Dr. Maskin's Home Page

Dr. Maskin's
Home Page

The Case

PART 1: THE CASE I have been teaching at the Bronx High School of Science for nearly 20 years. My relationship with my supervisors and colleagues was always supportive and congenial. Recommendations for special programs and awards were never a problem to obtain.

In January, 1995, my supervisor, Mr. William J. Stark, informed me that he was not going to write any more recommendations on my behalf. This sudden change in attitude happened to coincide with my decision to publicly raise the issue of maintaining academic standards at Bronx Science. From that day forward, I had to contend with an onslaught of file letters, grievance hearings, hostility from some social studies teachers aligned with the supervisor ,and what I consider to be flagrantly disparate treatment.

My efforts to fight for my rights through the administrative process set up by the Board of Education and the United Federation of Teachers proved overwhlemingly ineffective.

I waged these "battles" not only with my principal (Mr. Stanley Blumenstein) but also with my A.P.( Mr Stark,) and with the Bronx Superintendent's Office headed by Mr. Joe DeJesus. My appeals to the Central Board of Education under the adminsitration of Rudolph Crew yielded no relief. I was ignored or worse, leaving me feeling persecuted and harassed ,though still employed.

What follows is a brief summation of some of the events that have occurred at Bronx Science over the past several years. This information is contained in a letter written to Dr. Harold Levy in response to his article which appeared in the

New York Times, entitled "Why the Best Don't Teach." My letter to the Chancellor was accompanied by substantial written and visual documentation in support of the information provided.

The signifcance of my case goes beyond my situation in that it could potentially impact on any member of New York City's teaching staff . It is therefore vital that the Chancellor and the public become aware of the problems that exist in the grievance process. It is vital that the Chancellor and the public realize that teachers are entitled to due process under the law and any administrative process and that injustice affects the entire community, not just the individual feeling the brunt of it.

PART 2: LETTER TO DR. HAROLD LEVY

"Such is the irresistible nature of truth that all it asks and all it wants,is the liberty of appearing."

Thomas Paine, The Rights of Man

TO: DR. HAROLD LEVY
FROM: DR. MEL MASKIN
RE: YOUR ARTICLE:"WHY THE BEST DON'T TEACH" September 9,2000,New York Times

Dear Dr. Levy:

I am an AP U.S. history teacher at your alma mater, the Bronx High School of Science. I read with great interest your September 9th piece in the New York Times.

Though I do agree that my union has been reluctant to admit teacher weaknesses ( afterall, their mission is to support teachers, not to undermine them ) I do, however,wish to add another dimension to your conclusion that "Principals know the truth and have to deal with it as best as they can."

Principals are also aware of another truth which they very rarely admit: that there are those among their number who target accomplished teachers for reasons having little or nothing to do with the needs of our students. The resulting morale of teachers in general, and these teachers in particular is low.

As Chancellor, I believe it would be helpful if you received information about what is happening in your school system from the "trenches" and not only from those wearing "red tabs." The purpose of this letter is to give you an example of what can and does happen inside and outside of BOE central.

In addition, your statement made with regard to the 888 teachers receiving unsatisfactory ratings that "the paucity of negative evaluations suggests either that we are operating at the top of our game or that many of us have chosen to avoid our managerial obligations" needs to be examined in all of its implications.

* * * * *

When I relate my own recent personal experience with my administrators to my family, friends, and newly-minted college graduates considering careers in education, mouthes drop open in amazement and disbelief. Perhaps your's will too when you read the following list of events that began in l995, after 24 years of exemplary "S" rated service.

l) My former subject supervisor, Mr William J. Stark, accused me of harassment when I asked him for an old copy of our 9th grade Global Studies curriculum which I needed to access in order to complete an assignment given to me by this same supervisor. When he denied my request twice, I asked a third time, whereupon he placed a letter in my file and used this same letter to rate me "U."

2) This same subject supervisor ordered the dismantling of what he himself previously considered to be a highly useful and educationally beneficial Global Research center which I had developed for my students and for the general student population at no cost to the school. I did not receive any justification for this action which ultimately hindered the research efforts of our students.

