<p>Wow! </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/01/education/01education.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/01/education/01education.html</a> </p>
<p>I wonder where that student will go to college.</p>
<p>The teacher sounds as bad to me as the student. Missing 24 days in your first year of teaching is absurd unless there was medical cause, which he’d surely have mentioned to the reporter if he’d had it to say on his own behalf. So obviously that teacher skipped whenever he felt like skipping, as for example, he did for TWO DAYS to sulk when the decision didn’t go his way about this student. No work ethic here.</p>
<p>Aside from his own classroom absenteeism, the teacher missed two out of three parent-teacher conferences. These are often held in the evenings, and are right in the teacher contract he signed. It takes some brand new teachers by surprise that they have to work occasionally for important school reasons such as these at times that accommodate working parents. It demonstrates his disinterest in student success that he didn’t show for 2/3 of the opportunities to discuss student progress.</p>
<p>I know there are reasons to lambast the student, which the reporter has already done. I won’t excuse the student or the mother. But I also give the teacher a failing grade, and am not surprised to hear he crawled back home rather than continue teaching in NY State. If you can’t take the heat, get out of this kitchen. </p>
<p>I am only surprised that, by policy, the student’s poor classroom attendance rate didn’t trump the fact that she could pass the final exam. I believe the teacher can be allowed to design a weight on homework non-submissions, but that too might be a school, not teacher, policy. </p>
<p>If she knew the material and was a roaring A student, he probably wouldn’t have thrown the attendance up as reason to continue to fail her, but would smirk and say, “well you know those smart students…they don’t even need to come to class.”
Well, so she was a lousy student who still managed to learn (with heavy tutoring provided by the school) enough to pass a final. </p>
<p>The prom comment was cheesy and stupid from the parent, but it’s the kind of thing poor families will say. </p>
<p>I guess I don’t want to defend the student. I just want to rip apart the teacher. He sounds like a prig whose problem is NOT that he holds high academic standards. He doesn’t hold them for himself, and models poorly to his students with his own absences. He doesn’t give the profile of someone who cares a lot, which could be why he alienated his administration in his very first year of teaching. This is why the first several years are non-tenured. Teaching is not for the faint of heart.</p>
<p>The new pressure to keep kids from dropping out is the result of a decade of overemphasis on testing. In my kids’ poor high school, in a previous community in this state, as soon as the schools began reacting to No Child Left Behind, the tests began to reverse the gains made previously to keep kids from dropping out of high school. There are just so many times you can have a kid take and retake a h.s. course and Regents exam, fail the exam, and make them return to school for another year over it. Then summer school…and failed exam. How many times will a student return to retake the same course and exam before dropping out and aiming for a GED instead? So the schools began coddling the students like this, on crucial grades that were make-and-break for graduation, to keep them from dropping out completely.</p>
<p>As well, some poor schools began to institute across-the-boards Regents diploma requirements for all students, eliminating the Comprehensive courses and non-regents (test) alternatives. When this happened, the marginal students began dropping out, because they couldn’t keep up with a Regents level course. FOr a while, the state responded by lowering some of the test points required to pass certain Regents tests. But still, the pendulum swings to keep some students from dropping out, as the story in this NY Times article. </p>
<p>Teacher sounds like a bean-counter, not a teacher at the tissue-level, to me. Good riddance. He’s more of a tragedy than she is, since he took up somebody’s time to become a teacher and threw in the towel after the first year. If he was disgusted after a decade or two of hard teaching, I’d be more impressed. I met a lot of whiny young teachers like this, in and out within the first year like a revolving door.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. He penalized his other students when he went on his two-day sulk as p3t so aptly puts it. His behavior strangely mirrors that of the student!</p>
<p>I thought exactly the same when I read the article this morning. How bizarre for him to complain about the student’s behavior, when he, the adult in charge, seems to be exhibiting similar work ethic issues.</p>
<p>I think he’s going to regret letting this be publicized.</p>
<p>Additionally, I wonder at the discussion of the student including her name and test scores. Unless she gave permission, which seems doubtful, this would be a violation of privacy rules.</p>
<p>“I wonder where that student will go to college.”</p>
