Even in Non-Union FCPS It takes a lawsuit and 21 witnesses to fire a teacher

[Anonymous]

How is this an efficient use of tax payer resources?

Some interesting facts from the article:

Twenty-one witnesses testified in the case to decide whether Violet Nichols should be allowed to continue teaching in the Fairfax County Public Schools. The last sworn in was Nichols herself.

In 2009, Nichols’s midyear evaluation was fine. But that spring, a case of vertigo kept her out of school for more than a month. Administrators said her evaluation would be completed the following year. She never received another positive review.

She has received her salary — about $92,000 a year, records show — at home since last summer.

Nichols, who is African American, filed a racial discrimination complaint against Czarniak, who is white. Ten months later, the school system concluded there had been no such discrimination.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/teacher-tenure-a-fairfax-schools-firing-case/2012/06/02/gJQAVt4l9U_story.html

[Anonymous]

It's callued due process.
Obviously the School Board was wrong. She should never have been fired in the first place.

But this is the messed up part: she was not being charged with poor results as a teacher, but not following the FCPS methods in teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's callued due process.
Obviously the School Board was wrong. She should never have been fired in the first place.

But this is the messed up part: she was not being charged with poor results as a teacher, but not following the FCPS methods in teaching.

Sheesh... Obviously? I read the full article and it is obvious to me she would have been gone a long time ago in the real world.

....and why does someone get $92,000 to sit at home! No wonder we're broke.

[Anonymous]

The case against her was about as strong as the one against John Edwards.

[Anonymous]

From the Post article:
" There is a growing national movement to to base teacher evaluations on student performance, but it hasn't reached Fairfax.
So instead of asking how much a teacher's students have progressed, administrators ask how faithfully a teacher uses methods
the county deems effective.
In other words, the focus is on how teachers teach instead of whether students learn."

Her students did just as well as the other students in the school. So obviously her teaching methods didn't hurt her students any. Several parenst and former students testified on her behalf.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like the principal and the teacher had personal problems.

[Anonymous]

The pricipal is Lindsay Czarniak's mother (you know -- the former NBC 4 sportscaster). I don't know anything about this teacher, but given how well Ms. Czarniak turned out, I have to give some weight to the principal's opinion that the teacher was not doing a satisfactory job and she wouldn't want kids in that class. That is not to say that the teacher has never done anything right or never helped any child learn. But, I'm glad the principal was concerned about the well-being of our children and had the guts to move forward....I'm sure the principal knew it would be an uphill battle and PIA to recommend termination.

[Anonymous]

I worked closely with Violet Nichols for more than 5 years. She was a mediocre teacher who built good relationships with most of her students. Terri Czarniak was an idiot who never should have been named a principal. She was in way over her head and had no idea how to work with people. Case in point is this one here. How she thought she could get away with writing up a teacher for not having sub plans on THE DAY HER SISTER DIED defies logic and speaks to her stupidity.

The person who should have been mentioned is Betsy Fenske, the cluster superintendent who hired her (Czarniak) and then did nothing while groups of teachers and parents complained for years about Czarniak. Coincidentally, both Fenske and Czarniak retired a year ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The pricipal is Lindsay Czarniak's mother (you know -- the former NBC 4 sportscaster). I don't know anything about this teacher, but given how well Ms. Czarniak turned out, I have to give some weight to the principal's opinion that the teacher was not doing a satisfactory job and she wouldn't want kids in that class. That is not to say that the teacher has never done anything right or never helped any child learn. But, I'm glad the principal was concerned about the well-being of our children and had the guts to move forward....I'm sure the principal knew it would be an uphill battle and PIA to recommend termination.

You think the ex-principal has credibility because her daughter is a sportscaster? Talk about tortured logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article:
" There is a growing national movement to to base teacher evaluations on student performance, but it hasn't reached Fairfax.
So instead of asking how much a teacher's students have progressed, administrators ask how faithfully a teacher uses methods
the county deems effective.
In other words, the focus is on how teachers teach instead of whether students learn."

Her students did just as well as the other students in the school. So obviously her teaching methods didn't hurt her students any. Several parenst and former students testified on her behalf.

She had favorite students & those were the ones who testified on her behalf. As a previous pupil of Ms. Nichols, I can tell you that her methods DID hurt the students who weren't favored. I was so terrified of her that I stopped asking questions all together. She taught me to be frightened of authority through humiliating me (and others) in front of the entire class. This woman isn't some poor victim...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Post article:
" There is a growing national movement to to base teacher evaluations on student performance, but it hasn't reached Fairfax.
So instead of asking how much a teacher's students have progressed, administrators ask how faithfully a teacher uses methods
the county deems effective.
In other words, the focus is on how teachers teach instead of whether students learn."

Her students did just as well as the other students in the school. So obviously her teaching methods didn't hurt her students any. Several parenst and former students testified on her behalf.

She had favorite students & those were the ones who testified on her behalf. As a previous pupil of Ms. Nichols, I can tell you that her methods DID hurt the students who weren't favored. I was so terrified of her that I stopped asking questions all together. She taught me to be frightened of authority through humiliating me (and others) in front of the entire class. This woman isn't some poor victim...

so maybe this is why they tried to fire her and the failure to use modern teaching methods reason was just a pretext?

[Anonymous]

OP, I think the due process in this case was more for the school district's benefit and protection than for the teacher's. She strikes me as the litigious type -- wouldn't surprise me if she threatened a lawsuit somewhere along the line, which would explain the exhaustive crossing of t's and dotting of i's here. Better the district does this than settle a racial discrimination lawsuit (which is where this was heading if I read between the lines correctly).

[Anonymous]

All through America, more deserving employees are being fired everyday. Why is it such a convoluted process to fire teachers? It is clearly not good to taxpayers, kids, or even well-performing teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think the due process in this case was more for the school district's benefit and protection than for the teacher's. She strikes me as the litigious type -- wouldn't surprise me if she threatened a lawsuit somewhere along the line, which would explain the exhaustive crossing of t's and dotting of i's here. Better the district does this than settle a racial discrimination lawsuit (which is where this was heading if I read between the lines correctly).

yeah, but the appointed panel overturned the decision to fire her - so she keeps her job. Based on what I read, the evidence just wasn't there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's callued due process.
Obviously the School Board was wrong. She should never have been fired in the first place.

But this is the messed up part: she was not being charged with poor results as a teacher, but not following the FCPS methods in teaching.

Sheesh... Obviously? I read the full article and it is obvious to me she would have been gone a long time ago in the real world.

....and why does someone get $92,000 to sit at home! No wonder we're broke.

How can say this? All evidence is that her students were doing as well as other teachers' students, so where is your evidence that she had a detrimental effect on their ability to learn?