District recommends termination for Moffett
by Dale Mezzacappa on Mar 07 2011 Posted in Latest news
The School District plans to terminate Hope Moffett, because she gave tokens to students that they used to leave class and attend a protest against the policies of Superintendent Arlene Ackerman, specifically, the planned conversion of their school to a charter under Universal Companies, Inc.
The District decided that this act constituted “endangering the welfare of children” and removed Moffett from the classroom pending the outcome of the disciplinary hearings. The District set a “204 conference” – a termination hearing – for tomorrow at 9:45 a.m. A vote by the School Reform Commission on the case could occur as early as Wednesday, when it is scheduled to meet.
A letter sent to Moffett today by Assistant Superintendent for High Schools Linda Cliatt-Wayman recommends termination because she enabled students to leave school without parental permission, putting them in danger. Cliatt-Wayman said Moffett’s views opposing “the Renaissance initiative” had nothing to do with the recommendation and that she is “troubled” because Moffett still doesn’t acknowledge she put her students in danger.
UPDATE: Philadelphia Federation of Teachers president Jerry Jordan called the charges "ridiculous" and said the union would fight her termination.
Moffett reacted immediately.
“The idea that my personal beliefs regarding the takeover of Audenried High School are not relevant to the case against me is absurd. I stand by each and every choice I have made because I firmly believe that it is imperative that we as citizens stand up to corruption. Students, community members, and teachers cannot be denied a voice.”
The letter says:
“The fact that Ms. Moffett still does not see how enabling students to leave school premises without written parental permission presents a danger to students is very troubling to me. It is fortunate for everyone that nothing happened to any of the students on the day of their walkout, but I question the judgment of anyone who does not think that leaving school premises without parental consent poses a risk to their safety.
"No matter how hard she tries to make it so, through media interviews or commenting on stories about her, this is not, and never has been, about Ms. Moffett’s views on the Renaissance initiative or on the fact that she spoke at a SAC meeting or anywhere about her views. The fact that she disagrees with the initiative does not give Ms. Moffett the right to disobey directives. It does not give her the right to disclose confidential documents. It does not give her the right to make statements without regard to truth or accuracy, and it does not give her the right to endanger her students by providing them with the means to walk out of school and go downtown without their parents’ consent or the District’s knowledge. In short, it does not give her the right to violate state code or District policy. Ms. Moffett’s views on the plans for Audenried High School are irrelevant to this incident.
"No matter how strong her beliefs, Ms. Moffett’s actions endangered the safety of the children she is charged with protecting.
"The incident was unsatisfactory.”
It is a stunning development in a school system in which it is a rare event indeed for a teacher to be dismissed for any reason. Last year, just 25 teachers were rated unsatisfactory and even fewer dismissed as a result.
By all accounts, Moffett, 25, has been a top-quality English teacher, a Teach for America alumna who decided to stay with her students as they progressed from 9th to 11th grade. Her case has garnered national attention.
In an email today, Moffett told reporters that the District is recommending her termination. The Daily News and Inquirer also reported on the news.
Watch the Notebook for more on this developing story.
UPDATE: Text of PFT president Jerry Jordan's statement:
“I am outraged that the district has given Hope Moffett notice of their intent to terminate her. The charges are ridiculous, and the PFT will fight to restore Hope to her teaching position and defend her for exercising her First Amendment rights.”
Comments (70)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 12:52.
I will always love Big Brother
Submitted by Veteran of the WPHS Renaissance (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:17.
If Hope was "endangering" children, what about the Principal of Martin Luther King High School who forced the students to leave the school grounds and stand across the street when they walked out? This, in contradiction to the actions of the WPHS principal who insisted that the students return to the school premises because he was responsible for their welfare and could not be if they were outside of the school? What IS the policy of the district? Obviously it is whatever suits their needs. There are no "policies" that can cover the effort of citizens -- whether over or under 18 -- to voice their dissent with the actions of this public institution and political appointees (which the SRC members are, and by association so is Ackerman). What other recourse is there for citizens to voice their dissent? Certainly not in the mocked up arenas that the SDP arranges.
