That would be today, Monday, June 25th. In high schools at least, grades are in, the year is over, Regents exams are done, and everything is pretty much finalized. But former chancellor Dennis Walcott needed his pound of flesh, and we're supposed to teach today. It's a little bit of a challenge.

You can't give homework, because the students aren't coming back. You can't start something new, because tomorrow the students won't be here. You can't really review anything in depth because you only have one day, and you aren't building toward a project or a test, or indeed anything. Every student knows this is the last day, and there are few consequences, if any, for anything that happens on this day.

This could've been different. For example, the Regents exams could've been one day later, and we could've taught one day before they began. It would be pretty easy. We begin Tuesday instead of Monday. Or Wednesday instead of Tuesday. You see how that works? Then there's one more day of actual instruction, if you value actual instruction.

Of course, if your goal is to waste the time of teachers and students by giving one more day of school after everything is essentially finished, you make today a full day of classes. As far as I can determine, that was the goal of Dennis Walcott when he insisted on a full instructional day after grades were in. The man was a prince. At least Bloomberg thought so, after what's-her-name, the executive with no educational experience, went down in flames after a few weeks on the job.

This day is yet another reminder that the ghost of Michael Bloomberg haunts the hallowed halls of Tweed. We're the largest district in the state, the largest in the country in fact, and it wouldn't be that hard for the chancellor to ask Albany for a schedule change. Push exams back one day and we won't have a day of massive student absence and wasted teacher time.

Of course no one asks me, or you, or anyone who actually does this work. It's important that we leave such pivotal decisions in the hands of people like Dennis Walcott. After all, he may have taught for five minutes somewhere,  Or maybe he hasn't. But he did show a bunch of students how he made waffles. Also, he didn't sully his reputation by going out and getting some stupid degree in school administration. He simply took over as chancellor because Michael Bloomberg wanted him to. And Bloomberg must know the right thing to do, or why would he have all that money?

I'm actually not going in today, because I have something personal to attend to. I'm glad because it was really tough for me to figure out what to do. But all over New York City, teachers are scrambling for things to do that will make sense to kids who know that today is largely meaningless. I envision a lot of video and playing hangman. That makes as much sense as just about anything.

Except, of course, changing the schedule to add a teaching day at a meaningful time. If we were to do that, it would be a whole lot easier for teachers to prepare. We'd be working toward something, and we wouldn't be facing a half-empty room.

That's common sense. Of course, common sense is the least common of all the senses, so we can only hope against hope that it prevails.

Today, after having given our Regents exams, after having finalized and turned in all our grades, NY City high school teachers will face our students. Well, that is, we will face the students who bother to show up. All the students know grades are in. This is an innovation created by Dennis "Waffles" Walcott, reformy extraordinaire.

Personally, I don't believe that grades are everything. I think there's more to education than passing tests. We have a lot of interactions that aren't recorded, and we do a lot of things that are not actually required by contract. Of course we get no credit for these things, not on the Danielson rubric, not on the junk science ratings, and our supervisors don't even know when we work things out for kids. But we're teachers and that's what we do.

Nonetheless, high school students are not coming in today expecting help with non-academic issues. They're not coming in expecting help with academic issues either. In fact, a whole lot of them are simply not coming in at all, and I don't blame them. I mean, it's nice to come and say hello to your teacher and friends. However, when I was a teenager, if you told me that the grades were all in and there were no consequences for my non-attendance, you'd probably find me at the beach.

I teach ESL, and a lot of my students will show up. I'll show up too, because, you know, it's my job and I get paid and stuff. But it's not a productive use of our time. If we all have to come in, and the grades are a fait acompli,  the reformies who devised this should have found a better way for us to spend our time. Maybe they could send us all to a baseball game or a play. Maybe we could visit a college. Maybe there is something we can do other than sit in a classroom when class time is effectively over.

Actually I know they'll never do that, so here's my real idea--why not just push the Regents exams forward one day, and have us teach one day before the Regents exams? Wouldn't a class day be more productive if the students thought it were actually worth showing up?  Now I realize I'm just a lowly teacher whose paycheck is a mere fraction of Dennis Walcott's. And I've never been to a Leadership Academy or even an administration school (though he hasn't either). But naturally, by virtue of his innate reforminess alone, his idea is much better than mine. Still, I have no idea why.

My kids are great, and I'm sure they will pose no problems for me or anyone. But what if they weren't? What if they really didn't want to show and their parents forced them? What if they know their grades cannot be lowered, they can't be suspended, and it's highly unlikely there will be any consequence for any actions that aren't specifically felonious?

Dennis Walcott wasn't worried about things like that, because he wasn't a teacher. Who cares if Johny commits an atrocity in Miss Grundy's class? It's not like the AC was gonna break down in Walcott's  office, or the window air conditioners in Bloomberg's SUV were threatened. It's not like he was gonna have to eat whatever was left over on the last day the school cafeteria was open. And this certainly was not gonna result in bad service at his gala luncheon at the Plaza.

