Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
I don't know the details yet, but hear that the LSC at Juarez have decided not to renew Principal Laredo and that there is an LSC meeting about this tonight. He got renewed in 2004, according to Catalyst. I wrote about the school -- and Laredo's first year -- in a long article for Catalyst in 2001.
UPDATE: Here's a list I've never seen before from CPS: principals across the city with their contract status (appointed, contract) If I'm reading this right, principals with "Contract/Renewal" are those who are up this year. Those with contract/new are still under contract. Right? It's a spreadsheet. Let us know if you know any more principals who've been renewed or are being let go.
Digg
Del.icio.us
Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 11:05 AM
Dismissal At Juarez?
no news yet on what happened to loredo but there are lots of other decisions being made around town.
from a reader: Thomas Trotter has been voted by the LSC to be the contract principal at Hyde Park Academy. He was formerly the interim principal.
is there a list of principals who are up for renewal or where there are retirements, and what the decision has been?
from a reader: Thomas Trotter has been voted by the LSC to be the contract principal at Hyde Park Academy. He was formerly the interim principal.
is there a list of principals who are up for renewal or where there are retirements, and what the decision has been?
Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 11:10 AM
Dismissal At Juarez?
cpaa says it doesn't have a list and says i should talk to HR.
Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Dismissal At Juarez?
interested in what the CPAA is all about right now?
check out the LAMP, their newsletter.
https://www.mycpaa.org/cpaa/newsletter.aspx
the february issue includes a clarice berry piece about closings
check out the LAMP, their newsletter.
https://www.mycpaa.org/cpaa/newsletter.aspx
the february issue includes a clarice berry piece about closings
Thu Feb 21, 2008 at 1:28 PM
Dismissal At Juarez?
Who's at Englewood? Who's the new AP at Chicago Ag?
Fri Feb 22, 2008 at 11:35 PM
Dismissal At Juarez?
anyone know about an LSC that is not renewing their principal or begun a search?
Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Dismissal At Juarez?
Why is it that Mrilyn Stewart is always so unforgiving when it come to the Board's payroll people makiing mistakes? But now the delegates all got short changed on their stipends because of a computer glitch.
Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Dismissal At Juarez?
check the updated version of this post to see a list of principals and their contract status. is it accurate? got any updates?
-- alexander
-- alexander
Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 6:06 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Don't blame these Hispanic LSC members because of supposely the race card. Like at Curie when Otis Davis LSC member used the race card. Cannot use it hear at Juarez, try something else, CPS.
Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 7:38 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Alexander wrote:
If I'm reading this [prinicipal contract spreadsheet] right, principals with "Contract/Renewal" are those who are up this year.
No, that's wrong. The spreadsheet clearly lists a beginning date and end date for contracts. I think it's safe to assume the end date refers to the expiration of the contract, at which point a principal is either renewed or not renewed. "Contract/Renewal" appears to indicate a principal who is working under a renewed contract as opposed to a new contract ("Contract/New"). I don't find this in any way confusing.
(On a side note, can we please stop calling non-renewal something it isn't? Non-renewal doesn't mean a principal got fired or dismissed or ousted. Someone can't get fired or dismissed or ousted from a job that is over. Upon expiration of a contract it simply isn't the principal's job anymore. These other loaded terms are not adequate synonyms for non-renewal.)
Less clear is the shelf life of a principal operating under the categories "Appointment/Interim" and "Appointment/Acting". Some begin dates for these principals extend back as far as 2002, but there is no end date listed for any of them.
If I'm reading this [prinicipal contract spreadsheet] right, principals with "Contract/Renewal" are those who are up this year.
No, that's wrong. The spreadsheet clearly lists a beginning date and end date for contracts. I think it's safe to assume the end date refers to the expiration of the contract, at which point a principal is either renewed or not renewed. "Contract/Renewal" appears to indicate a principal who is working under a renewed contract as opposed to a new contract ("Contract/New"). I don't find this in any way confusing.
(On a side note, can we please stop calling non-renewal something it isn't? Non-renewal doesn't mean a principal got fired or dismissed or ousted. Someone can't get fired or dismissed or ousted from a job that is over. Upon expiration of a contract it simply isn't the principal's job anymore. These other loaded terms are not adequate synonyms for non-renewal.)
Less clear is the shelf life of a principal operating under the categories "Appointment/Interim" and "Appointment/Acting". Some begin dates for these principals extend back as far as 2002, but there is no end date listed for any of them.
Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
As I recall, the board could appoint interim principals at schools on probation, who would serve at the board's pleasure and without a contract until the school got off probation. Interims may also serve during an ordinary search, right?
Acting I thought generally meant an assistant principal or other person filling the void until an interim could be appointed, for any reason.
Please correct me if I am wrong about either of these terms.
Acting I thought generally meant an assistant principal or other person filling the void until an interim could be appointed, for any reason.
Please correct me if I am wrong about either of these terms.
Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 9:26 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
You are correct. Our AP served as an acting principal until the LSC voted on her becoming the principal. The interim principal can be assigned by the board or the LSC, until a principal is voted upon.