<p>Kids like that don’t go to college. I went to a highschool where about 40% of the kids were like that. It was getting so bad that enrollment at local magnets schools went higher than our public one. The school got a really bad reputation. </p>
<p>Even when I graduated, looking at the school report they include with the transcript (I requested an extra on for myself 
) Graduation rate was 65%, kids attending 4 year institutions was 14% and kids who stayed on to graduate from 4 year institutions was 10%. Now that 65% is a big jump from my friends 48% that was on the school report 2 years ago. Yet the percentage of those attending college stayed the same.</p>
<p>The point is, a lot of public schools are just trying to graduate kids. If they’re only two steps away from graduating but haven’t met the requirements…schools will let them graduate just to lower attrition rates. I have to side with the teacher. I hate it when I saw someone who I know didn’t deserve to graduate walking across the stage.</p>
<p>Let me make it clear that I don’t agree with the school’s handling of the situation. It’s just that I think that the teacher seems to be a case of the pot labeling the kettle–his own attendance issues, especially the two day snit, seem really extreme, especially for a first year teacher.</p>
<p>My H, who just finished his first year teaching, never missed a day. If any thing had disillusioned him, it would’ve been the attitudes of some of the teachers (not all by any means; he’s met some incredible ones, too), not the students. At 48, though, he’s past the easy disillusionment phase of life, and accepts what he can and cannot control. He teaches, he gives grades, and what the administration or other teachers do is out of his hands.</p>
<p>Passing people along seems to be a common phenomenon in high school and college classes. In one of my dual enrollment classes, our computerized grades showed a mysterious entry called “miscellaneous” under assignments. It was worth 15 points. I contacted the instructor to see if I had missed an assignment and found out that no, it was just a boost of 15 points given to the kids who might not otherwise pass the class. I was ineligible since I had a high grade.</p>
<p>And I do have to wonder how the teacher could have such “meticulous notes and records” about each student if he were absent for 24 days (plus the two for his tantrum)?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That might be what he did during his absences from the classroom. I’m glad everyone picked up the two-way street in this news story. The story seems odd all around, but I fear it is not unique. It does illustrate the cardinal principle of economics, the dismal science: people respond to incentives.</p>
<p>I’m afraid that what the article really illustrates is the intersection of two uncomfortable realitiies in public school systems of many states: the social & political pressures to graduate uneducated students and the rare availability of math teachers qualified in their field. Any teacher, math or not, with high performance standards, will likely be quite disillusioned, quite quickly, at how unseriously his or her own level of standards is viewed by officials, and by many parents. Clearly the guy had high standards. His personality is another matter, but his academic standards are clear:</p>
<p>“Still, Mr. Lampros received a satisfactory rating five of the six times administrators formally observed him. He has masters degrees in both statistics and math education and has won awards for his teaching at the college level.”</p>
<p>It is also true that schools OF ARTS AND TECHNOLOGY will feel particularly bound to hire masters’ level teachers in math & science especially. Somtimes these specifications are actually written into their charters or governing principles. Many of these teachers are used to motivated students, because, like this teacher, they may have taught at the college level. We do not know what his math education degree consisted of: it might have been somewhat lacking in field work, or his field work may have been at a higher performing school, less political school. Clearly the politics at his school were a significant feature, and I have seen this over & over. Of the 2 uncomfortable realities I opened with, the first is king. It is even supreme at many highly performing schools, where some parents, for example, will be determined to change a B to an A, and where the parents’ wishes tend to win out over the teacher’s assessment. (Not at all schools, no.) </p>
<p>I’m not going to make a judgment about his missing 24 days. Maybe it was sulking, maybe something psychosomatic was going on, as he may very well have been struggling with a desire for excellence that was not being honored at this school, and it literally made him sick. I’ll tell you one thing, though: I’ve seen enormous absenteeism at such schools in my state, which is a big tip-off to me that morale is low. The fact that he took meticulous notes may also be a reflection of his standards, or he may be OCD. Again, I don’t think there’s enough information about whether he was or was not a “bad boy.” Nor do I think that was the point of the article. </p>