Submitted by Ms. Chips (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:25.
At MLK, the students were also prevented from returning to the building.
Submitted by ACourt (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 22:20.
Hope is in the way of somebody's millions and they are out to discredit her and take the heat off an investigation into their criminal backdoor dealings. Why aren't they letting her back in class? Because they want her students to fail...
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:30.
well put, sooo sad but sooo true...unfortunately..set them up to fail like always
Submitted by CuriousPhilly (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:23.
if the district was so concerned about the dangers of kids being out of school, there would be truancy squads cruising the city all day, every school day, to pick up students out of school for their own safety. The fact is, hundreds of students with less purpose than the Audenried students are on the streets every day and no one cares. These are high school kids for crying out loud, not first graders! How many Audenried students cut school every day?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:30.
Rally take TWO!
District beware! We will be HEARD.
Submitted by Annonymous) (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:43.
Wayman is as full of herself as ever. Wayman doesn't get it. This is ALL about Moffett speaking out regarding Audenreid. Shame on Wayman and Ackerman. Now, SRC, have some guts and vote against Wayman's "findings." Johnny Irizarry, you are the ONLY voice on the SRC who has some sense of justice. We are counting on you to vote
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:45.
Wayman once again can't see the "light." This is ALL about Moffett speaking out about Audenreid and raising legitimate questions. It has nothing to do with token. We have all given students token / money for transportation.
Now, SRC, have some integrity and vote against this edict. Johnny Irizarry, you have integrity, now show it. Don't rubber stamp Wayman and Ackerman.
As for Jerry Jordan, the PFT is out of step with those you are to represent. Start representing!
Submitted by Bobbie Cratchitt (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 13:52.
The letter written by Wayman seems to have a a double-sided tone. She says that the termination recommendation was in no way about Hope's opposing views and then banters on and on about all the things it is supposedly NOT about...if the focus was strictly about the tokens then that is all she needed to stay...instead the "Guilty Man Runs when No one Chases....Lets ALL get behind Hope...or soon they will tell us that it is policy not to comment on Notebook or philly.com or facebook...or twitter...
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 14:10.
Even believing this was going to be the outcome, I am shocked at how fast this has happened. Someone is trying to scare the rest of us. Someone is trying to shut us all up.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:44.
I agree and would put it this way: they are moving faster than a speeding bullet with hardly any heads up to the schools or community.. I'm worried, as is everyone ,about the unilateral decsions being made,under the guise of "reform." I know there are parents groups,out there and I hope they're speaking out, since teachers are being discouraged from doing so.
Submitted by capski (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 14:30.
The Audenried students used those tokens to return to school after the protest that parents organized.
The School District has yet to provide any data to support making Audenried a Renaissance school. They have missed their own self imposed deadlines for providing the data.
The School District has falsely claimed Audenried is failing and lied to the staff, students, and community. I hope some administrators lose their jobs over this.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 14:46.
did she give the kids the tokens at the school in order to enable them to leave and attend the protest? i need more information.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 15:12.
And, once again, the PFT's response to the district trying to fire a teacher for disagreeing with her is nothing more than a statement.
The PFT is going to "fight." HOW, JERRY? WHAT, EXACTLY, ARE YOU GOING TO DO?
Calling Jerry Jordan a gutless coward is an insult to cowards.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 15:47.
She will be protected by Jerry Jordan and the PFT. Anyone who has heard this story knows full well that the District is playing hardball. The District will have no leg to stand on when she hires an Attorney. Look at a big lump sum payment to Moffett because she will win this case. Jerry Jordan will not lie down on this, trust me. He also knows that she has a First Amendment RIghts case in which a lawyer, not PFT will have to represent her on. The PFT will help her!!! Worst case scenario they don't then she can sue the union for misrepresentation then get her lawyer to file a case against the DIstrict. She will win on this one and the DIstrict will look really bad!!!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:16.
