Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Nasty accusation
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 367455" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>Kathy, I need to clarify a few things.</p><p></p><p>First - I agree with you that if a teacher genuinely has suspicions, then it is her duty to deal with it. I said as much to the principal. I do feel she could have handled it better in so many ways, though, because I had been calling for almost a week and I think she kept putting off calling me back to discuss it because she knew it would be unpleasant. I agree that getting aggressive with her over it is futile and inappropriate (however much we might want to fantasise). What I have in mind must work better - we have to resolve this so SHE can accept and recognise that the results actually point to areas where difficult child 3 needs help with his work, in order to produce this standard more consistently. Cheating like this, especially for a difficult child who needs highly specialised help, would be an utterly stupid thing for me to do, as well as thoughtless and inconsiderate to all the superb efforts these teachers (including this one) have been putting in with difficult child 3, on a face to face basis. It would utterly devalue all their efforts but it would also make it almost impossible for difficult child 3 to get the help he needs. Some parents might work that way; but nobody at this school who has been there for any time, would get away with it for as long we difficult child 3 has been there. This teacher claims to have considerable experience of kids and their writing tasks. But the majority of those kids are PCs whose work is fairly representative of their overall capabilities. difficult child 3 is very different and I need his teachers to see his output as plainly and unadulterated as possible, so they can help him where he needs it. Added to which - difficult child 3 himself would refuse to be party to a deception and I am shocked ti teacher didn't already realise this.</p><p></p><p>As for the use of parents on promotions panels - it is actually embedded in the rules of our Dept of Ed. Laid down very strictly, all government schools must conform to this. But it is handled very professionally with a lot of checks and balances. I won't make specific reference to any people or positions because it would be contrary to the rules, but I can explain in general.</p><p>Basically, if a position (teaching or non-teaching) becomes vacant or is created (say, the school decides to create the position of a groundskeeper) then a panel must be formed to oversee the entire process. If the position is one of head teacher, then the panel convenor must be the principal or deputy. If the position is a lower ranking ("ordinary") teacher then the head teacher is sufficiently high ranking to head the panel. The rest of the panel must include a parent representative, a staff representative and a representative of the Aboriginal community. It is clearly set out, including how many on the panel, for which level of rank of position. A principal's position requires someone higher up at the district level in Dept of Ed to come in and head the panel. We all need to have a current connection with the school. We also all have to have had specific training and to carry the accreditation card verifying this. Then on the panel there are strict rules we must follow. For example, when assessing the applications, we first have to divulge any possible conflict of interest (do we have prior knowledge of the applicant? Will it influence our decision inappropriately?) and also NOT divulge anything or say anything which could inappropriately influence other panel members. Anything not done exactly right could lead to the panel outcome being challenged (say, by an unsuccessful candidate) and this becomes expensive and time-consuming if we have to throw it all out and start over. We're also supposed to keep everything strictly confidential. Sometimes a teacher will say to us, "How's it going?" and we are not permitted to answer with any specifics. Technically, they aren't even allowed to ask us this much. We also have to report any such approaches to the panel convenor who has instructions on what kind of action he has to take. There are rules on how many questions to ask the referees; who has to be present; when the questions have to be drafted; all the records that must be kept (including all our notes) and so on. No way is this ad hoc in any way.</p><p></p><p>I nearly goofed on my first panel - one applicant, I noticed, was almost 60 years old and I was privately concerned that if there was a mandatory retirement age of 60 then we would be appointing someone who would then have to leave a few months later. But by merely asking the question, "Does the department have a mandatory retirement age?" I put the whole process in jeopardy. I explained my reason for asking (carefully) and was then able to say, "My concern is now allayed and was unfounded; it was irrelevant." All applicants have to have noted in writing our reasons for acceptance/rejection. We all have to actively participate in the discussions, each from our own relevant place. For example, my own experiences as a parent of a difficult child are on the table when it comes to drafting interview questions. Of course I cannot contribute on the subject of the applicant's professional credentials, but I can speak for the sort of specific problems parents and parent/supervisors need a successful applicant to deal with.