Mr. Adam Urbanski, this is the program that you put in place 20+ years ago. Your actions (rather than speech) will uncover your true agenda.

“The career ladder followed by Rochester School District teachers for decades and replicated in districts across the country does not hold teachers to high standards, shelters underperformers and undermines principals’ ability to manage their schools”

“Careers in Teaching”, introduces in 1987, the program created huge raises written into the district’s contract with teachers. It gave them the 40% increase and has been a failure. It should be rescinded, along with the 40% raise.”

REPORT: Review of the Teacher Human Capital Work in the Rochester City School District

Report is scathing in criticism of Rochester schools
Mar. 9, 2011

The career ladder followed by Rochester School District teachers for decades and replicated in districts across the country does not hold teachers to high standards, shelters underperformers and undermines principals’ ability to manage their schools, according to a district-commissioned study obtained by the Democrat and Chronicle.
The findings were simultaneously derided by teachers and their union as flawed and hailed as a blueprint for change by Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard, who sent it to educators by e-mail Tuesday with a note that thanked them for their work but claimed, “We have not kept pace with the needs of our teachers as they progress in their careers.”
The study was scathing in its criticism of the school system on several fronts, referring to its human resources department as “fundamentally broken” and the quality of instruction as containing “little evidence of rigor.”
But it was the indictment of the so-called Career in Teaching program that generated the most buzz in city education circles and appeared to further erode relations between the district leadership and the teachers union, which are at an impasse in their contract negotiations.
“For years, CIT has been seen as this great program to strengthen teachers and make them more prepared,” Rochester school board President Malik Evans said. “If (this study) is saying that it is doing something different, I would definitely like to explore that further. That goes counterintuitive to what we thought.”
Introduced in 1987, the program created four tiers of teaching levels that ranged from intern to lead teacher and offered support for teachers at each level of their careers. The program, along with huge raises written into the district’s contract with teachers that year, quickly became the focus of national attention as a collaborative way for veteran teachers to mentor newcomers.
Just four years ago, the district trumpeted recognition of the program by the National Education Association.

The study, conducted by Rachel Curtis, an education consultant who formerly headed instruction in Boston Public Schools, found that teacher advancement in the program was essentially a rubber stamp defined by time served rather than performance.

It also found that the program’s review panel had too much authority to move teachers along and that its support system excluded principal input.

At the same time, the study, which Brizard said cost about $15,000, praised the program’s framework as a strong foundation to build upon.
Among the study’s recommendations were to better measure teacher improvement and have principals and the panel make joint decisions.

A phone message left late Tuesday for the president of the principals’ union, Deborah Ryder, was not immediately returned.
Rochester Teachers Association President Adam Urbanski called the criticism “shallow and myopic” and suggested the study was slanted to favor what he referred to as the “dictatorial, top-down” leadership style of Brizard, who has advocated for greater principal control in teacher hiring and firing.
“Brizard is determined to dismantle whatever reforms he found in Rochester that include any amount of teacher self-determination,” Urbanski said. “The purpose (of the study) was to essentially undermine this national model of a reform so that Brizard could replace it with something done to teachers rather than with teachers.”
In a telephone interview, Brizard said he released the study to educators without the fanfare of a news conference to avoid accusations of spinning the findings.
“(The program) was a national model. To still call it a national model 25 years later is a problem,” Brizard said. “Adam is so married to what he created that he can’t step back and see what’s good about it and what needs to be changed.”
He wrote in his e-mail that once teachers advance beyond the “intern” stage of their careers, “our system does little to provide them with meaningful feedback necessary to improve their practice.”
Brizard’s remarks inflamed tensions among some teachers, who recently approved a no-confidence vote in him.

“What he basically wrote was that we were once very good and now we’re not that good,” said David Wurz, a special education teacher at School of the Arts and a mentor who was interviewed for the study. “I thought it was very offensive.”
There were elements of the study to which both sides agreed, including the findings about the district’s human resources department, which the district has renamed “Human Capital Initiatives.”
The department is so dysfunctional that it is unable to maintain reliable information about teacher certification, hiring and assignments, according to the study.
Nor could the department provide accurate information about the rate of completion of teacher evaluations.

References in the study to teachers being preoccupied with the welfare of adults in the school system rather than student achievement and reluctant to accept accountability measures were dismissed by teachers and district officials alike as excessively harsh.
DANDREAT http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20110309/NEWS01/103090347/Report-scathing-criticism-Rochester-schools

From JohnQ.Public:

For all of you who have dared to question the huge raises given to the Teachers Union without any requirement of accountability or meaningful job performance, you’d better be ready for the attacks from the Teacher Union thugs. Daring to suggest the abolition of tenure or mentioning the fact that teachers are not full year employees, yet collect compensation packages as if they were, can expect the same old hackneyed responses from the militant Teacher Unionistas:

Education Choice Vouchers would provide a higher quality education for our children at a lower cost to taxpayers. And it would better reward the many good teachers while weeding out the far too many low quality teachers who are just marking time in the current system.