That's not how the First Amendment works.
Submitted by Erika Owens on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:38.
The First Amendment rights around this issue are not as clearcut as one may think.
Submitted by Philly HS Teacher (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 19:55.
Unfortunately, Erica is correct - things aren't clearcut. I'm not a lawyer - just a social studies teacher - but I can read. This is what I understand about teachers and speech (thanks to the Nov./Dec issues of Social Education):
In the 1969 Tinker v. DeMontes Independent School District ruling, the Supreme Court determined "neither students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the school house gate." This was a more progressive Supreme Court.
Jump ahead to 2006 with a conservative Supreme Court and we have Garcetti v. Ceballos. With a 5-4 vote (many, many decisions under this court are 5 -4), the Court ruled that "when a public employees speaks in the course of performing his/her job duties, the First Amendment afford no constitutional protection whatsoever..." Speech belongs to the employer - not the employee.
Now, before Wayman, Spangenberg, Nixon, Archie, Ackerman, Silverman, et al start jumping up and down, there is protection for what is done IN A CLASSROOM if the union has a academic freedom clause in the contract. This also, based on what I've read, only applies to what is done/said/read/discussed in the classroom. Ms. Moffett spoke outside of the classroom - at public forums. Our speech can't be controlled outside of school. Also, based on what we know, Ms. Moffett followed the SDP curriculum (topics, texts, etc.) and assigned an essay aligned with the format for the PSSA. Therefore, maybe (and again I'm not a lawyer), Ms. Moffett's first amendment rights were violated. Even though Wayman claims this is over tokens, it is because Ms. Moffett eloquently spoke at a public forum and dared to put Wayman's words in public.
Last week the very conservative Supreme Court ruled a group which makes hideous, offensive and painful statements at funerals has the right to speech, I hope the SDP upholds the rights of teachers to voice our opinions which affect their students and staff. Ackerman et al tried to silence the parents from West Philly HS last year. This year it is Audenreid. Who is next? Maybe the PFT should have a "token" day this Friday. We can all give students a few tokens and see is Wayman charges us with "endangering students..."
Submitted by Teacher (K.R. Luebbert) (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 20:31.
Great explication of the rulings and the arguments. I love the idea about "Token Friday". We have all given our students tokens and even cash to get home--but truly, who knows where they went? How about Wayman, et al endangering the academic progress of their students by refusing to give them a certified English teacher when one is available?
Submitted by Philly HS Teacher (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 05:55.
Wayman's actions - denying the students their regular classroom teacher (who the students have known since 9th grade) - is an attempt to lower the PSSA results at Audenreid. Word "on the street," is Wayman's office is holding Audenreid's PSSA tests so no one can look at them before next Monday. Copies of the PSSA are in other schools and, if a teacher wants and the administration gives access, can look at them. I've seen this done in neighborhood and magnet schools. (Yes, then teachers can better "prepare" students...) So, Wayman knows this happens - I'm sure she "looked" and "prepared" with the PSSA at Rhodes - so she is making sure there is no access at Audenreid. Ackerman, Wayman, et al want to control the outcome - thus the phantom "data." Shame on them!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 12:41.
"Therefore, maybe (and again I'm not a lawyer), Ms. Moffett's first amendment rights were violated."
No. They were not. Job loss is not an abridgment of speech. This is not a First Amendment issue. End of story.
Submitted by Hope Moffett (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 16:41.
The District asserts that my public opposition to the unwarranted takeover of Audenried has nothing to do with my pending termination. I doubt this but the right to free speech comes up through my disclosure of a confidential document relating to my reassignment. The District does not have the right to comment on personnel but the same restrictions to not apply to my right to speak about my own situation. The "gag order" contained in the document would have precluded me talking with the union or notifying my family where I was going to be physically located the following day. And yet, the District found me insubordinate for ignoring a defective order.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:49.