</p><p></p><p>If an applicant is someone I know personally, I have to divulge it. This is highly likely when a position is advertised and teachers within the school apply because if they get it, it will be a promotion. Everyone might know the applicant. I might have a personal dislike of someone, but I am not permitted to divulge that because if I do, it could make the whole process invalid and the panel convenor has the duty to disband the panel and start over. Even if I have had a personal experience of a teacher badly handling a difficult child situation, if it doesn't come up during the interview, I am not allowed to mention it. If any of us have any questions (such as me wondering if I should or should not tell the panel) I can say to the convenor, "I have a question to ask an arbitrator; please can you let me talk to someone for advice, privately?"</p><p></p><p>It's OK, Kathy. Not only is this NOT irregular, it is actually how it MUST be done. I would have loved to have said last year, lots of times, "Leave me out of this." But if I had, they would not have been able to replace the vacant positions.</p><p></p><p>It is because I had had to work with the school at this level, requiring such a high level of integrity, that I MUST get my reputation cleared.</p><p></p><p>I'm going to compile a list of items to support my case. I've given you guys an abridged version, but this teacher, the SpEd and principal have it all in detail, in email. I included copies of difficult child 3's submitted work; the computer creation dates/last save dates on those files as well as my movements at those times (I was at the hospital having tests for a lot of it). I will also have available, samples of difficult child 3's early writing (it shows the same sort of flaws, notably inability to include conflict in his narrative) as well as my own writing - narrative as well as my activist correspondence. I will also print out samples of difficult child 3's siblings' work so teachers can see the individuality, as well as the inevitable influence of simply being members of this family and exposed to my activism.</p><p></p><p>One of difficult child 3's writing tasks was a protest letter. But it was a very heated, angry letter where my writing on that topic would have been far more logical and also more balanced.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I didn't think difficult child 3's work was that good. But then - I have high standards.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 367455, member: 1991"] Kathy, I need to clarify a few things. First - I agree with you that if a teacher genuinely has suspicions, then it is her duty to deal with it. I said as much to the principal. I do feel she could have handled it better in so many ways, though, because I had been calling for almost a week and I think she kept putting off calling me back to discuss it because she knew it would be unpleasant. I agree that getting aggressive with her over it is futile and inappropriate (however much we might want to fantasise). What I have in mind must work better - we have to resolve this so SHE can accept and recognise that the results actually point to areas where difficult child 3 needs help with his work, in order to produce this standard more consistently. Cheating like this, especially for a difficult child who needs highly specialised help, would be an utterly stupid thing for me to do, as well as thoughtless and inconsiderate to all the superb efforts these teachers (including this one) have been putting in with difficult child 3, on a face to face basis. It would utterly devalue all their efforts but it would also make it almost impossible for difficult child 3 to get the help he needs. Some parents might work that way; but nobody at this school who has been there for any time, would get away with it for as long we difficult child 3 has been there. This teacher claims to have considerable experience of kids and their writing tasks. But the majority of those kids are PCs whose work is fairly representative of their overall capabilities. difficult child 3 is very different and I need his teachers to see his output as plainly and unadulterated as possible, so they can help him where he needs it. Added to which - difficult child 3 himself would refuse to be party to a deception and I am shocked ti teacher didn't already realise this. As for the use of parents on promotions panels - it is actually embedded in the rules of our Dept of Ed. Laid down very strictly, all government schools must conform to this. But it is handled very professionally with a lot of checks and balances. I won't make specific reference to any people or positions because it would be contrary to the rules, but I can explain in general. Basically, if a position (teaching or non-teaching) becomes vacant or is created (say, the school decides to create the position of a groundskeeper) then a panel must be formed to oversee the entire process. If the position is one of head teacher, then