3) I received negative file letters for the following:

a) for giving academic extra credit to students who maintained the above mentioned- Global Research Center-- (my subject supervisor decreed that reading, evaluating, classifying and filing the documents that flowed into the center from around the world was "clerical work-")

b) for allegedly breaking Board of Education policy (of nonconfirmed existence) by not collecting consent slips for a voluntary educational opportunity-- (a New York York University library instructional tour of the US goverment documents collection which I informed my students was being conducted on Columbus Day) --this letter was placed in my file by the principal, Mr. Stanley Blumenstein.

Based only on these two file letters, a "U" rating was upheld last spring by your Office of Appeals and Review. (I had received undocumented information that the hearing office at this appeal session who sat in judgment of me had himself been rated "unsatisfactory" as principal and was removed from his position.)

4) I was denied conference leave by the principal of the Bronx High School of Science to be part of a U.S. History Regents exam development committee at the request of the New York State Department of Education- (I had to take three personal days from my sick bank in order to attend these sessions.

5) During the two-year period in which I received both "U" ratings, I was authorized by the State Education Department to write the official essay rating guide for a U.S. History Regents examination. Every social studies teacher in New York State rating that particular Regents exam therefore had to use the answer guide prepared by a teacher who was graded by his principal as "unsatisfactory."

6) During the two-year period in which I received both "U" ratings, I wrote an article which was published in the Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals.

7) In order to gain evidence against me, the principal and my subject supervisor "interviewed" several of my students.The students revealed that they felt intimidated by this "interview"; a formal complaint from the parents of one of them against the principal and supervisor was submitted to Mr. Stancik's office from where an investigation was initiated. (The investigation to this date has not been closed to the satisfaction of the complainants)

8) On the final rating sheet specific category list for 1996, I was rated unsatisfctory though this specific list is reserved for untenured teachers. Among other issues, I was rated unsatisfactory for attendance and punctuality, despite the fact that I only had 5 absences that year with no latenesses recorded and 107 days in my CAR. ( On the same sheet, I received a "U" for the use of English; that year I was given written recognition by an English language organization for promoting excellence in English language instruction.)

9) In the school year prior to my first "U" rating I won three major awards for my Economics class project. These included the Freedom Foundations Leavy Award and the New York State award for teaching Economics. The latter award was sponsored by the Chase Manhattan Bank. Specifically, in 1996, I was deemd "unsatisfactory" in the categories a) planning and prepration of work and b) effective use of appropriate methods and techniques. Ironically I was rated satisfactory in my "skill in making class lessons interesting to pupils" and in promoting "pupil growth in knowledge, skills, appreciations and attitude." I was considered satisfactory in the "maintenance of wholesome classroom atmosphere," but unsatisfactory in my "effect on character and personality growth of pupils, and in my "attention to pupil health, safety and general welfare."

10) I was removed from my college mentor position based upon yet another file letter which was sustained through STEP III grievance but ultimately thrown out in arbitration. This letter claimed that I violated the policy of Georgetown University and in so doing, jeopardized the chances of our students being accepted for admissions--allegations denied orally and in writing by the Dean of Admissions at Georgetown. Supported by this file letter, I was rated "U" in the category of record keeping on my final evaluation for l997 because I made the error of writing EA (Early Admissions) instead of ED (Early Decision) after the listing of one college for one student on my personal mentor records. ( I made no such mistake on the official school record). A significant associated issue arising from this Georgetown matter was the formal complaint to the Chancellor and Mr. Stancik by the student referred to in this file letter against various supervisors who she claimed harassed and/or verbally abused her.

11) Despite all of the accomplishments listed above and in my resume as well as the specious nature of the charges against me, Mr. Jules Levine and Mr.David Kroun of the Bronx High School superintendent's office warned me by letter that referenced the principal's and supervisor's file letters against me that "Since this is your second "U" rating in a row, we have also advised the Superintendent to recommend to the Chancellor that charges be preferred against you under Section 3020a of the State Education law." My understanding is that if the Superintendent had followed this recommendation , I was in danger of losing my license, my job, my career, my pension, my medical insurance, and thus my ability to support my family.