Jerry Jordan got us a contact with 2 raises in a time when nobody is getting raises,so I'd be more careful about the name calling. He also kept our pension contribution multilpliler intact, We don't really know what he said, but if there's something you'd like to suggest, I'm sure the union will be all ears.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 12:38.
A contract with two raises isn't worth anything if he can't keep people's JOBS.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 17:46.
You need to look around the country before you hop on the anti Jordan train. The union itself is not a job protection agency. They try their best to see the that there are not UN warranted layoffs, and that things are done according to the agreement. In other words, if there going to be layoffs, they have to be done in a certain order,not for personal vendettas, and not willy nilly.
The people who complain most about the union are those who don't contact their staffers with their problems,and wonder whey "the union doesn't do anything FOR us".
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 15:14.
Every child who used a toking should show up at the meetings with a parent who gives/confirms ex post facto permission.
Submitted by K.R. Luebbert (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 15:16.
Exactly what confidential documents did Hope disclose? Her conference letter? That letter concerned her, so she certainly had a right to disclose it if she chose. If she waived her own right to confidentiality by disclosing her own personnel matter, the district should have no complaint. Of course, they complain because they do not like to see their own unethical practices exposed to the light of day. There are some teachers who deserve firing (thankfully, not many), and never even get written up, yet they torment this young woman for what should be a very negligible offense--if at all. It is ridiculous that they let these 11th graders go on without a certified high school English teacher, all the while paying Hope and a sub every day. This is vindictive and foolhardy.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 15:28.
You'd have to check with a lawyer, but unless there's something in the contract that specifically states that teachers can't discuss things like the letter in public, I'm fairly certain one party in a written correspondence saying "this is confidential" is not legally binding.
Now, it wouldn't surprise me if language to that effect IS in the contract, in which case, yeah, it's a crappy thing to discipline her for speaking out about it, but it's perfectly legal.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 15:27.
Didn't Hope say that she'd given tokens to kids before?
And isn't there something like getting written up before you get fired?
And what's up with the gag order? How can it be unethical to reveal your own personnel issues?
I hope that Diane Ravitch and Huffington Post are already onto this and blasting it around the country.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:12.
The PSD - Ackerman, Silverman, Nixon, Wayman - are so addicted to power that they can't even concoct a coherent lie. It is clear from the letter that Moffett had apologized thn she would have received a slap on the wrist. They certainly can't prove that she gave the tokens for the rally, and if the real reason for termination was "endangerment" then this decision could have been made much more rapidly. They might even have encouraged parents to file criminal charges. These people are a disgrace and I hope she sues them and the case unveils their corruption.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:19.
"They certainly can't prove that she gave the tokens for the rally"
They don't have to, she's publicly admitted that she did. The question is whether that is reasonable grounds for termination. A normal person can see that it clearly is not, especially given the actions of the administrators at MLK w/r/t their protesting students.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:29.
She admitted giving tokens, but claimed no knowledge as to how they would be used. She claims to have provided tokens and other assistance on a regular basis. The district is wrapping their charge in assumption - not fact.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:39.
I agree. If you have given out tokens on a regular basis, high school students walk out of school at any time anyway. It doesn't mean that she encouraged them to do so. The District appears to have been looking for a technicality. It also appears that they don't want to hear from anyone about their plans, and so much for input and collaboration.
Submitted by Tara (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:20.
What statements did Hope Moffett make that were untrue or inaccurate? Every statement or post I have heard/read from her was true and accurate.
This whole situation sets a troublesome tone for teachers. I wish it were less about this teacher and more about what is happening at Audenried. Public education is for sale. It doesn't really matter what Universal's successes are at running a school. It doesn't matter than Universal has had its eye on Audenried for almost ten years. It doesn't matter that the SDP always tells teachers to examine the data, but then ignored the data from Audenried.
The SDP used their heavy-handed tactics at West Philly. They are on Audenried now. All public schools have basically been put on notice.
Submitted by Hope Moffett (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:30.