the panel convenor must be the principal or deputy. If the position is a lower ranking ("ordinary") teacher then the head teacher is sufficiently high ranking to head the panel. The rest of the panel must include a parent representative, a staff representative and a representative of the Aboriginal community. It is clearly set out, including how many on the panel, for which level of rank of position. A principal's position requires someone higher up at the district level in Dept of Ed to come in and head the panel. We all need to have a current connection with the school. We also all have to have had specific training and to carry the accreditation card verifying this. Then on the panel there are strict rules we must follow. For example, when assessing the applications, we first have to divulge any possible conflict of interest (do we have prior knowledge of the applicant? Will it influence our decision inappropriately?) and also NOT divulge anything or say anything which could inappropriately influence other panel members. Anything not done exactly right could lead to the panel outcome being challenged (say, by an unsuccessful candidate) and this becomes expensive and time-consuming if we have to throw it all out and start over. We're also supposed to keep everything strictly confidential. Sometimes a teacher will say to us, "How's it going?" and we are not permitted to answer with any specifics. Technically, they aren't even allowed to ask us this much. We also have to report any such approaches to the panel convenor who has instructions on what kind of action he has to take. There are rules on how many questions to ask the referees; who has to be present; when the questions have to be drafted; all the records that must be kept (including all our notes) and so on. No way is this ad hoc in any way. I nearly goofed on my first panel - one applicant, I noticed, was almost 60 years old and I was privately concerned that if there was a mandatory retirement age of 60 then we would be appointing someone who would then have to leave a few months later. But by merely asking the question, "Does the department have a mandatory retirement age?" I put the whole process in jeopardy. I explained my reason for asking (carefully) and was then able to say, "My concern is now allayed and was unfounded; it was irrelevant." All applicants have to have noted in writing our reasons for acceptance/rejection. We all have to actively participate in the discussions, each from our own relevant place. For example, my own experiences as a parent of a difficult child are on the table when it comes to drafting interview questions. Of course I cannot contribute on the subject of the applicant's professional credentials, but I can speak for the sort of specific problems parents and parent/supervisors need a successful applicant to deal with. If an applicant is someone I know personally, I have to divulge it. This is highly likely when a position is advertised and teachers within the school apply because if they get it, it will be a promotion. Everyone might know the applicant. I might have a personal dislike of someone, but I am not permitted to divulge that because if I do, it could make the whole process invalid and the panel convenor has the duty to disband the panel and start over. Even if I have had a personal experience of a teacher badly handling a difficult child situation, if it doesn't come up during the interview, I am not allowed to mention it. If any of us have any questions (such as me wondering if I should or should not tell the panel) I can say to the convenor, "I have a question to ask an arbitrator; please can you let me talk to someone for advice, privately?" It's OK, Kathy. Not only is this NOT irregular, it is actually how it MUST be done. I would have loved to have said last year, lots of times, "Leave me out of this." But if I had, they would not have been able to replace the vacant positions. It is because I had had to work with the school at this level, requiring such a high level of integrity, that I MUST get my reputation cleared. I'm going to compile a list of items to support my case. I've given you guys an abridged version, but this teacher, the SpEd and principal have it all in detail, in email. I included copies of difficult child 3's submitted work; the computer creation dates/last save dates on those files as well as my movements at those times (I was at the hospital having tests for a lot of it). I will also have available, samples of difficult child 3's early writing (it shows the same sort of flaws, notably inability to include conflict in his narrative) as well as my own writing - narrative as well as my activist correspondence. I will also print out samples of difficult child 3's siblings' work so teachers can see the individuality, as well as the inevitable influence of simply being members of this family and exposed to my activism. One of difficult child 3's writing tasks was a protest letter. But it was a very heated, angry letter where my writing on that topic would have been far more logical and also more balanced. Personally, I didn't think difficult child 3's work was that good. But then - I have high standards. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Nasty accusation
Top