplished in recent history. The previous year’s rate of 65% also did not include students in such programs.
[end quote]
So it’s an “historic high” when 2% becomes 12% through redefinition of terms that shamelessly favor the biggest educrat currently under fire in the self-proclaimed “education reform” firmament. How about an “historic high” of shameless self-aggrandizement that leaves this PhD with 9 credits with more egg on his face than “Dr.” Steve Perry and “Dr.” Terence Carter. *Aside: since when does “comes with a substantial caveat” substitute for the more accurate phrase “is eviscerated with a mountain of facts and logic that undermines the entire assertion and turns it on its head”?
[reprint of previous comment END]
Simple question: is this the sort of behavior that high education officials should be modeling for the hundreds of thousands of LAUSD students?
“I reject that mind-set.” [Michelle Rhee]
Even a broken clock is right twice a day…
😎
LikeLike
Breaking up is hard to do….
LikeLike
So, we see a pattern of Deasy refusing to follow the directives of the BOE. Does he get written up or even fired since insubordination is grounds for firing. No. How long will the BOE allow DZ to bully them into submission. Again it comes down to the public interest or the interests of outside moneyed deformers. If I were the BOE, I would fire him before the Oct 21st meeting and if he hollers, indict him for malfeasance and fraud. Its the highway or prison buddy. And by the way, the old excuse of just following orders won’t work for you. Yes you were following orders from the moneyed deformers but they won’t be able to save you. Get out and get out now!
LikeLike
Please tell me in what universe would it be recommended for a superintendent to literally declare war on both the teachers union AND the board of education???? Let’s not forget his attempted imposition of AGT, a version of VAM. Then, his glee at being asked to provide evidence against teachers in the Vergara lawsuit. More recently, he hired a lawyer who deals with cases of bid rigging and also requested emails of board members.
And don’t forget the torturing of administrators and teachers due to the forced imposition of MiSiS on all schools.
At what point will the board members end his history of attacks on the very people who he is required to collaborate with?????? Sure, they won’t always agree, but that doesn’t mean that it’s okay to destroy anyone who stands in his way to impose these failed policies and technologies on the whole district.
At this point, he seems focused on attacking and destroying everyone and anyone who stands up to his failed policies. I guess he thinks that the best defense is an offense. Perhaps this is the only thing he can do at this point. However, with Blume’s latest article, it’s not hard to see how this policy is catching up with him.
LikeLike
I’m so sick and Deasy—in the lawsuit, and
in general with comments like “lifting children
out of poverty—claiming he’s all about
the children.
Here’s a blast from the recent past (July 2013)
regarding Deasy failing to do something to
improve education for kids—in this case,
lower class size, as directed to him in a 5-2
vote of the pre-Ratliff board:
Before you read this, here’s Board Member
Zimmer’s impassioned speech that preceded
the vote to lower class size:
Zimmer points out the hypocrisy of Deasy—
and his two allies on the school board,
Tamar Galatzan & Monica Garcia
On the one hand, they champion
the charter schools/chains that
financially back Deasy, Galatzan, and
Garcia, and that they claim are so
superior to traditional public schools
with unions, AND THEIR MAIN FEATURE
IS LOWER CLASS SIZE. The charters tout
this on their web pages, that Zimmer, in a
Pacino-esque moment, starts throwing
around the room.
And yet… Deasy, Galatzan, and Garcia
fight tooth and nail from funding the
same lowering of class size for those
traditional public schools, effectively
tying one hand behind those schools’
and teachers’ backs, and denying those
students the advantages of lower class size.
They’re rigging the game in favor of their
beloved charters who bankrolled their
campaigns.
They do this because even though they
know full well that traditional public school
students would benefit from this—the way
the students in their beloved charters do—
their ultimate goal is to starve the traditional
public schools into failure, and weaken
and wreck the teachers’ union, as they will
have less members, less dues, and a
membership angry at their leaders, and
fighting among themselves for less
classroom positions.
Deasy, Galatzan, and Garcia are following
their corporate masters’ marching orders…
and doing so to the detriment of the students
in tradiional public schools.
Even after this motion was passed, DEASY
publicly went on L.A. SCHOOL REPORT
and defiantly said, “I’m not doing it… You
can’t make me.” He derided the plan
to lower class size as “a directive to hire
every human being on the West Coast.”
Here’s Ravitch’s coverage at the time:
============================
Deasy Defies New L.A. Board Majority
By dianeravitch
July 12, 2013 //
When the Los Angeles school board prepared to elect a new president, Superintendent John Deasy let it be known that he might resign if Richard Vladovic won the election.
Vladovic won by 5-2. The two nay votes came from outgoing president Monica Garcia and her ally Tamar Galatzan.
Before the election, there were rumors that Vladovic was under investigation for verbally abusing board employees, and newspaper accounts suggested that Deasy was trying to derail his candidacy. That did not help their working relationship.
The new board passed a resolution endorsing class size reduction, a measure opposed by Deasy. Deasy favored a motion by Galatzan proposing more money for high-needs students, which was postponed by the board.
In a show of defiance, Deasy said he would comply with the resolution that was not passed because the board did not forbid him from doing it. Deasy opposes reduced class size because it will mean hiring more staff.
This is what he told the LA School Report (a pro-corporate reform newspaper):
————————————
JOHN DEASY: “The Board voted down the directive to have me come and do it,” said Deasy, referring to Galatzan’s local spending resolution. “[But] they can’t stop me from doing it; we’re doing it anyway. If they had voted to prevent me from doing it… well they didn’t think of that.”
———————————–
“The Superintendent explained that the future spending plan the Board ordered him to produce will comply with the Board-passed Kayser resolution regarding staffing (or as Deasy derisively called it, a “directive to hire every human being on the West Coast”) but will also include some form of the local spending plan he and Galaztan have been advocating.”
When the unions learned that Deasy would ignore the board vote, they wrote a letter to the board.
They raised the question about why Deasy intended to flout the authority of the board he works for.
With a number of strong wills converging, this will be worth watching.
Bottom line: How long will Deasy last as an employee of a board whose leadership he does not like or trust, and how long will the board tolerate insubordination by Deasy?
———————
Here’s Zimmer’s classic class size speech at:
LikeLike
Sleazy Deasy shows his utter, unfathomable mendacity and ignorance once again. He’s the bloody superintendent! It is totally within his power to send a team of counselors and other admins to Jefferson High to help them get students into the correct classes. Instead, Deasy writes a letter to the state saying he supports the students. Mind boggling.
However, sending a team would have been an admission that the MISIS computer system was rolled out (on his orders) before it had been tested and before it was ready. He would have had to admit that he was in error, something he is utterly incapable of ever doing.
The board needs to show this narcissistic bully to the exit. The Times needs to start reading Blume’s reporting and stop supporting Deasy’s failed “leadership.”
LikeLike