Mon Feb 25, 2008 at 10:26 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
renewal simply means it's not the principal's first contract, it's a re-up. I'm amazed at the number of appointments (>80) and how long some of them have gone on (could that be right, McCorkle hasn't selected a principal in 10 years?)
Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 4:30 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
There were two CPS Officials Ms. Pam Price and Ms. Luczy Lopez from LSC Community Relations Department who led a group of ill informed LSC members and instructed them to introduce a motion to renew the principal contract. Nobody second the motion, no vote was taken and then they ended the meeting and walked out. At the next meeting they motioned to begin the principal selection process.
On March 5, 2008 5:00 p.m. Ms. Price and Ms. Lopez will give a lesson on this process. Several parents, teachers, and myself are planning on attend to ask questions about this process. How can you move into a new principal selection process if a formal vote to not re-new was ever brought to the table for a formal OPEN LSC VOTE??????
The cps law department could not comment on this action. The parents and teacher are looking for answers as to why this group of renegade parents did this to our principal mr. Loredo. We need answers.
What else can we do?? concerned
On March 5, 2008 5:00 p.m. Ms. Price and Ms. Lopez will give a lesson on this process. Several parents, teachers, and myself are planning on attend to ask questions about this process. How can you move into a new principal selection process if a formal vote to not re-new was ever brought to the table for a formal OPEN LSC VOTE??????
The cps law department could not comment on this action. The parents and teacher are looking for answers as to why this group of renegade parents did this to our principal mr. Loredo. We need answers.
What else can we do?? concerned
Tue Feb 26, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Ask around town how many principal evaluations and or renewals Lucy Lopez has screwed up! She is a HUGE part of the problem. She forgets that she is working for CPS and no longer an LSC member herself. She is very anti-principal
Wed Feb 27, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Lopez doesn't know what she is doing. Have your LSC call her boss at 553-1400 and request her removal before it is too late. She has created problems in the Cluster Two schools during principal selection and we requested her office to send someone competent! Besides she doesn't speak clear English and it's very difficult to understand what she says.
Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Yes, our LSC had to call Ms. Wood her boss to pull her out of our school. She was guiding select LSC members into giving the principal negative scores on the principal evaluation. She told us this is how you get rid of bad principals. I was shocked to hear this. We had to call downtown and ask that they send a more professional person from School and Community Relations and they did. Once Ms. Lopez was out, we were guided fairly and honestly by a professional LSC Facilitator and gave our principal a fair evaluation. I had no idea she was doing this at other schools. Call her boss, she can be replaced.
Fri Feb 29, 2008 at 10:33 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
who is this lopez person -- new or old, from a school or from another office downtown? can someone fill us in?
-- alexander
-- alexander
Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 7:15 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Ms. Lopez is a Chicago Public Schools employee, LSC facilitator that works for the Office of LSC REltions at 125 S. Clark. She is assigned to work on the north side of Chicago but very mysteriously works with certain spanish speaking lsc members. We have attended some of the Juarez HS LSc meetings and she speaks in riddles and shys away from full explainations when confronted by the audience. We are looking for an explaination on a tactic she used to guide certain lsc members to not renew the principals contract, when they made a motion and NO SECOND was used, so the motion died. Ms. Lopez assured the lsc that this is legal and therefore this is a way to n ot renew the principals contract. We recieved a CPS law department letter and their response to this inquiry does not make sense. The law department is fully aware of the situation and supports this action with mumbo jumbo twisting of words using their legaleeze language. I encourage the LSC to seek outside legal help ie... COOK county courts and take this to real lawyers who practice real law and get an answer on this illeagl action. Ms. Lopez from CPS created this mess and she should not be left off the hook. Where is her supervisor on this ?? Can anyone out there tell me who can legally help define if the LSC was correct and were their actions legal? I've asked several of my friends up in Rogers Park and they tell me they have never heard of anything like this. Is there any organization that can intervene in this process, Chicago Teachers Union?, since CPS CANNOT BE TRUSTED and honest.
Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 7:37 PM
Dismissal At Juarez? [UPDATED]
Find out the difference between a motion failing
and a motion dying and the answer will be
clear about what happened at Juarez
Roberts Rules of orders states that
a motion fails when the vote does not
get the majority needed to pass.
It dies when it does not get a second.
The law states that if the motion fails
then the contract is not renewed and
if the evaluation does not meet or
exceed. It has been stated that
the Principal's evaluation got
voted on and it was not good.
and a motion dying and the answer will be
clear about what happened at Juarez
Roberts Rules of orders states that
a motion fails when the vote does not
get the majority needed to pass.
It dies when it does not get a second.
The law states that if the motion fails
then the contract is not renewed and
if the evaluation does not meet or
exceed. It has been stated that
the Principal's evaluation got
voted on and it was not good.
By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. District 299 reserves the right to delete or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule, and to ban anyone who violates this rule. Reader comments are limited to 500 words.