<p>Many of these magnet schools begin, on paper, and in sincere public enthusiasm, with the best of intentions. Each one sounds as if it will be a school like no others before it. <em>It</em> will uniquely focus on high standards, enriched curriculum, highly qualified/educated teachers. Unfortunately, however, if the <em>system</em> is politically corrupt, the system wins out. One such magnet prep-school in my state just shut down over a grade-inflation scandal. The schools self-defining as high-performing are also bound to show such results, both by community expectations and (often) by charter description, which is sometimes further time-restricted. (“Within 3 years, this school will______”)</p>
<p>Please understand that, depending on the school, assistant principals are often the real seat of power – at publics and at privates. Sometimes they call the shots, and clearly it was the ass’t principal who was at odds with the teacher, even though it was the principal that, as ultimate authority, signed off on graduation. </p>
<p>I’m not even going to speculate about missing 2 out of 3 conferences. Yes, could be his fault. Could also have been (seen this many times) that in fact the family had screwed around wth the schedule, making excuses. Parents whose children are performing poorly tend to avoid these conferences like hell. They often don’t show themselves, cancel/reschedule repeatedly, or make it so difficult for the teacher to meet their “needs” that missed connections are more likely. Two of the conferences could also have been on days he was also sick (or rescheduled on those unfortunate days).</p>
<p>Nor am I his booster. I would not have proceeded as he did. I’ve never missed a conference. But I think all the posts I’ve read before this one will be posted, are missing the big point that the author was trying to communicate: It’s the politics that rule in the public school system, and that extends to the ironic degree that families whose last priority is education and whose first priority is the prom, will ultimately win, while the education loses.</p>
<p>I don’t think that ‘the two-way street’ is about his supposed underperformance & unprofessionalism matching the family’s irresponsibility. I think the two-way street is about the collision course between politics and excellence in the public school system.</p>
<p>I did not miss the main point the article was trying to make. Social promotion is nothing new, however. But if, besides giving a name and a face to the evils of social promotion, the author of the article wanted to show how this policy led to the disillusionment of an idealistic highly qualified teacher, surely some other messenger could have delivered the message with greater credibility. I am thinking specifically of the 2-day snit and the missed conferences; I am not passing judgment on the other days missed since I do not know why they were missed.</p>
<p>I also know that social promotion is nothing new. However, its significance rises in direct proportion to the underperformance not just of a single student, but to the school as a whole, whose very existence is threatened by the non-promotion of students due to failure. Where you see schools with large segments of under- or non-performers, you see far greater levels of social promotion, greater public pressure to promote, and an eroding of the very foundation of education, which is built on mastery, not appearances. Graduating failing students is an epidemic in my state. It is contributing to legacies of illiteracy in functionally illiterate families.</p>
<p>Perspective please: This was a new teacher, at least in this high school. The fault lies primarily with his principal. If he was out of school 24 days, the administration should have been leaning on him really really hard. He should not have gotten good evaluations. It’s good math teachers that are hard to find, not ANY math teachers. It sounds like he got not support, guidance or development from his school, and for that the blame lies squarely on the prinicipal’s shoulders. New teachers at low-performing schools need a lot of this and it sounds like he didn’t get much at all. And as for modeling? Give me a break. My mom, a NYC teacher, once told me what I now tell my own kids: “Sometimes you learn beacause of your teachers, and sometimes you learn despite them. But you still learn.” </p>
<p>And no, poor parents don’t frequently use prom expenses – or somthing equally stupid–as an excuse for failure. That’s condescending and stereotyping. The mother and daughter are just jerks. Don’t balme that on poverty. It may be too late for Mom, but the kid still has time to do some growing up and larn that in a job, she 'll never get get a “break” like the one she got to graduate.</p>
<p>Needless to say, yes, the kid should have been flunked.</p>
<p>“It’s good math teachers that are hard to find, not ANY math teachers.”</p>
<p>(I hoped I also made that clear. That was indeed one of my points.)</p>
