Throughout my years in the school system of New York City, I have listened to the adage that the elders are wise. I listened to them, those older teachers, and of the future they foretold, and I heeded the lessons they shared. If you have been served with 3020a papers and you are flabbergasted: your job is immensely harder. Since I WAS prepared, years in advance, I documented EVERYTHING, and the administration were as much amateurs at lying as at having a clue about teacher effectiveness. There are some helpful tips even if you are just learning of the smear campaign (specifically, the section on "preponderance of evidence"), but the best defense is a long trail of evidence. Never let a verbal agreement go undocumented in writing. Your new best friend is, "per our conversation" and, "Please advise if anything I have documented is incorrect or disputed".
The good news is that most administrations expect a rote process and are taking the path of least resistance. You CAN win if you are willing to put in the work.
Preponderance of Evidence - Your New Full-Time Job
First of all, the 3020-a is a "preponderance of evidence" hearing. I am not a lawyer, and nothing that I post should ever be seen as a replacement for valid legal advice, but, from a layperson's understanding, this means that whoever has the most evidence, wins. So, you need to document everything. My state is a single-party state, meaning it is legal to audio record with only one (as opposed to all) party's knowledge. Obviously, this, again, is not legal advice, but in my case, that information could have been crucial. I asked the administrators' directly if I was being targeted, and that I felt targeted, and countered every argument to no avail, all on tape. Still got 'em, in fact.
There will be charges brought. Read through them. In my service of 3020a papers, I was referred to as "Jane Doe", without it having established my actual name (like a form letter). Incompetence on the DOE's part is a good omen; already they're showing the lack of attention that you will exploit. Write down everything you remember about each event listed. Think of names of students, paraprofessionals, parents, etc, that could contradict these charges. Specificity matters, but if you can't come up with a name, write down as many clues as possible. For example, I built an offensive case, as a backup, and gathered intel as I received it. Having all potential "witnesses" in one central file helped me piece together dirt. In some cases, the information was as vague as 'Joe, lives in Long Island, talk to Jennifer about him", but as I gathered more information, it became a rolodex of phone numbers and email addresses. This, in my case, has so-far proven to not be germane, but it was therapeutic during the beginning phase when I was still in a state of limbo. Go through old emails, searching for the administrators that are involved. This will remind you of events in the past, as well as provide crucial evidence, as it did me. An administrator had written in her personal log, presented as proof at my hearing, that I was absent for a TIP meeting, but I found an old email where I contacted her on the date in question asking her whereabouts, meaning I was at the meeting but she wasn't. The more educated you become about the case, the better.
I kept my evidence stored on a cloud drive, but I also kept hard copies in a binder for the hearing. Get organized and stay organized. I had kept a harassment log that included links to email communication or photographic evidence. I kept a rebuttal document with each charge, and each point refuted with proof. In many cases, the evidence was the administrator's own words. For example, she would write that "Many questions were low-level and could be answered in only one way", but her evidence was contradictory: "You asked why is the denominator 1" or "Is there another way to do this". Another common problem was vague comments. One of my favorites was "lesson lagged or was rushed", which besides not being helpful, was also pulled from a data bank of possible characteristics of "ineffective", which indicated that she worked from "ineffective" backwards, looking up things to write on my observation reports on the internet. Yes, I googled some of this genius' favorite phrases. She neglected to read the data bank, unfortunately, because if she had, she may have seen the disclaimer that the ideas were not meant as replacement for true, low-inference evidence, but rather as a training tool. It is tricky to implement changes if the problem is not identified! Some of the evidence she used to justify an ineffective rating was used as an example of effective rating on the Danielson rubric. Please re-read that sentence, because I'm sure you need to. I also noted patterns in the assistant principal's comments, and at one point she obviously started from a previously completed observation rather than a blank form, because she forgot to change the lesson's objective. She thought I wouldn't pick up on her alternating identical observation reports with different dates and objectives. We're not dealing with masterminds, here. When asked about it, she lied, and we exploited that to the utmost! She would note that I didn't identify pre-requisites or didn't have high order questions, and I rebutted it with the lesson plan that I sent via email after the observation. It is tiny things like this that collectively will win your case. Remember, they've been half-assing this. They want to tick the boxes and say that they followed protocol. It is your job to point out that they didn't.
The Lawyer - Find Your Team
I think a fallacy held among non-legal population that a lawyer will take care of everything. This is your case, and the lawyer can only use what you bring to the table. You will need to do work. In my case, I kept the names of those elders who had 3020-a charges before me in my rolodex, my lawyershe was able to look up the transcripts and come up with possible strategies. For example, one of my former coworkers argued that the observations were completed by only one administrator, which the hearing officer noted in the decision as a reason for the favorable decision. We used this strategy, too. It will help the lawyer get a feel for who he or she will be dealing with. We discussed our message and how to best present this message. In my case, the message was that I was a decent teacher, not perfect, that tried her best, but couldn't overcome the administration's bias against me. And the important thing was that it was true, and I wholeheartedly believed this. The other obvious pattern that was found in the previous teachers' cases was, of course, they were all experienced (read: well-paid).