So if you're sitting five periods in a classroom that looks like the one above, consider sending a thank you note to Dennis Walcott. The thing about reformies is they're all about wasting your time. They don't really care about the quality of education. They have their eye on opportunities. After all, Eva Moskowitz is barely pulling in 500K a year, and you can barely buy a house with that these days. There are more charters to be built, and cyber-charters that don't even have to technically exist to rake in the bucks.

If you and your kids have to spend your time sitting around doing nothing for no good reason, well, that's a small price to pay for all this progress.

I don't support NYPD's turning their backs to Mayor de Blasio. What de Blasio said to his son, in view of what was happening in NYC and around the country was perfectly reasonable. I'd have said the same if I were him, and the community who voted for him, perhaps largely because of a commercial in which his son was prominently featured, needed to know that the mayor saw that. He opposed stop and frisk, ran on a platform saying so, and moved to block it. He has never said a disparaging word about NYPD.

On the other hand, I've watched Rudy Giuliani say teachers don't deserve raises because they stink. This was Rudy's way of arguing for merit pay, which has been around for a hundred years and has never worked anywhere. This argument, of course, is not restricted to Giuliani, and is bandied about by politicians statewide and nationally. It's discussed in op-eds as though it's common sense. Of course, common sense is the least common of all the senses, and this sort of blather has pervaded all of MSM, up to and including the allegedly liberal New York Times.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg treated us like something he had to scrape off of his Florsheims. He gave the police an 8% two year raise, and he gave FDNY and virtually every other union the same during an economic downturn. In lieu of that, he gave us a middle finger, threatened to lay us off, tried very hard to destroy our seniority rights (thought not those of any other union), and said he'd like to fire half of us and double class sizes. I don't know about you, but I've had very tough classes of 34. It's idiotic, counter-productive, and incredibly thoughtless to contemplate classes of 68 kids at a time.

With the financial support of the extremely right-wing, extremely wealthy Koch Brothers, Scott Walker decimated union in Wisconsin. He eliminated collective bargaining, and made unions vote annually for dues checkoff. Of course he didn't do that for police. Michael Bloomberg famously referred to the police as his private army. And someone has to protect Walker from the crowds that surrounded his capital when they realize how badly they're being screwed. Pretty much all of the above is disparate treatment.

The press regularly vilifies us. I've seen Campbell Brown and her nonsensical arguments plastered everywhere. Judging from the extremely selective stories she tells, literally based on a handful of cases, you'd think teachers were sexual predators. You'd think people like Bloomberg and his pawns ought to be able to fire us at will, based on unsubstantiated or even rejected allegations. I've read stories in the Daily News and the Post that mirrored her blather. I'm familiar with precisely one of the cases she endlessly repeats and I happen to know the teacher in question deserved nothing more than a caution to be careful of how his words can be interpreted. This is a lesson that teacher, after unmerited years in the rubber room and thousands in unnecessary fines, probably knows better than any other teacher in the city.

The NYPD officer, on the other hand, was facing a man strangled to death, and on video. This was ruled a homicide. A grand jury, however, cleared the officer. I don't hear Campbell Brown loudly crying for this officer's job. I don't see articles about him in the tabloids demanding justice. And in case it isn't clear, this officer was not accused of making a distasteful statement. This officer killed someone, someone who said, "I can't breathe," eleven times, and the video is all over the internet.

I would understand the cops turning their backs to the mayor on the basis of the crap contract they're being offered. My very first act of unionism was marching with UFT at a Labor Day parade in which we planned to do that to David Dinkins. We were all wearing black t-shirts that said, "Shame on City Hall" on the back. But we weren't at a funeral, and we weren't making the preposterous claim that Bill de Blasio had blood on his hands. Because our plan was no secret at all, Dinkins ran off to a tennis match somewhere rather than face us. Apparently, we are supposed to respect the authority of the police, no one may ever question the actions of a single police officer, and no one may warn their children to be careful when dealing with the police, even after we watch a man killed by a police officer on video.

On the other hand it's perfectly fine to vilify teachers, to stereotype us based on shoddy evidence, and to deprive us of due process based on a handful of sensationalized cases. We should trust in the good graces of folks like Mike Bloomberg and Dennis Walcott, and we should disregard the fact that they are fanatical ideologues with no regard for evidence or truth.

Is this because teaching is a profession dominated by women? Is it because time and time again our union leadership has compromised with folks like Bloomberg, embracing mayoral control, charter schools, colocations, two-tier due process, and things that looked very much like merit pay? Is it because the job of educating our children must always take second place to the importance of enriching the likes of Pearson, Eva Moskowitz and Rupert Murdoch? All of the above?

No more multiple choice questions for today. Today's a day for reflection. Why is there one standard for police, and a very different one for teachers? Why is it so widely accepted by the media? Is it the job of our union leadership to let the public know this? Is it possible to even do that, and if so, how?