I also wonder what Ms. Wayman is talking about when she alleges that I have made untrue or inaccurate statements. The facts support Audenried's case, not the District's. This situation is not about me, it is about a takeover of a succeeding school without due process.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:46.
The don't even bother to refute the veracity of your allegations. They don't need to because they are engaged in "legal" corruption, starting with Archie, Gamble and Mr. Islam. What's so pathetic is that they are using the very strategies used by major corporations in order to line their own pockets, while claiming it is "community development." Revolting.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:57.
"It," as in your situation, is also about who controls an annual school district budget of 3.2 billion dollars.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:28.
Bye bye, Ms. Moffett. May God be with you. Your next job will be in private industry. With only three years work experience, I would hold back on telling the management how to run their business. You will show up on time every day and perform. No excuses. Either produce or be fired. If you do well, you will be paid more. If not, you're gone. Welcome to the real world, sweetheart.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 16:38.
Change only happens when people take risks. Ms. Moffett took a risk on behalf of her students. This is noble. Ms. Moffett did produce - her students not only do well academically but apparently respect their teacher.
The real world won't allow for the bullying tactics of Wayman, Spangeberg, Ackerman, et al. Wayman has gotten away with intimidating and threatening teachers but now someone has stood up to her.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:27.
The irony is that this is exactly what Hope did - showing up every day, putting in extra hours, and producing results (better than most Philadelphia teachers, experience notwithstanding) - while hundreds of others around her failed to do so and experienced no disciplinary action. Education is at its heart a human endeavor - Hope taught her students as if they were valuable human beings, and fought for their futures with the same urgency. Private industry can keep its silence and its brown-nosing. Education, like all public institutions, should be open to debate and dissent!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 18:24.
I want to see you spend one week teaching for the PSD. I bet you wouldn't last!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 23:20.
Anything paid for with public money is open to scrutiny. Hope wasn't "telling management hot to run their business", but asked for the data that the SRC's decision was made upon (which they could not show since they had none). The school district is our "business" since we all pay into it. What we question are the actions of this administration that fails to respect to the very lifeblood, teachers, of this school district. After all, there are no laws preventing administrators from striking because who would care if they showed up for work? This current action is the work of cowards who seek to hide their dirty deeds by bullying others. Their arrogance is such that they can't see their day of reckoning coming.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:00.
One less public union vampire. Soon to be more. The coming liberation of the taxpayers is at hand, and not a moment too soon.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:30.
what exactly is it that you think teachers do now that you think would be different if there weren't unions?
They couldn't really be paid much less in Philadelphia--7 years of experience makes just over 50000, which is comfortable but not extravagant.
We contribute 7% of our salary to our pension--not much different than many private workers contribute to their 401Ks and retired teachers don't get health benefits, so the things that are typically cited aren't the huge drains many anti-teacher/anti-union apologists suggest.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 18:27.
I see that you are falling for the propaganda that the politicians want you to believe. How about asking the politicians give back and leave the working class alone. After all they are the ones that can really afford it.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 03/09/2011 - 16:12.
That's absurd. I don't know how you could bring up tax dollars. You think it's a waste of money to try and educate students? How about mentioning that your tax dollars go directly to ALL of the student's families who are on welfare and don't work at all. Would those kids grow up to be better teachers? You know, since they aren't receiving the education they need to learn how to get a job?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:16.
as a teacher in an empower school, the token issue concerns me because I frequently gave students tokens to get home if they lost their transpass or otherwise needed one. I've also provided snacks for kids who were hungry, shirts if they didn't have a clean uniform...i always saw these as being supportive not endangering, in a high-poverty school. Just because the student told me they were using the token to get home, doesn't mean they couldn't have used to to get somewhere else, but what other options are there?
Many of those students could have used their free school transpass to get to the protest regardless of what Hope did--the District provides these for anyone who lives more than 1.5 miles from school and they can be used as many times as needed between 6am & 6pm
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 17:35.
Spin it any way you want. She gave them tokens to protest a management restructuring process. It is none, absolutely none, of her business to do so. When and if she gets a job in private industry, she better think twice about pulling that little stunt again. She either likes the job she gets, or she is free to quit and work elsewhere.