<p>Yes, one of the subtexts of the article is the lack of support at the school for this teacher who was at least new to this type of school or to this population. (As I mentioned) But I think this was not likely to happen with an ass’t principal with whom the teacher was at odds. Very often “softer” prncipals hire tougher ass’t principals to be the enforcers – not just regarding pupil discipline – but with regard to supervision of teachers. This is ill-advised, but may have been how this particular school was structured. People would be amazed at how many people who are essentially uncomfortable in leadership positions, seek & accept jobs as principals. The salary boost is significant, providing motivation for that. I’ve never been happy in jobs I was unsuited for, nor have I ever been lucky enough to hire an ‘assistant’ to do my work for me, but a principal can be in such a position. Again, it’s the politics and what is allowed under a public system. A principal can have a lot of discretion in that regard, but I agree it’s unprofessional. It’s on her watch. She should have both supervised & provided support. Usually when communication is dysfunctional at any place of business (including a school), it compromises the training; new employees do not feel comfortable being assertive about needs when the signals are not uniform.</p>
<p>From the article, it looks like there was failure from every corner: the student, the family, the school’s administration, the teacher. But while one message was that social promotion was a bad thing, the title of the article suggested there was a good reason for teacher disillusionment; it was as if the teacher himself had not been part of the problem through his no-show. It does not matter how qualified he is if he is not in class to give the students the benefit of his qualifications.</p>
<p>The whole discussion of why he missed the 24 days strikes me as “teacher-talk”. I can’t miss more than ten percent of time in a new job, nor can most people I know. But some teachers seem to think that’s kind of normal. My H hears that at work all the time; and I just spent the weekend with a good teacher friend who spoke of a colleague who missed 72 days during one school year because she didn’t like the schedule she got. It made her ill. Tough luck for her students.</p>
<p>The more I get to know really great, dedicated teachers, the more I hear their consternation about colleagues who are phoning it in. And a first year teacher who misses that much time, at least partly because of a snit, misses teacher conferences (I don’t care if two families out of all of them show up–he needs to be there for them), gets even one unsatisfactory review, and then talks about “his” disillusionment, well, it really sounds like he’s in the wrong field.</p>
<p>Yes, there’s plenty of guilt to go around, but painting him as the victim stresses credulity.</p>
<p>This isn’t the first time the Times has run an education story where the perspective seemed at odds with most people’s reality. It’s hard to visualize anyone in the article as a good colleague, teacher, student, friend, or supervisor.</p>
<p>this student had some sort of “doctor’s note” whatever that means saying she could willy nilly miss school whenever</p>
<p>anyone check out that “note” at all? as for the comment on the Prom, well somehow this student missed school left and right due to “illness” but managed to go to the prom, snarkiness is called for</p>
<p>I would bet you that the girl was not sick, as it was never mentioned except for the doctor’s “note” I would love to get some info on that note that said she could show up whenever she felt like it</p>
<p>as for the teacher, sure the days off were a lot, but sounds like that school has some serious issues</p>
<p>as for the final, who wants to be it wasn’t the “regular” final and the girl still failed</p>
<p>The school messed up and is using that “doctor’s note” to cover up imcompetence on their part</p>
<p>mom is letting D get away with it all, she too sick for school, then too sick for prom, but we all know D was not to sick for school</p>
<p>I think I have been misunderstood, but I don’t appreciate the “teacher-talk” comment. My attempt to shed light on the reasons for the absences cannot be equated with excusing the (teacher) absences. I am neutral on the absences, as I am not an insider at this school, cannot assess what the atmosphere was and was not, and thus cannot heap blame the teacher without more data. As a policy (as I mentioned) I do not operate the way this teacher does. However, unless you have taught in environments similar to this in large public school systems, you are not well acquainted with the morale factors that decimate motivation & professionalism out of the most competent teachers. The system is not designed for competence. The system is designed to align with the system, period. If you are lucky enough to work in a high-performing school, you will be less likely to be be demoralized – even though parents pressuring a principal or teacher to convert a B to an A (& usually succeeding) can be disheartening - not enough to excuse a 24-day absence, certainly.</p>
<p>I appreciate cgm’s comments. I think they’re realistic & align with my experience in general, as well as the facts as stated in the article. Whatever “pass” the teacher was given in the article (and I think that’s been overstated in the above posts) was diminished by the enormous & enormously immoral pass given to the student & her family. Shame on the school.</p>
<p>In the non-unionized private sector, missing 24 work days in any year would only be acceptable if the employee was spending those days in a hospital. Otherwise, he’d have been shown the door long before hitting 24 days absent. I agree with Marite that all the problems of social promotion & teacher disillusionment are not being championed by featurng this particular teacher!</p>