Teacher dissatisfaction with Bloomberg lackey Dennis Walcott is at 57%, and Gotham Schools calls it an all-time high. I can only marvel at the other 43%. It's entirely feasible they were too paranoid to answer honestly. Teachers have repeatedly asked me whether or not the surveys could be traced to them. After all, they're numbered, and who knows there aren't principals writing the numbers down, or even attributing poor results to individual teachers with no reasonable basis whatsoever?

In this era of American education, reason is a quaint relic of the past. We judge teachers on junk science. We issue standards that have never been field-tested anywherem and NY Times columnists rave about their importance. We have insane ideologues running not only the NY City Department of Education, but the national DOE as well.

Who's to say the leadership academy grads aren't hunched over in their offices, smoking cigarettes, and plotting revenge against those awful teachers who said those terrible things about not only Walcott, but also their exalted selves?

So maybe those 43% aren't paranoid after all, and are focused on the very real consequences of working in a system based on ideas that originated in the hind quarters of bull goose loony Bill Gates. There are, of course, exceptions. For example, the Educators 4 Excellence just can't wait to be fired for no reason. Gotham Schools darling Ruben Brosbe, who couldn't get tenure when he was a teacher, went and took some course at Harvard, and came back in some sort of leadership position. After all, just because you haven't been deemed fit for teacher tenure, if you're reformy enough that's no reason you're unfit to be in charge of schools or teachers.

There are all sorts of opportunities for teachers who drink the Kool-Aid. Diane Ravitch writes that TFA teachers are on the fast track for advancement. Those of us in the reality-based community are doomed to be teachers. Actually, that's fine with me. I'm very much aware that we're doing the most important work there is, and I'm proud of serving kids who really need me. I only hope I can continue to do so as long as I'm able, and that I leave before the junk science monster bites me.

It's a shame so many teachers are so timid. We need to stand as one, unafraid. We need to speak the truth. We need to do this not only for ourselves, but also for our students. Any teacher who endorses the nonsense that pervades education today is either misinformed, working toward a Gates gig, or sorely lacking judgment and curiosity. And which of those is qualified to serve as a role model for our children?

I'd argue none of the above.

Aside from my typical disgust when we are targeted for the egregious offense of dedicating our lives to guiding children, I know there must be a particular reason the Daily News and legal expert Campbell Brown targeted us this week.

There are big issues with this story. The primary issue is the teachers they discuss have not been found guilty of anything. The person who determines guilt, or lack thereof, is the arbitrator. So the Daily News, abetted by legal expert Campbell Brown, cries, "WHY WEREN'T THEY FIRED?" or some such inflammatory nonsense. However, they fail to provide the answer, which is quite simple. "BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T GUILTY!"

That gets left out of the mix, of course, because it tends to detract from the story. "TEACHERS NOT GUILTY DON'T GET FIRED!" won't get you as many readers.

What is it that they want? Ostensibly, what they want is for Chancellor Dennis Walcott to determine ultimate guilt or innocence. That is, instead of the independent arbitrators selected jointly by UFT and DOE mandated by the Contract, Walcott's agency would investigate, and Walcott would decide whether or not his agency did a good job. The fact that Walcott rejects 100% of U-rating appeals has not made it into any of the articles. One could say that is because legal expert Campbell Brown, who just happens to be married to some Students First person (Michelle Rhee's group) does not know about this. Or maybe she chooses not to know about it.

It's tough to say. But last year they made a big deal of it, and they appear to wish to do the same this year. And the message the public gets is that teachers are a bunch of perverts, sickos, weirdos, or whatever invective they've selected this week.

Make no mistake--the message is total nonsense.

But Students First people, like the one legal expert Campbell Brown is married to, tend not to like unions. And the charter movement is very much about avoiding unions. I meet a lot of student teachers, and not one I've met wanted to work for a charter. But in a tough market, a job's a job.  So let me assure real parents out there that public schools get first pick of available teachers, and Eva Moskowitz, despite her glitzy ads, gets whoever is left. That's just one reason I send my kid to a public school.

The bottom line is the people the DN and legal expert Campbell Brown are raving about are not threats to children, as far as I know. For one thing, if they were, and Walcott couldn't make a case against them, that speaks more to his ineptitude than anything else. For another, if they were actually criminals, like my daughter's former principal appears to be, there would be real stories enumerating real charges, rather than nebulous crap about only being able to fire 30 of 100, or whatever it is.

So let's be clear--this ridiculous vague attack against a large group is NOT about keeping our children safe. It's about attacking the working conditions of unionized teachers. It's about depriving us of voice.

Because there's one thing I know as sure as I live and breathe--there are people who love kids, who support them, who want them to be happy and successful. The Daily News and legal expert Campbell Brown, and the Students First demagogues are not those people.

We are those people. We stand up for what's right for kids. And we will continue to do so no matter how many times they slime us, no matter how many nonsensical stories they put forth, no matter how much filthy corporate cash they toss around, and no matter how many tinhorn politicians, at any level, they buy.

