A Public School Principal (the PSP)

On a beautiful midsummer’s day, several teachers and a principal stood around a South Bronx black-top school yard, monitoring the dismissal of the students. The public school principal (PSP) stood near the gated entrance of the school yard, remarking upon the failed efforts of a teacher who had aspired to work in a chapter school during the upcoming school year. Four teachers took turns making listening noises and asking questions about the teacher in question. 

This teacher had been pursuing an employment opportunity over the summer at a charter school. The hiring principal asked the PSP about this teacher’s rapport with parents. According to the PSP, the hiree indicated that parents at the charter school took very active roles in the classroom, providing suggestions and giving feedback during instructional time.

The PSP shook her head and said that she could just imagine what would happen if a parent gave a suggestion to this teacherduring one of her lessons. Then, she reported that although the teacher had stated that she might not be returning for the new school year, at the end the spring semester, she had asked to be reinstated. So, the PSP complained about the hassle this would be, citing the extra wor, and the days it would take for the revised budget to be approved.

 Why was this matter being discussed by the public school principal (PSP)? Why did she shared this story with teachers who work under her supervision? Why didn’t the PSP simply gave the teacher a good review for her rapport with parents, thus preventing the current situation?  A number of reasons come to mind:

- The PSP thought she was helping the teacher out by preventing her from working in a situation where she might have to deal with more intrusive parents.

This rational was discarded, as the PSP make no other remarks to suggest that she was thinking of the greater good of the teacher at the charter school. In fact, she said that the teacher would not do well in this situation, according to her “imagination.” This imagination has no basis in reality, since the practice of parental involvement at the charter school has no real counterpart at the teacher’s current school.

- The PSP didn’t like that the teacher was leaving, and wanted to sabatoge her efforts. It was thus easier to go through the hassle of adding her salary to the budget, as much as it was complained about, then to devote energy towards finding a new replacement. It also gave her a sense of power over a potentially former employee’s future job prospects.

- The PSP didn’t want the teacher to be in the charter school environment because the PSP has problems herself with taking suggestions from outside parties, and projected that situation onto the teacher. Nor does the PSP feel comfortable with that type of parental involvement at her school site.

The PSP, throughout the conversation, appeared to attempt to generate sympathy for her position, due to the extra workload brought about by this change of events. So the two latter reasons seem to support her thinking, or rather reactions to the teacher’s potential circumstances at the new site.

However, how sympathetic a character can she really be, when she could have prevented the current situation by choosing to make a supportive recommendation for that teacher?

Ah, the beauty of self importance!

what can I do about JELLYFISH?

As I was looking through the Sunday classifies at the New York Times website, I came across an article about jellyfish. I have a growing interest in the impact that we humans have on our environment, and this article resonates with that interest. Why? Two days ago a friend and I were discussing the possibilities of humans being able to do something to prevent earthquakes. It was my friend’s belief that there was little that could be done, plate tectonics being something beyond the reach of human control. I maintained that I did not know enough yet, about plate tectonics to rule out the possibility of human intervention or prevention. Who knows what impact we humans have had on the shifting of the Earth’s crust. There is still more research I need to do on this topic, before I come to some sort of conclusion about it.

The New York Times article, however, deals with the jellyfish population, and how global warming and overfishing have contributed to the current problem. Specifically, because humans have been capturing the predators of these animals, they are proliferating and causing concern along the coasts of the world.

Because I have decided to abstain from eating meat, whether it be from air, earth, fresh water, or sea, I feel that my dietary choice is a part of the healing of the earth. Since I do not eat fish, or knowingly consume products that are derived from fish, this is but one thing I can do about the current environmental mess
on our planet.

Here are some questions I have, that go along with this topic. If the sea is declining, and the sea is a body that helps to regulate temperature along the Earth’s surface and atmosphere, is there a relationship between this activity and the activity along the Earth’s crust, or are they two discrete types of activities, completely unrelated?

If you have any knowledge, please share!