XXXXXXX XXXXXXX

123 XXXX XXXX Street

XXXXX 1X

XXXX XXXX, XXXX 12345

February 3, 2011

Ms. Madelene Chan

Superintendent District 24

9850 50th Avenue

Flushing, NY 11368

Dear Ms. Chan,

I am in receipt of your letter regarding my possible termination, and it took me quite by surprise. Since
each of the three observations in my classroom, I felt that I had made great improvements in the
classroom as well as instituting recommendations made.

Before I present my case against termination, please allow me to provide some background. Ms.
Michaeli hired me at a job fair in Brooklyn last summer. She described the job to me as one that would
require much creativity on my part and I should be prepared to teach “out of the box.” Our conversation
included talks about showing movies related to curriculum, and having the students do research
projects on a regular basis. She suggested that I contact the previous social studies teacher for his
digital material.

She went on to explain to me that because the New York State 8 th grade Social Studies test had been
eliminated, I would have a tremendous amount of leeway in what I wanted to teach and how I wanted
to teach it. Of course this came with the understanding that I had to follow the curriculum and the
pacing calendar. She told me to plan numerous internet-based projects because my classroom would
be equipped with a Smart Board and at least 15 computers. The Smart Board, which I use every day,
was there but the computers were not. As of today I have 6 laptops, three of which work properly.
The person in charge of technology in the school has not been to my room once the entire school year
even though I have requested his help many times.

I was very excited about the job opportunity. I had differentiated PowerPoint presentations, which
covered every topic in the 7th and 8th grade curriculum, and I was very anxious to fill in my historical
movie collection with DVDs that the students would find engaging.

The first four weeks of school were positive. The students accepted me quickly and they found my
teaching style to be one that would make “social studies fun.” I not only heard this from the students
but also from their parents. I was getting them to do very interesting and rigorous work, which I
proudly displayed in my classroom, on my bulletin board in the hallway as well as on the walls in the
hallway.

I thought everything was going great. Ms. Michaeli told me many times that the students liked me and,
as a neighborhood school, that was very important to her. She also made similar comments to my
colleagues about me.

At the end of September, she informed me that I should “throw away” all of my PowerPoint
presentations because they did not fit into her “pedagogical style”. She wanted every social studies
class in school, from pre-k through 8, to be taught in exactly the same manner. She explained to me
that her teaching philosophy was based on the book “How the Brain Learns” by David A. Sousa. She
gave me a copy of the book, which I read. What she wanted for every lesson was a reading, a graphic
organizer, modeling of how to fill out the graphic organizer, a rubric, differentiated group work and
sharing. In addition to that, she wanted every classroom in the school to be working on the same
strategies for Comprehension in literacy and content areas at the same time.

Therefore, she expected every 3rd grade class and 8th grade class to be concentrating on a literacy
strategy like “inferencing” on the same day. My attitude was that, as the boss and, although I had
never taught literacy before, I would do whatever she asked me to do.

At this point she told me that it usually takes teachers three of four months to catch on to this
methodology and told XXXXXX XXXXX, a math coach and an elementary school teacher to help me. As
you can see from Ms. XXXXX’s notes, I met with her very often. The issue that I have with the notes is
that I was asked to sign them under false pretenses. At approximately 2:30 on Tuesday January 4th (not
certain about day) she approached me with the log turned to the signature page. She explained to me
that it was a running record of our meetings to be used for her to retain her job as a coach. I asked her
as a colleague and a coach if I should read it and she told me that it was not necessary. I take full
responsibility for signing it without reading it but I made the mistake of trusting her.

After reading it thoroughly, I can tell you that most of it is fiction. The event she described most
accurately was the one dated November 8, 2010. In that log entry she describes how well she taught
one of my classes and I agree with her. She put together a great lesson. What she omitted from the log
is the details of our debriefing when she told me that putting the lesson together from scratch took her
about 5 hours. She then commiserated with me about how difficult it is to plan two of these every day
as I have been asked to do and have them all be wonderful.

I also take exception to her allegations that I did not take her advice or at worse ignored her completely.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. When I was confronted by Ms. Michaeli about not following
Ms. XXXXX’s instructions, Ms. XXXXX made it clear to me that she never told Ms. Michaeli that and she
would make sure that Ms. Michaeli knew that I was being very cooperative.