The most horrifying aspect of the list above is that it is only partial--there is alot more to tell. My story does not only reveal "a lack of recognition for (the) extraordinary accomplisments" of a dedicated professional but also what seemed and seems to be a protracted effort to end that professional's career. How many of those 888's situation resonates with mine.

I wish to add that most everything that has happened to me over the course of the last 5 l/2 years is fully documented. ( These documents are collected in more than l9 fully packed two and three inch binders; it might be of interest to note that two of the file binders contain more than 300 complimentary letters from former students, parents, New York State Education Department and College Board personnel, as well as commendatory letters from the above mentioned supervisors written prior to 1995)

In March, l997, the Senior Assistant to the Deputy Chancellor for Instruction, Ms.Pat Haith, responded to my documented appeal for help with the following observations:

" Much time and energy have been involved in this correspondence in an attempt to find resolution between you, the Principal and Assistant Principal, Social Studies at Bronx High School of Science, the Bronx High School Superintendency, and the Chancellor and other central staff. Much time and energy have been involved in this correspondence in an attempt to find resolution between you and the school's administrators. Grievances and mediation have taken place, consuming more time and energy.... It is my feeling that the Principal and Assistant Principal Social Studies have more than met your issues. It is now time to cease and desist and move on." All of my attempts to clarify from Pat Haith the meaning of her March l3th letter were to no avail. My own interpretation of her words was that I was being " strongly advised" to discontinue my self -defense, to stop filing grievances and to stop sending correspondences. Although she attempted to end the letter with some softer comments, I felt extremely threatened by her overall tone.
I therefore found then and now a need to conclude written communications with the following sentence. . .

In writing this letter I am exercising my First Amendment right of free expression.

Respectfully,

Dr. Mel Maskin
Bronx High School of Science

copy: education editor , The New York Times
education editor,The Wall Street Journal
Ms. Randi Weingarten

PART 3- TYPES OF DOCUMENTS ACCOMPANYING THE LETTER TO DR. LEVY

PART 3: DOCUMENTS ACCOMPANYING THE LETTER TO DR. LEVY

1. Copy of the article written by Dr. Levy for the New York Times and other statements made by him as quoted by the UFT.

2. Maskin's resume, The two "Unsatisfactory" rating sheets. ( Described in more detail later in the page)

3. Dismantling of the Room 315 issue, letter and photo essay.(Described in more detail later in the page)

4. Principal's recommendation:

One and a Half years prior to my first "unsatisfactory"rating by Mr. Blumenstein, this same superviosr gave me his"strongest endorsement." He also noted that my "scholarship and dedication to your profession are quite evident."

5. Advertisement of the Leavy Award in the Wall Street Journal

6. Copy of the Certificate commending me for "Excellence in English Language Instruction." I was rated "Unsatisfactory in the category "use of English" at the end of the year.

7. Sample letters from students

8. Documents relating to the Georgetown Issue (Described in more detail later in the page.)

9. The 3020A issue--(Described in more detail later in the page.)

Part 4 THE TRAVESTY

My original intention was to limit my postings to the materials above. The controversy surrounding the candidacy of William J. Stark for principal of the Bronx High School of Science and what I consider to be the extraordinary biased and unbalanced coverage in the press has prompted me to expose more details.

I have opposed the promotion of Mr. Stark to the position of principal for reasons which might be deduced from my letter to Dr. Levy . I realize that many people support Stark, some others do not and that others waver.Many who are either neutral or opposed to Mr. Stark's appointment might be afraid to disclose their views altogether.It seems to me that most of the press has engaged in some sort of a "love fest" trying to create Stark in the image of David fighting Goliath. Nowhere in most press articles did I glimpse even a hint that perhaps Dr. Levy may have details backing up his conclusion that Mr. Stark might not have the credentials to be principal of our school.

What seems to have occurred was an onslaught of what I consider to be misleading information, possibly unverified, sometimes contradictory, leaving the public in general and the Bronx Science community in particular rather confused about what was really going on.