We love the kids. And we will expose those who attack us for what they are.

Day by day.

Lie by lie.

We tell the truth. We show kids how to find the truth.

Because that's what we do. That's why we're here. And it's also most certainly why we're under attack.

The Daily News, no longer content to have its editorial section lecture us on the perfidy of teachers, has now taken to the pages of its "reporting" to do so. In fact, to save time, they appear to be simply writing the same story every day. Teachers are a bunch of perverts, legal expert Campbell Brown says they are right, and that's pretty much it.

And, of course, paragon of fairness Dennis Walcott says anyone charged with sexual misconduct ought to be terminated. If the puppet of the city's richest man says you're guilty, that ought to be good enough for anyone. Right, Daily News?

To bolster their case, they gave one example of a teacher they say attended some NAMBLA meetings. Momentarily disregarding whether that's any truer than the rest of the unsubstantiated nonsense they offer, did this guy actually do anything? There are laws about having sex with children, and it's my belief that people found guilty of such things go to prison. In fact, it's my belief they belong there. Of course, I'm not a legal expert like Campbell Brown, so it's hard to say.

And I'm sorry, but there is still a presumption of innocence in this country, and it still applies to all Americans, even school teachers.

It's reprehensible that the Daily News is so appallingly ignorant of our legal system that it would vilify people for asking their guilt be proven before they face conviction and termination.

Probably the Daily News is also unaware that Chancellor Walcott, whose judgment they dare not question, upholds almost 100% of U-ratings for teachers, whether justified or not. Is it because they didn't do their homework? Or is it because, in their zeal to stereotype working teachers with unsubstantiated nonsense, they just don't give a damn?

Hi. I'm New York City Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott, and I think it's about time we addressed bullying. Personally I've had it with bullying. That's why I'm making 80 thousand teachers give lessons on it. After all, I've made them come back for full school days on June 24th and 25th, after they've given grades and their students have finished all their tests. What better time to tell 34 kids you oppose bullying than right after you've forced them to come back to a hot classroom for no reason?

I'd also like to say a few words about the Democratic mayoral candidates, who have been criticizing the mayor's initiatives, which they have no right to do. It's important we continue closing schools, and those candidates have made unconscionable statements saying we shouldn't do this. That's bullying, and I will not stand for it. Who the hell does John Liu think he is saying we need to involve parents and communities? Does he really think any community would let us come in and close their neighborhood school if we gave them a real say? Of course not. We won't let them bully us like that. We will come in and close their schools whether they like it or not. It's for their own good.

We've also had it with those damn UFT teachers. Who the hell do they think they are trying to push an evaluation system on us by negotiating, just because the law says we have to negotiate? We will not be bullied like that. We will accept our own system, with no variation whatsoever, and as soon as they're willing to accept it, we will agree. If not, we'll just let Reformy John King decide, and whose side do you think he's gonna take? Get real, people.

Once we get this new evaluation system in place, the mayor can buy himself a suitable candidate, and within two years we can fire every single teacher who isn't part of E4E, so if you want to be working in 2016, you'd better join now. Of course if you don't want to, that's entirely your choice. We aren't bullies and we understand you are free to do as you choose.

But we will not be bullied. We will get what we want, when we want, however we want it, and we will settle for nothing less. So I urge teachers to demonstrate to their students that bullying will not be tolerated, and that includes any criticism, however trivial, of our Great Leader Mayor Michael Bloomberg, blessed be his name.

Thank you very much, and remember we have cameras everywhere.

I'm surprised at how many people are shocked at NYC Schools Chancellor Walcott's sales presentation to principals last Saturday. It's encouraging, of course, that the principals gave him such a cool reception. After a decade of crap that never works, it's good to see that even administrators are not buying it. Bloggers I read regularly are shocked that he resorted to being outright political.

Yet it's one of Walcott's primary duties to fight for and defend crap that doesn't work. As long as Rupert Murdoch can squeeze a few extra millions out of it, whether or not it works is of no consequence. The important thing is to keep tossing out untested and unproven mandates and hope for the best. The best, of course, means Mayor Mike gets to fire as many teachers as possible, close as many schools as possible, and have Eva Moskowitz and her minions take over as many buildings as possible. Every dollar paid to a unionized teacher is a dollar that hedge-fund magnates may not get their grubby little hands on.

The NYC Chancellor, since the advent of Michael Bloomberg and mayoral control, is not at all the same position it once was. Ostensibly, the chancellor is supposed to be a voice for public school children. But now, the chancellor serves at the pleasure of the billionaire mayor, whose pleasure is closing neighborhood schools. undermining others by siphoning high-performing kids to charters, and thus creating a domino effect.

When Democrats stand up and say it's time to stop closing public schools, it's time to respect parents and teachers, and it's time to stop enacting insane policies that help no one who isn't already a billionaire, that threatens Bloomberg's legacy. It cannot be tolerated.