If there is a change in your representation, make sure that the new lawyer has read the entire file. As a cautionary tale, this happened to the DOE's case, and the new lawyer didn't verify that the observations included in the charges were ALL of the observations, which they weren't. The DOE did not include certain, more positive, observations, and there must have been a reason, but in the hand-off, there was a lack of communication and the incoming lawyer assumed the charged observations must have included every observation, and the look on his face when we entered the uncharged observations made the process almost bearable. Lawyers can only do so much. You have to make your own luck.
Do not feel as if you must do as if your lawyer is telling you. They can advise, but the ultimate decision about your case should be done by you. If your lawyer is trying to coerce you, make your chapter leader and district representative aware. In my case, I wanted to follow the tact of the state law that requires districts to first have a board or PEP vote on whether to pursue a 3020-a, which NYC decided, "nah", and it's just always been this way. There was a decision in Staten Island by Judge Desmond Green, regarding this 2590 state law. I wanted my lawyer's opinion on this, and rather than face the issue directly, it seemed to me that she was offended that I was asking. I also sought counsel outside of the UFT, from teachers who'd been through the process, speaking with private attorneys and friends I had made who were involved in activism in the union and the like. I have always made it my business to cultivate the acquaintance of rabble-rousers. Perhaps that is why I was singled out, but I have quite a few theories. The good people will only be too willing to help. They are a good sounding board for your ideas. Talk it out as much as you need to with people from various perspectives. Obviously, you need to choose these people wisely. You can use confidants that you know are turncoats to your advantage, as I did, to convey certain information to the administration. If you need devious tricks, ask them for it!
My lawyer also believed in the beginning that I had made a tactical error in allow the administration to video tape a lesson. Every year, I opted for this, and longed for proof that either they were, or I was, crazy. I was pretty adamant that it was a good thing, and it ended up being key in my case. Finally, it wasn't my word versus hers. If you are still in the classroom and still being observed, I would consider (talk with a lawyer) audio taping your instruction, but this is tricky legal territory. Not only did the video(s) debunk the claims on the observation form, but when asked about a specific incident that didn't appear on the tape, my principal again decided to lie, and said that there was a break in the tape and the incident must have occurred during the time where she "turned off the camera", and even, that "you could see I was getting tired [of videotaping]". That came back to haunt the principal and the videographer (the observing supervisor) because if she had indeed gotten tired and stopped videoing and then restarted, the result would have left the second video with the same date stamp as the first, but a slightly later start time. But, this was not the case; the second video had a date some weeks later, and ironically, it was the date that the observation report was written. It was a simple matter of noting that the videos were obviously from the same lesson (everyone was wearing the same thing in both videos), and the reason the date stamp on the second video was different was because she edited the one video she took and took out a portion, and saved the end portion as the second video. Arcane stuff, but crucial.
Despite our differences, my legal representative and I had a very good working relationship in the end. Understand your lawyer's role, and understand that it is your job and right to make sure they are doing it to your standards.
Strategy - Stay Cool, You Got This
You've decided on the narrative, and you've looked for evidence that supports this narrative. Now, regardless of your strategy, you must look helpful and willing to improve. I had a right to be angry; administration was unfairly targeting me and it made my life a living hell. But, the hearing is not the forum for venom. You are an educator, and that is a career that no one chooses lightly. Showing that person, the one who loves children, is tantamount. Also, the best narrative is one that isn't completely one-sided; my lawyer told me that one. There are always three versions of a story and the arbitrator knows the truth lies in the middle somewhere. If both sides are diametric opposites, it is difficult to see what actually happened, so tell the officer the truth. If some of the charges are based in fact, say so. On such and such day, yeah, I was having an off day or a made a bad judgement call or whatever. In my situation, the few specific, low-inference comments she wrote were factual. I framed the events as rare occurrences that I dealt with and learned from.
In the end, my lawyer convinced me to stay high, and let them wallow down below. I didn't take the offensive as a strategy, as much as I wanted to. I told myself I would do that later if I needed to, if there was a negative decision in the case, and I needed to take it to federal court. My counsel got my administration to contradict each other, but most importantly, she got the observing AP to lash out briefly in anger. It looks very, very, very bad when a person cannot control their hatred and anger. Do not do this. Their lawyer will try to provoke you, so if you feel yourself getting heated, ask your lawyer to take a break. Staying level headed will be your biggest challenge. I was friendly and helpful to the point where I offered copies to opposing counsel in front of the arbitrator. Judges are human, and if they like you, they can't help but side with you. Educators put on shows every day, and your job now relies on this honed acting ability. Don't lose the faith. You got this.