But even if Mr. Stark were universally loved, which he is not, ( see the February edition of Bronx Science Cyberspace)it should not be the most important qualification for being appointed principal. The leader of our school should have educational vision and creativity. The leader of our school should be fair-minded, treating ALL staff members equitably. The leader of our school should protect our children and assure that they are provided with a safe, secure learning environment. So long as an applicant has demonstrated disparate treatment toward even ONE teacher, so long as he is has intimidated even ONE student, so long as he has demonstrated EVEN ONCE that his personal will and needs supersede the educational needs of our students, so long as he has indicated any reluctance to strive for the highest of standards in a school for the gifted and talented,then he or she in my opinion, is disqualified from attaining the position of principal of the Bronx High School of Science.

I wish to demonstrate how Mr. Stark along with our former principal Mr. Blumenstein treated me disparately, and made what I felt were some educationally unsound decisions.

In December, l994, Mr. William J. Stark was awarded tenure as chairman/ subject supervisor of the Bronx High School of Science Social Studies Department. Though there were some disagreements and issues during the early l990s, my problems with Mr. Stark and Mr. Blumenstein commenced approximately January l995 . PART 5-MERIT DOESN'T COUNT

It is important to keep in mind that during the horrible years I did not neglect my professional duties. It might be interesting to glance at my resume and then proceed to the problems I had to endure.

I will admit that there are many things that I do not do well. In fact, there are many things I do quite poorly. There is a world out there full of people who can do many things better than I. Perhaps I will generate another website someday and elaborate on my shortcomings. But the truth of the matter is, I can teach, and I and some others think I teach quite well. I believe that, at the very least, the people around me should leave me alone and let me do it. I, like everyone else, should be treated equitably. Link to my Resume Please see main website page)

NOTE:

It is most interesting that the chairman of the Board of Trustees, Marshal w. Jaffe wrote in a letter dated February ,2001 to the Fellow Bronx Science Graduate(s) that:

Whatever you might have read or heard about the turmoil in New Yorks public schools, there remains one sad, eternal verity: a huge, centralized system, serving a million children and struggling to achieve acceptable performance, is neither able nor willing to help a few thousand highly gifted students make the most of their talents. It is our duty to fill that void.

How ironic! The public was led to believe that all the alulmni supported William J. Stark. And yet, this man Stark ordered the dismantling of a research center which was so extremelly helpful to these highly gifted students make the most of their (research) talents. And yet, this man Stark recommended unsatisfactory ratings to a teacher who many students claim was one of their best teachers. Why would the alumni endorse a supervisor who accused a teacher of excessive work load , and who put limitations on an a award- winning program which these highly gifted students were quite able to handle , and indirectly through his decisions eliminate that project altogether.? What is the Alumnis justification for backing Mr. Stark?What exactly was the reasoning here? Was it, perhaps, because they thought that he was popular? Yes, popularity is one factor.--I agree. But how popular is Mr. Stark really? In any case, without making any direct comparisons whatsoever, --any person(s) who feels that popularity is the main and most important factor in choosing any leader of anything on any level should look at the German documentaries made in l936.

What exactly was the information they did have upon which they based their position? Did they poll the alumni? Or, did the leaders of the Alumni make a decision based upon their own opinions. Perhaps the Alumni might claim that , in making their decision they did not have all the facts. Again, what was the information they did have? Did the Alumni association know Mr. Stark well enough to give such unqualified support? This doesnt make much sense to me.

PART 6- WHEN THE HOMETEAM HIRES THE UMPIRES-- >COPING WITH CORRUPT GOVERNMENT BUREACRACIES: PHILOSOPHY AND METHODOLOGY

(COMING SOON)