Thus, Walcott must be trotted out to proclaim how successful the mayor's policies are. That's his prime directive. He follows in the footsteps of previous non-educators Cathie Black and Joel Klein. Since none of them know anything at all about what it means to be a teacher, they can spout whatever they're told and not worry about how utterly inaccurate it is.

I certainly hope we get a mayor who isn't insane soon. It doesn't seem like a lot to ask, but it's been a long, long time with Emperor Mike, and who knows whether or not he'll change the law again to buy a new term for him and best bud Christine Quinn? But it's time for a new mayor. And it's time for a new chancellor who really has the interests of children at heart.

And if that mayor wants to know what children need, there are a whole lot of parents and teachers who can fill in the details.

Hi there, all you folks in education land! It's me, Chancellor "Waffles" Walcott, telling you that Mayor Bloomberg has decided to take action against "perv" teachers, and I agree completely! First of all, we've had it with those nasty arbitrators! Sometimes, they even decide against us! I ask you, is that reasonable? You don't see anyone ruling against us on the PEP, where Mayor Bloomberg has 8 of 13 votes. If any of them threaten to vote the wrong way, Mayor Bloomberg fires them before they can do so. That's great policy, and I agree completely.

Frankly, the only way we can represent children in the way Mayor Bloomberg wishes to, with which I agree completely, is to make sure he gets the final word. Well, technically I get the final word, but as you see with U ratings of teachers, I reject virtually every single case, whether or not there is evidence. That's the way the mayor wants it, and I agree completely.

So let's say that one of these "perv" teachers gets accused of something, and one of those useless arbitrators determines it isn't true? What the hell do they know anyway? Are they taking instructions from Mayor Bloomberg? If they were, I'd agree completely. But it appears they are not.

So what is it we want? Well, we found some NY Senator from Poughkeepsie to propose a bill that says, if the independent arbitrator finds their case to be baseless, we can fire that darn teacher anyway! That'll teach 'em a lesson! (Get it? That's just one of the cool education jokes we like to tell around Tweed! We are lots of fun when you get to know us. Really!)

So here's the thing. It probably won't get passed, as there are folks in the Assembly that insist on reading this stuff before they vote for it. (Mayor Bloomberg hates that, and I agree completely.) So it won't get passed. But even if it doesn't, we'll get teacher sex stories in the Post every day for a month. This way, we can not only put the union in the position of looking like they defend perv teachers, but also harp on those 16 cases that were dismissed! Sure, you'll say, these cases were found to be without merit. Well, let me tell you, you wouldn't know that from reading those darn tabloids! Joe SixPack, or whoever reads this stuff, thinks teachers do this stuff all the time, whether or not they actually did it.

So, given that, Mayor Bloomberg thinks we should fire teachers whether or not they're actually guilty, and I agree completely! It's another wonderful day in Mr. Bloomberg's neighborhood! And remember, if you're in the neighborhood of Tweed, feel free to step up to one of the food trucks and buy yourself a waffle!

Hi, it's me, your old buddy Dennis "Waffles" Walcott. I've just made a tough statement about teachers, because Mayor Bloomberg thinks the way to support our hard-working staff is to let them know we're working on new ways to fire them, and I agree completely. From now on, get two U-ratings and we'll try to remove you from your job, whether or not your principal thinks it's a good idea. This may be tough, since some of our principals give U-ratings for arbitrary and frivolous reasons, but I don't care about any of that.

It's true that right now the burden of proof is on us, and we're likely to waste a great deal of city money going after teachers who haven't actually done anything wrong. However, I'm certain the NY Post will not see it that way, and will gleefully do stories on the perfidy of these teachers even after they're acquitted. So for me, it's kind of a win-win.

Of course, once we get that new evaluation system up, we figure the burden will be on the teachers and we can pretty much fire whomever we want. Of course, the agreement now states that 13% of poorly-rated teachers can get a fair hearing, and we're holding out until we can negotiate that number to a more reasonable 0%, which the mayor prefers, and I support completely.

You see, Mayor Bloomberg thinks the best way to encourage teachers is to not give them a raise for four years, and also to deny them the contract we granted all other city workers for the 2008-2010 round of pattern bargaining. I agree completely. A few days ago, the Mayor decided teachers would feel even more supported if they were denied a retroactive raise to catch up. You see, that way, we can wipe out at least 8% of the "raises" we're always boasting about, and actually lower teacher pay. Mayor Bloomberg thinks this will encourage teachers to support him, and I agree completely.

We're also looking at trying to fire the ATRs, but now we're thinking about a buyout. Maybe if we wave enough money at them they'll just go away without a fight. You see, our "fair student funding" plan makes principals pay the full salaries of teachers, so principals just don't want to hire some highly-paid experienced teacher when they can grab two newbies for the same price. Mayor Bloomberg thinks that's a great idea, and I support him completely.