-The coming liberation of the taxpayer is at hand.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 18:30.
I bet you don't even pay taxes.
Submitted by James F Mothersbaugh, Jr (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 20:25.
"the coming liberation of the taxpayer [may be] at hand," Anonymous, but there won't many teachers left in a couple of years, and then who will teach your kids? I think this woman is under fire because she's a TFA gone over to the dark side. She enjoyed teaching, and she became one of us, a good teacher. TFAs are supposed to teach two years and get the hell out, thus saving Bill Gates a buttload of money. I retire in three years, hopefully, and I will never look back. I am already coaching wanna-be teachers to choose another profession, one with a future. Really, Anonymous; who's going to do the teaching when you're done stoning those of us teaching now? Or doesn't it matter to you? Just remember: my teaching conditions are your kids' learning conditions.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 21:50.
Except that "management" here is public servants, spending tax payer money, not someone managing a private business for their own benefit.
And I'd be willing to bet that with the press over this Ms. Moffett won't even need to send out applications to get some offers for employment.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 22:01.
How is it none of her business? Just out of curiosity... do you not think that she has a say in this?
Schools aren't businesses. They are public institutions, and, as such, the public has a say in what happens in them.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 07:18.
Everyone, please let's not feed the troll.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 19:39.
Hope, thank you from all of the teachers who are afraid to speak out because they have families to support. Thank you for your courage.
Submitted by Sanity N. Reason (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 20:14.
FREE HOPE MOFFETT...FIRE QUEEN ARLENE!!!
Submitted by Alan Kaman (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 20:33.
Why aren't we all walking out in support of her. This is a school district and union without HOPE.
Submitted by Audax (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 22:08.
Why is the union not asking for the heads of the administrators at MLK who kicked their protesters off of school ground? Has the District asked for them to be terminated too? Afterall, by putting kids off of school grounds and refusing them re-entry they too seriously "endangered the welfare of students."
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 23:02.
I decided to become a teacher following a few years in the private sector and many years working as a social worker and probation officer. I'm also an adoptive parent of older children who recently graduated from college. That said, I assumed that teaching would be no more stressful than any of my previous family or career choices. I was wrong. Teaching is an overwhelming experience. There are so many road blocks to being successful. The million or so road blocks in the classroom are exasperating. I get up every day and give 100%. I work until late at night trying to create the best lessons and activities for my students. I volunteer my time on Saturdays to take my students to a mentoring program in Center City.
I have no doubt that I am doing absolutely everything possible to try to get my students where they need to be, and yet, it's not enough. Further, the emotional and physical exhaustion that results from battling children and circumstances with so many needs and complexities is something that no one can truly understand unless they've been there. You just can't appreciate what it's like to work in such an abusive, stressful environment day in and day out. You can't. I know that I used to think it was a whole lot easier before I became a teacher. Now, I'm wondering why I ever decided to make the switch. It's a lot easier to punish people once they become adults than it is to detour them as children.
Like other teachers in this district, I spend my own pathetic paycheck of $2000/month to pay for classroom supplies and help my students with their ever present physical needs. At the end of the day, the only thing that keeps me in the game are my students. Knowing that I'd be yet another person who let them down is the very reason why I get up each and every day and try again. I don't need money or validation from society to keep going. I need to feel like I'm making a difference in the lives of the children that I've come to care about very much.
Yet, it sure would be nice to turn on the television, read the news or come across an article that doesn't demonize my work as a teacher. I'm so tired of hearing what a rotten, greedy, lazy piece of garbage I am. I'm sick of being the scapegoat for all of society's ills. I'm tired of being told how lucky I am for "getting" to do what I do every day. I'm sick of people with absolutely no insight into what it's like to be in the classroom every day implying that they could somehow do my job better than me. So while I don't need the validation from society to keep going, I would really appreciate it if for once, someone besides my Mother, husband and fellow teachers would be supportive of the work that I do. It's exhausting enough without society dumping all over it. For all those people who seem overly concerned that teachers don't understand reality or the real world, I can't help but to shake my head. You're kidding, right? Really?