PART 7- THE ISSUES--Contents

1.STANDARDS ISSUE/ SPRING ECONOMICS PROJECT, January , l995
2.SOME POSTITIVE STUDENT RESPONSES
3.THE UNSATISFACTORY RATING, JUNE 1996
4..THE UNSATISFACTORY RATING, JUNE , 1997
5.THE TN GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER, SEPTEMBER 19,1995
6.THE 30 SECOND GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER,JANUARY 30,1996
7.THE OBSERVATION I GRIEVANCE, OBSERVATION DATE:APRIL 24, 1996
8.THE OBSERVATION II GRIEVANCE, OBSERVATION DATE: MARCH 7, 1997
9.THE CALENDAR OF LESSONS GREIVANCE, FILE LETTER, MAY 30,1996
10.THE BLAIR/BERK/HARRIS/HARPER GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER,JUNE 18,1996; PETITIONS
11.CONFERENCE GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER, JUNE 18,1996
12.ALBANY 1 GREIVANCE, RELATING TO REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE LEAVE, APRIL 1,2,3, 1996
13.ALBANY 2 GRIEVANCE, RELATING TO REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE LEAVE,MARCH 24,25,26,1997
14.ALBANY 3 GRIEVANCE, RELATING TO REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE LEAVE, FEBRUARY 3,4,5, 1999
15.DENIAL OF PROGRAM REQUESTS, INCLUDING ECONOMICS, JUNE, ,1995 GRIEVANCE FILED, SEPTEMBER, 1996.
16.DISMANTILING OF THE RESEARCH CENTER, ROOM 315, LETTER OF INSTRUCTION FROM WILLIAM J. STARK, OCTOBER 1, 1996
17.EXTRA CREDIT GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER ,OCTOBER 18, 1996
18.THE UC (STUDENT) COMPLAINT OF SUPERVISOR HARASSMENT, FILED BY STUDENT AND PARENTS, JULY, 1997.
19.TRIP GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER, OCTOBER 28, 1996
20.DISPARATE TREATMENT GRIEVANCE FILED NOVEMBER, 1996
21.THE BOOK ISSUE, FEBRUARY, 1997
22.GEORGETOWN GRIEVANCE, FILE LETTER,MAY 16,1997
23.EM (STUDENT) COMPLAINTABOUT SUPERVISORY VERBAL ABUSE. SPRING, 1997.
24.STUDENT FALSIFICATION OF SCHOOL RECORDS, APRIL , 1997
25.THE 30-20A RECOMMENDATION, JUNE 4, 1997
26.THE MISSING SPARK RECORDS,MARCH 1997
27.COLLEGE MENTOR GRIEVANCE, LETTER IN FILE,JUNE 20,1997
28.REGENTS ASSIGNMENT/DISPARATE TREATMENT GRIEVANCE, FILED JUNE 23, 1997
29.FULBRIGHT GRIEVANCE FILED JANUARY 20,1999
30.EARLY MORNING ASSIGNMENT GRIEVANCE, FILED JUNE 22, 2000
31.THE ADMINISTRATIVE CLASS ISSUE, SEPTEMBER 2000
32.THE MILLER MATTERS, 1,2,3,4,5, BEGINNING MAY , 2000
33. THE MEDIA MESS

PART 8- THE ISSUES, text

(1).STANDARDS ISSUE,/SPRING ECONOMICS PROJECT January , l995

In January l995, Mr. Stark and Mr. Blumenstein criticized me for "excessive work load." They indicated in a letter dated January 27, l995that they had received "unusally large number of complaints from students and parents of students in your classes." I asked for a list of those complaints in response to that letter. On October 31, l995 I was finally given a list of l6 students who allegedly complained between the years l990 and l995. ( I taught a total of about 800 students during those years. ) Blumenstein and Stark did not present me with any documentation other than this list. In his January 27,l995 letter , Mr. Bumenstein stated that "the level of work in your classes is expected to be on the same level as in other equivalent classes in the department." I requested departmental guidelines . No such guidelines from Mr. Stark were ever presented . The operative word in the criticisms by Blumenstein and Stark is "excessive." I never claimed that my course is easy, nor did I ever claim that I do not require hard work. The question is, what is the ultimate goal of the students working hard? I believe the benefits for their future are limitless. Many former students agree. What follows are some sample comments.

SJW wrote on October 6, l997 that " I learned alot from being in your class, and even though it was hard, it was worth it. I have such good study skills because of you that my roommates are jealous." (George Washington University). (HN a-101)

Excessive work load????

" I have to admit that when I was sweating over the projects and cramming for your tests, I was asking God why He had put me in your class. Things have obviously changed, and I am now very glad I had you as a teacher. ...I learned that I can achieve so much more than I may at first believe. As of yet, I have had no other class, even in college, that has challenged me the way your class did. You helped so many of us get over the fear of using the world as our library and see that we, the students, are not to be ignored." SJ, April l997, Wellesley

Excessive Work Load??????