So what we're looking at, especially with closing 24 schools for no special reason, which I support completely, is trying to make this job so insecure, threatening, and frustrating that teachers will walk out en masse. Then we can hire newbies to replaces them, turn them over every two or three years, and no one collects a big salary but consultants and those of us working at Tweed, which I support completely. Hopefully, no teacher sticks around long enough to collect some nasty pension--another win-win.

So thanks, teachers, for all your hard work. Mayor Bloomberg and I will be happy to give you a hearty handclasp along with your pink slip.

Chancellor Walcott is always thinking of us. That's why, during Teacher Appreciation Week, he issued this statement as part of the Principals' Weekly:

I believe the best way I can show my appreciation is to support you actively in our critical work, and that’s why I’m pleased to share the 2012-13 citywide instructional expectations with you.

Thanks, Chancellor. Words can barely express how much I appreciate your sharing your list of demands with us. I've no doubt they'll be equally effective as anything else you and Mayor4Life cooked up over the last decade, which is to say, not at all. But I digress.

Not only has the chancellor magnanimously shared his demands with us, but out of the kindness of our heart, he's turned June 25th and 26th into attendance days for kids. This, apparently, is to make up for the snow days we didn't have. Why exactly there is a need to make up snow days we didn't have baffles me utterly. Like most initiatives from Tweed, it makes no sense whatsoever. But that's not all.

Actually, Mr. Walcott does not wish to have students attend those days. He wishes for schools to have SBOs so they can spend two full days discussing his list of demands. You see, Walcott forgot we still have this contract that dictates which days we can and cannot use for that sort of thing, and probably felt any day was as good as the next for indoctrination.

So those of us in high schools are faced with a choice--do we call students into school after their grades have been issued, their books have been collected, and their minds have tuned out, or do we sit through two days of mind-stultifying nonsense about programs that are sure to fail? Let's not forget these programs are designed by the same people who gave contracts and 8% plus raises to every city worker except educators over the 2008-2010 round of pattern bargaining.

There doesn't seem to be a great choice here. What would you choose?

That's essentially the DOE policy on Facebook and social networking. They recommend you not friend your students. No, wait, they STRONGLY recommend you not do so. I recommend the same, to tell you the truth. But my motivations are quite different.

I think it's a bad idea because it's entirely possible your Facebook comments could be printed out and sitting on the principal's desk the next time you get called in for a friendly chat. Do you really want to explain why you chose that particular string of obscenities? Did you mean to imply something about the principal? Your students? It doesn't matter all that much because you can't grieve the letter in your file until you're at a 3020a proceeding and they're trying to take your job. My advice? If you don't want your principal, your class, and your grandmother to see it, don't write it.

DOE has a different perspective. Go ahead, they say. Do whatever the hell you want. But if it blows up in your face they'll be right there, saying see? We told you! You shouldn't have said that. You shouldn't have done that! Now look. We have to tell the New York Post and they say you're the worst teacher in the world, even worse than the last worst teacher in the world!

That's the late Freddie Prinze above. Not my job, man, was part of a comedy routine he did years ago on the Tonight Show. It was pretty funny. But if the DOE catches you on Facebook, they won't hesitate to go after your job, and it won't be funny at all. It's not wabbit season, and it's not duck season. It's teacher season, and you'd better believe Bloomberg, Walcott, and all their hedge fund buddies are coming after me, you, and anyone else who commits the unpardonable offense of teaching children and demanding to be paid for their services.

 Good morning New York. I'm Dennis "Waffles" Walcott, NY City Schools Chancellor.

You know, we here at Tweed take the education of our youngsters very seriously. That's why, two years ago, Mayor Bloomberg decided to utilize the "transformation model" for 33 schools in the city. I fully supported this great innovation, as supporting our schools is something it's important for us to do. Also, using the Danielson Framework was helpful. While some people, including Danielson, felt our rubric was kind of a "gotcha" thing, I thought we did a pretty good job, especially since none of us had actually been trained in how to use the darn thing. I fully supported the way we used it.

Now, once we and the UFT were unable to come to an agreement on evaluation, I fully supported Mayor Bloomberg's decision to keep the federal money via the federal "turnaround" plan, which entails replacing the principal and at least 50% of staff. After all, we need that money to enact valuable reforms. When the UFT and the city came to a preliminary agreement on evaluation, I fully supported Mayor Bloomberg's decision to do the turnaround model anyway. After all, the UFT ought to know that we do what the mayor wants, when he wants, and how he wants, and that I fully support this approach.

Mayor Bloomberg also took the step of removing 7 schools who'd received As or Bs in our progress reports. We looked pretty stupid closing those schools, so when Mayor Bloomberg took them off the list, I fully supported him. 

Of course, there is that nasty contract that the UFT insists we use, just because we negotiated and signed it. While I think it's unreasonable, it turns out that the federal "turnaround" model violates the contract, which says we must allow a minimum of 50% of the most senior teachers to keep their jobs. Mayor Bloomberg wisely decided to follow this model rather than face a losing lawsuit, and I fully supported him.