Submitted by Teacher (K.R. Luebbert) (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 23:17.
Wonderfully, beautifully well-said.
Submitted by Ron Whitehorne on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 08:48.
You speak eloquently for our profession,
Submitted by Phantom Poster (not verified) on Mon, 03/07/2011 - 23:39.
If the draconian treatment of this exceptional teacher succeeds, there truly will be no hope for this district.
Submitted by Lisa Haver (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 12:18.
Hope has said that this is about more than her, and she is right. Teachers are already afraid to speak out on the conditions of the schools and School District policies. They see this teacher prosecuted and fired at warp speed. They know that the message is: we will do this to you if you say anything.
I would like to see the Notebook write more about how Kenny Gamble has had Audenried handed over to him, especially given that the present Universal school is performing poorly. Thanks to the Notebook for its coverage of this story.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 17:02.
Hope is the Philly version of Norma Rae
I am not a teacher nor a parent of an Audenreid student; I am a taxpayer who cares. Hope, I wish you the best and hope you beat them down. There are a lot of us just regular folk around the city who are behind you.
Ackerman must go!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 17:54.
The person who said the SDP will look bad is correct in my opinion. IF the problem is speaking out outside of school, that's not good, OR if she was giving out tokens, that won't fly either. Many HS teachers give out tokens, I don't see anything wrong with talking to the students about the Audenreid situation,(after all it is their school) but I would not encourage them to walk out (not that Hope did).
So their position is what?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:20.
What's wrong with you people? Are any of you actually parents?
If my daughter's high school teacher gave my daughter tokens to leave school, that would not be okay with me. I'd want to be in on that decision. I have a legal right to be in on that decision. A school district that condoned such an action by a teacher would be open to law suits.
She was told not to speak publicly about a directive, and she did.
Who can disobey a directive from their boss? Someone who is about to be unemployed.
You don't have to agree with the directive. But you do have to obey it if you want to keep your job.
You call this noble? I call it unprofessional.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:19.
Are you a parent? I doubt it, this post sounds too much like the cowardly actions of the a scared administration that knows its time is nearing the end. How you can condone punishing someone for speaking out about a very public matter boggles the mind. If you don't have the guts to ask questions like these then stand aside. A concerned parent would want to know just as much as a teacher as to why her child's school was closing when there was no data to justify this action. Enough with the guilt trip. Its your mentality that making the school district a national joke. When a directive comes from a racist, moneygrubber you have every right to ignore it. We still have free speech despite what your ilk would have us believe.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:27.
Your high school student doesn't even need a transportation pass or tokens to leave school and walk somewhere that you don't know where they are going. They are in high school, they like to lie and sneak. Students were groped by a strange man outside my school last year walking to school, more than once. So the possibilities in things going wrong from walking between school and home are just as high as if you give a student tokens to get home or to a rally. Administrators give out transpasses everyday, so it is ok for them to do so and not a teacher? What we should be focusing on is how truancy is more of a safety issue. But supposedly you can't be older than 16 for the truancy court, which is beyond ridiculous. All the truancy issues are far more important in safety and transportation than Moffett giving a student who cares for her school a chance for her voice to be heard. If we keep raising such nit picky issues in education like this, we might as well have Judge Judy hear our case, because this is as bad as someone suing over some used furniture because their boyfriend dumped them.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 22:03.
If your daughter was given a token and walked out, that would be HER choice. If someone would give her a cigarette and she smoked it, it would be HER choice. Teach your daughter to make decisions no matter what others give her or tell her what to do... that is called parenting and you don't have to be a professional to do so
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:54.
The District gives out TransPasses every week at times during lunch periods, does this mean they are also at fault when students leave the buildings during the school day? She has every right to give the tokens (her money); it was the students CHOICE to leave.
Post new comment