Surely, some students do not appreciate the high level demands required for them to reach their potential. But why should the demands of some for an easy route deprive others who are willing and able to be challenged from gaining life-long skills? I have found during my many years of teaching that these students for the most part are able to meet the challenges and that rigorous assignments well presented and taught are most doable.

" I also want to thank you for giving me a valuable experience that won't be easily forgotten. I realize now that being in your class was one of the best things that could have happened to me. Your class taught me many important things ESPECIALLY the imortance of Hard Work." AP, 12/95 (HNa-7)

Excessive Work Load????

"With determination and a lot of hard work, all goals are achievable and within grasp. This is significant to understand, not just in high school or even in college, but in life." MD,college essay (HNa-34)

Excessive Work Load????

" I just wanted to let you know that you were the best teacher I had in High School and that the research project was the hardest and most rewarding assignment I had." ES, February 15, l996, Binghamton (HNa-53)

Excessive Work Load????

" Your class also gave me a sense of accomplishment and taught me the the importance of hard work." CD, April 22, l997 ,Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (HNa-74)

Excessive Work Load????

From a parent: " We are grateful for teaching not only about high standards, but also about a sense of pride in achieving them." AS,June 12, l997. (HNa-81)

Excessive Work Load????

The focus of this January, l995 criticism was my Spring Economics Project-- "Doing Business In New York: Entrepreneurial Dream or Nightmare?"which won three awards on the national, state and local level. Students in groups of 4 or 5 had to identify a vacant store front in a neighborhood of their choice and organize a business in that spot. They had to do a Feasibility Study, draw up a Business Plan, and investigate all aspects of running a business in that particular location. In addition to submitting a written report the students had to discuss their plans to the class at the end of the term. I believed, and still do, that insights beyond the world of business were gained from this course.

But a few students actually put the skills learned to practical use.

BR wrote to me on January 23, 2000 that he and a friend
"have just recently entered the fast paced internet start-up world. We had a great idea and we went out and got some funding to explore the true viability of the idea. We are currently looking for our second round of funding, and are in the process of writing our Business plan. A true challenge! I often find myself thinking back to the days sitting in your class struggling to find many of the same answers I search for now. Even through the most difficult emotional stages of starting a business, I always seem to have this strange sense of comfort which I attribute directly to the education I received sitting in your class." (HNa-157)

Excessive Work Load????

"I am thanking you for the level of education that you provided me at Bronx Science that prepared me for the business world." VF, March 26, l998(HNa-114)

Excessive Work Load????

I was eventually removed from my Economics program by Mr. William J. Stark, and this award winning project was never again presented at the Bronx High School of Science.

------------------------------------------------------------- (2) SOME POSITIVE STUDENT RESPONSES

The purpose of posting the following student opinions in the form of quotations is NOT to toot my horn. Rather they are posted to illustrate views about me that did not and do not mesh with those of Mr. William J. Stark and Mr. Stanley Blumenstein. I realize that there were some students who did not appreciate my methodology (please see reference to the l6 mentioned above) and that there were some students who failed, some who asked to leave my class, and some who say they " struggled." Some even say that initially they were fearful because of the rumors of the work load. Many of these students came to realize, however, how much they gained in the long run, and that the results were worth the "sweat."

These quotations are taken from letters written to me after these students finished my class or graduated from Bronx Science. I have more than 215 of these letters. I only received one negative comment in E-mail format from an anonymous author. In view of the fact that I did not formally ask these students permission for reprinting their ideas, I am identifying them and the quotations above with name initials. I could try to contact these students if verification is required. ( the file numbers listed are for my own reference)When you read the quotations below please remember that I was rated "unsatisfactory" by Mr. Stanley Blumenstein, principal, based upon the recommendations Mr. William J. Stark.

" If I wanted to thank you all at once for everything you've done for me over the past four years, I'd need a card the size of a hallway bulletin board." JB 2/91 New York University- (HNa-1a)