The fact is that I had never before done what they were asking me to do, and even with her limited help,
it did not come easily to me. I suggested that I may become more comfortable with this teaching style
if I was supplied the reading material for a few months. I explained to her that if I could eliminate the
stress of finding two new readings every day, I could concentrate on learning how to correctly present
that material to the class. The fact that I did not even know if the readings were appropriate
significantly added to my overall anxiety within the classroom. This request was conveyed to Ms.
Michaeli who rejected it outright and accused me of being lazy and not wanting to do the preparation
that was necessary for my class. She was uninterested in anything I had to say on the matter and
dismissed me from her office. I still believe that had she taken my advice, I would have progressed more
quickly.

I had been trained using the “workshop” model of teaching social studies. It is the most common
format that you can find in any class across the country. Many books have been written about its
success. The most famous is “Social Studies for Secondary Schools” by Alan J. Singer.

In addressing the physical state of my classroom, I inherited the space with every inch of it filled with old
textbooks and student work. I asked (the AP) Ms. Guarino what I could throw away and her answer was
so vague that I did not feel comfortable disposing of any of it. Ms. XXXXX helped straighten out my
library but that is basically where her involvement ended. The main closet in the room is used for the
students’ coats and other personal items that they do not want to carry around. There are no lockers,
no coat hooks and no private spaces to put items like gym sneakers. As a result, everything the 25
students in my homeroom would normally put in a locker is shoved into the closet, which does not
even having working doors. As I am sure you can imagine, this makes the room look unorganized.

The other major problems I have with Ms. XXXXX’s log are her constant emphasis on how I did not use
graphic organizers or rubrics. I absolutely disagree with her on that point. She told me that in lieu of
handing out 130 organizers every day, the students could draw them in their notebooks. I would
model the organizer on the white board and they would recreate it in their notebooks. She also made it
clear to me that a rubric was not necessary for graphic organizer on a daily basis regardless of what Ms.
Michaeli told me. A rubric should only be used for a project or something that can accurately be
assessed. Since we use graphic organizers every day, handing out a rubric every day would be
redundant and wasteful. The students have a rubric for the graphic organizers, which they should refer
to every day. I most vehemently disagree with her assertion that I did not use graphic organizers with
every lesson. That is completely false and I am prepared to get notarized statements from teachers
and para-professional teachers who are in my room every day that will attest to the fact that from the
day I was told to use graphic organizers in every lesson I did. I can also offer student notebooks as
proof.

I would now like to address the formal observations. I took Ms. Michaeli at her word that it would take
3 to 4 months to transform myself from a social studies teacher to a literacy teacher incorporating
American history readings into every lesson as she requested. Yet, on October 29th, after just one
month she formally observed me. I did a lesson on Emma Lazarus’ poem, which is displayed at the
Statue of Liberty using context clues. Three weeks earlier I had never heard of “context clues” as a
teaching strategy and this was the first time I had taught a lesson using that method. I disagree with
her observation that there were no NYS or CCSS standards posted because I do that every day and have
done it for years. I agree with her that I had not mastered the way she wanted me to teach each lesson
but it was obvious that I was trying.

The students had been given a copy of the poem, a rubric, and a graphic organizer. I also had
differentiated activities and left time for sharing. Unfortunately Ms. Michaeli did not mention any of
these things because she came in late, wrote text messages on her phone the entire time she was
there and she left early.

The second observation occurred on November 22nd at 1:40 PM. This day and time is significant
because it is the last period on the Monday of Thanksgiving week. The students are very distracted by
events going on around them including class parties and family matters which directly affect their
behavior. The class also has the reputation as being the most difficult one in the school. In addition to
that, it is a class where I have a second teacher in the room doing a parallel lesson. Ms. Michaeli has
instructed us that parallel teaching must take place for the entire lesson. Therefore, group one and
group two are doing read alouds at the same time. I do not disagree with the theory but it can create a
very disruptive atmosphere. On this particular day that is what occurred.

In addition to that, Ms. Guarino came in late for the observation and left early. The times she refers to
in her formal letter are inaccurate and misleading. She arrived at 1:44 and left at 1:52. Had she been
there on time, she would have seen how agitated the students were from an incident in the previous
period and she may have been more sensitive to why the lesson did not go perfectly.