So now it looks like we won't get the federal money after all. That was the main reason Mayor Bloomberg decided to use the turnaround model. But he has decided to go ahead with it anyway, and I fully support him. After all, it will be a nice change for kids to come to a school that's brand new, with lots of different teachers. Why? Because Mayor Bloomberg says it will, and I fully support him.

Sure there are those nattering nabobs of negativity, who wonder how a school will get off to a good start when it can't actually program for next year, or plan anything whatsoever given it has no idea who will be working there next year, and that the school technically will not exist next year. I say, embrace the challenge! Mayor Bloomberg changes his plans all the time, for any reason, or for no reason at all, and all I can say is I fully support him.

As Chancellor, one of my biggest priorities is putting Children First, Always. That's why the children will be first to eat the nearly 200 metric tons of pink slime in our frozen meat. Other municipalities are banning it outright and having kids eat peanut butter and jelly. But we're feeding it all to NYC's 1.1 million schoolchildren. After all, they've been eating ammonia-drenched meat products for so long, a few more months won't make a difference.

On the bright side, plenty of kids eat at McDonald's, and while we don't much like it when our kids eat highly caloric fat-laden mass-produced non-nourishing crap, at least it doesn't have that darn pink slime in it! McDonald's insisted it be removed immediately. Who would've thunk it?

As you know, I'm highly interested in nutrition. That's why I'm so particular about what I put in my waffles. But let's face it, lots of kids eat fast food crap every darn day. So really, what's a few more tons of slime, one way or the other? They'll get over it. And if they don't, I'll close their damn schools! Just kidding. Or maybe I'm not. Honestly, who knows what we're gonna do next, or why?

Anyhoo, the important thing is it's Children First. And if there's any left over, I'll feed it to my dog. Now there's a science to that. As you know, over the last few years, to serve you better, we've cut school budgets by 14%, and allowed thousands of teachers to leave without replacing them, causing an even sharper increase in class size than usual. We've taken a billion dollars to reduce class sizes and they've gone up each year. You see? It's Children First for budget cuts and larger class sizes.

Next, of course, is my dog. I will reduce his ration of Alpo by 14% and replace it with pink slime, which I hope he enjoys as much as the Children to whom I served it First. And we shall see about reducing dog park space by 14%, and devoting it toward something Mayor Bloomberg wants, like a Moskowitz charter school. As chancellor, I take the job of representing Mayor Bloomberg very seriously, and you can be sure that whatever new cuts, whatever foul products available, it will be Children First, Always. Because that's the kind of folks we are.

Mayor Mike Bloomberg, after a midnight New Year's kiss from Lady Gaga, woke yesterday to yet another surprise, an unexpected early-morning call from dynastic tyrant Kim Jong-un. The newly established Supreme Leader was interested in establishing a more positive image in hopes of getting more international aid and better PR.

Both Kim and the mayor agreed a good first step would be a new Revolutionary Panel for Re-educational Policy. Kim was delighted to learn he could establish a board to discuss pre-decided matters and have what would appear to be open discussion periods. Bloomberg assured him that most people, including the press, would assume the panel listened to said discussion. Whether or not they actually did was of no importance whatsoever. Were anyone to disrupt said panel, Kim could simply have his reps shake their heads disapprovingly while state-controlled newspapers editorialized about how disrespectful and inconsiderate the protesters were.

Kim could appoint 8 members, others could appoint 5, and after all discussion, the board would simply do whatever Kim told it to do. Dissenters among Kim's 8 could be disposed of as he saw fit, and, surprising to Kim, he could get rid of them before any actual voting took place. Kim was shocked to learn that this was how things were done in a democracy, and was confident that adoption of such methods could result in a PR bonanza. Mayor Bloomberg's staff provided numerous NYC editorials as evidence of how effective the practice has actually proven to be.

Kim was  also effusive in his praise of NYC Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott and NY State Governor Andrew Cuomo. He expressed great admiration for the way these leaders pretended to negotiate in good faith with organized labor, and then, when they failed to get exactly what they wanted, simply chose to ignore the agreement altogether. Kim, through an interpreter, expressed great optimism that he could run his country the way New York City was run and still appear to be moving toward democracy.

"This is a great opportunity to shape an image for myself, rehabilitate my country's image, and still do whatever the hell I feel like," said Kim. "It's like they say, New York New York, if you can pull it off there, you can pull it off anywhere."

So says Chancellor Dennis Walcott, in his response to the impasse between the DOE and the UFT. Since the UFT insists that outside mediators must decide whether or not teachers can be fired based on test scores, Walcott has asked that the UFT be excluded from negotiating the evaluation system, in direct violation of the agreement with the state.