She also neglected mentioning that due to laryngitis I could not speak above a whisper. I asked her if
the observation could be rescheduled but she declined my request. It is clear to me now that the
administration had a schedule regarding me that they had to stick to and that is why a postponement
was not possible.

What is particularly disconcerting about her observation is her implication that I did not address the
issues raised in my October 29th observation regarding the appearance of my classroom, the
housekeeping of my classroom and the illegibility of the charts I had hung around the room. I admit that
my handwriting is awful and I explained to the administration that it is one of the many reasons why I
love PowerPoint. They insisted that I hand write charts everyday and then complained that they were
unreadable. Also, I had a word wall posted in my classroom which she obviously overlooked in her zeal
to find fault with every other detail of my lesson.
The third and final observation came just two weeks later. The timing amazed and surprised me
because I do not think it is possible for any teacher to dramatically improve in such a short period of
time. I expected to be observed again after January 1 st. That being said, I prepared every word of my
lesson with Ms. XXXXX and Ms. XXXXXX, who were asked to give me extra help. In one 30-minute
session the three of us picked an appropriate reading piece, we chose and filled out a graphic organizer;
we wrote a rubric and scripted the entire lesson. We also went over comments from previous
observations to make sure those issues were not duplicated.

I taught the lesson exactly as Ms. XXXXX, Ms. XXXXX and I had constructed it. Nonetheless, Ms.
Symbouras went out of her way to accentuate the negative and ignore the positive. In one particularly
disturbing criticism she commented that the text I had projected on the Smart Board was too small to
read. I disagree with that but I do agree that the type was not sharp and that is the fault of Ms.
Symbouras who is the A.P. in charge of technology. I have complained to her for months that the
resolution on my Smart Board projector needed to be fixed.

Ms. Symbouras also observed “the classroom is not print rich, which was noted in the two previous
observations.” I completely disagree with this. Student work and charts reflecting current student
learning are posted all around the classroom. She either did not notice it, which is impossible, or
simply chose to ignore it so her observation would fall in line with the previous two.

At the post observation meeting Ms. Symbouras became very agitated when confronted with the fact
that I conducted the lesson exactly as Ms. XXXX, Ms. XXXXX and I had diagramed it. She even took Ms.
XXXXX out of a classroom half way through the meeting to refute my allegations (which she did not).
It was clear to Ms. XXXX, Ms. Guarino, Ms. XXXXXand me that Ms. Symbouras was sent to give me an
unsatisfactory observation and she would do or say anything to achieve that goal.

It must be pointed out that none of these observation letters stated that if I did not improve that I would
be terminated.

I would like to address the disciplinary letter. Ms. Guarino does whatever Ms. Michaeli tells her to do.
The only accuracy in the letter is that I told her that the students were planning a party for the last day
of school, something that Ms. Michaeli encourages. Please note that Ms. Guarino cites a time of 8:35
in her letter, which is during the first period of school. I did not have a first period class on that day.
The students were let out of their first period early, and I had them come into my classroom in an effort
to keep them from getting into trouble wandering the halls. The balance of the letter is pure fiction and
it is the first time I was ever threatened with termination. I did not even have an opportunity to prepare
a rebuttal letter when I received the notice of my discontinuance.

In conclusion, it is my opinion that Ms. Michaeli, Ms. Guarino and Ms. Symbouras colluded on the
formal observations to make sure that they would be rated “unsatisfactory”. Their motivation is
unclear because the students were being intellectually challenged; producing good work and seemed to
like my class and me very much. I was also doing my best to implement the type of teaching methods
that Ms. Michaeli wanted in the classroom. Had I been ignoring their suggestions I would have been
utilizing the “workshop model” which I prefer, believe is better and feel much more comfortable with.
I am attaching the lesson plan from the third observation with Ms. Symbouras as well as the materials
that go along with it. I am also attaching a picture of my current bulletin board and work posted in the
hallway. In addition I am attaching letters my students wrote to my mother. This may sound crazy but I
used parent conference day to have the students evaluate me in the form of a letter to my parent. I
believe that getting feedback from the students is an important part of becoming a better teacher. The
letters were written anonymously so the students did not have to worry about any repercussions.

I also sent you an email requesting a meeting with you before you made your final decision. The picture
painted by the administration of me in the observation letters is inaccurate and that can be confirmed
only by having a face-to-face meeting.