This is in keeping with the philosophy of Mayor4Life Michael Bloomberg, who set up a fake board of education to give the appearance he was not simply doing whatever he wanted, however he wanted, whenever he wanted. Perhaps if the UFT were to propose that Mayor Mike hand-pick 8 of 13 arbitrators, Walcott would be happy.

But this begs the question--what the hell sort of role model is this man, the highest official in the school system? Do we want to teach our children that rules mean nothing, that they are to be disregarded when inconvenient, and that they should simply scream loudly when things don't go their way?

Is Walcott, then, the kid at the supermarket checkout loudly demanding a Chunky bar, and refusing to eat dinner until he gets it? The whole, "I want it, I want it now, and I want it all," is hardly the model I'd propose for my child or my students.

Yet it's pretty much all we get from Walcott and Bloomberg.

Tenure is under attack all over. Chancellor Dennis Walcott doesn't support it, because Michael Bloomberg doesn't support it and New York's school chancellor is only permitted to support what Michael Bloomberg supports. Theoretically, a chancellor should represent schoolchildren, but under mayoral control, he represents a billionaire tycoon, as does our fake school board, the PEP.

Acquiring tenure, according to the "reformers," entails hanging around for a few years and being able to produce mist on a mirror. For me, it was not so simple. I could never find a position teaching in my license area, and actually had to change it. I think it took me at least six years. I have no idea when I actually received it.

A few years ago, a young teacher told me she thought she'd gotten tenure, and wanted to ask the principal. Would I come with her? It can be scary going to see the principal, so I said okay. The principal had no idea, but checking the dates it appeared she'd crossed the threshold. He wanted to do something for her, but had no idea what.

"Here, have this plant," he said, grabbing one of the potted plants the secretaries had lying around.

We've come a long way from those days. Now, the DOE sends out a certificate. I know because a young teacher showed me one the other day. This is a pretty nice thing to do, I think.

Perhaps it's the exception that proves the rule.

NYC Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott, according to an incredibly superficial account in today's Times, is looking for better relationships with teachers, and better communication with the public. He's therefore reaching out in a calm fashion without frothing at the mouth. Judging by the article, this represents a paradigm change.

Actually, Walcott espouses precisely the same policies Klein did, a fact unnoticed in this article. These policies are largely untested and unsupported by evidence, but favored by a Billionaire Boys Club that pretty much dictates policy in America these days.

Walcott dismisses the notion, wildly popular among parents, of reducing class size, an initiative for which Bloomberg took hundreds of millions of dollars:

“If I have a great principal there and if I have great teachers there,” he said, “that, to me, benefits the students no matter how large the class size is.”

No matter how large? That's a frightening concept, deemed unworthy of comment or follow-up by the Times reporter.  What does the most powerful member of the DOE think about morale among teachers?

He dismissed the notion that there might be a morale problem among teachers — “no matter whether you have a three-person work force or a 135,000-person work force, there are people who will be unhappy,” he noted — and said it all boiled down to commitment.

I have seen a marked decline in morale since Mayor4Life took over. Does Walcott know that every city employee has gotten a contract and a raise except teachers? Why are we alone unworthy of a salary increase? In fact, the morale issue started well before that. Walcott's willful ignorance defies belief. What does Walcott say to alleviate this?

“You’ve got to perform or we’ll do something to you.”

What on earth does that mean? Likely it means that teachers alone will be held responsible for test scores. They're not his problem.  And they're certainly not Mayor4Life's problem. What else does Walcott say to boost morale? On tenure:

“I don’t believe in lifetime guarantees.”

I don't either, in fact. However, tenure is simply a guarantee of due process, not a lifetime guarantee. Stories like this one perpetuate the myth that tenure is anything otherwise. The fact that Walcott either doesn't know or care what tenure is speaks volumes about him. The fact is Walcott approves of all Mayor Bloomberg's policies and initiatives, and represents a direct continuation of the destructive and ineffectual policies initiated by Joel Klein.

Don't be fooled by his quiet demeanor, and don't let articles like this one fool you either.

Thanks to Reality-based Educator

It's absurd to suggest that cheating is prevalent in New York City. Here in NY, we take test scores very seriously. In fact, we close schools and dismiss principals based solely on test results. So what possible motivation would anyone in the system have to cheat? We encourage all episodes of cheating to be reported fully, and I've invited anyone who knows of any cheating to contact me personally. What more can people ask?

As for this nonsense about expensive erasure analysis, it's important to note we have limited funds. In these tough times, we need to pick and choose how we spend our money. Since we already know we have little or no cheating, why would we want to spend money testing it?

Now clearly there have been cheating scandals in other areas of the country. But here in NY we have standards in place that should make cheating more difficult. That's good enough for me. If in fact there were cheating going on, why hasn't anyone reported it to me? Sure, there are a few bad apples, but the good ones would pick up their telephones and immediately expose whatever malfeasance that may be occurring.

So I ask you, New York, to simply relax. Don't worry about cheating because it's not happening here. You can trust us here at Tweed. After all, have we ever misled you in the past?