In late September, my classroom management instructor, Ms. Sullivan, emailed me about the major project for the Classroom Management course, the Classroom Management Plan. She had “had a difficult time scoring it” and wanted me to meet with Dr. Lotan about it. I asked if I needed to resubmit it, saying I would be happy to write a more “traditional“ plan, and she replied that I would “probably” need to resubmit. Dr. Lotan replied that I was not to change my views, that she would meet with me and we would discuss.
A few days later, everyone else received his or her classroom management plan. A number of students were told to resubmit; none of them were required to meet with Dr. Lotan first.
Dr. Lotan had health problems that precluded our meeting for six weeks. We finally met on November 17th, a meeting that served other purposes as well (see next section).
Despite her assurances, Dr. Lotan’s comments made it clear that, from her and Ms. Sullivan’s perspective, the sole problem with my classroom management plan was my views.
- She opened the discussion by saying, in exasperation, “Why would anyone with the views you hold want to spend the time and money getting a teaching credential at STEP?”
- She told me that any principal who hired a STEP graduate would be angry at getting someone with my views and would hold STEP responsible.
- She said that several of my views expressly violated the California teaching standards. (I disputed this.)
- She said that my views cast serious doubt on my ability to meet the professionalism standard, and that she expected this to be reflected in my assessment, although she had not consulted my supervisor or cooperating teacher about this.
While we discussed all of these issues, the resolution regarding my Classroom Management Plan was one I had already agreed to: I had to redo my Classroom Management Plan to eliminate the views they found objectionable.
The same day, I received a note from Ms. Sullivan: “Upon initial review of your classroom management plan, we were very concerned and had a very difficult time providing feedback to you. The document not only seemed to contradict STEP philosophy, but it also contradicted the course content and the California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP¹s)”. This again confirmed that the problem was with my views. (all email correspondence here)
I received far less time to redo the classroom management plan than any other student, thanks to the additional requirement of meeting with Dr. Lotan.
I had no objection to redoing the classroom management plan once I understood that it was part of my teaching portfolio; in fact, I actively wanted to rewrite it. Had Ms. Sullivan been concerned with providing effective instruction, she would have told me that my plan spent far too much time discussing what I wouldn’t do, and too little time describing what I would do. That would have been a perfectly legitimate reason to give me a B, encourage me to rewrite, and would have avoided the questionable demand for an ideological whitewash. But at no point did Ms. Sullivan or Dr. Lotan evaluate my plan from an instructional perspective; they both focused entirely on my unacceptable views.
I am not bringing up the classroom management issue as an academic grievance; my resubmit was deemed acceptable and I got an A- in the class. However, it reveals again the extraordinarily disparate treatment I have received at STEP. Moreover, the meeting I had to attend with Dr. Lotan was extremely stressful. It was in this meeting that I again believed that Dr. Lotan wanted me to leave the program, and was doing everything but ask me to do so. Moreover, I believe this meeting was when Dr. Lotan began her most recent campaign to remove me from the program. She introduced the threat of “professionalism” for the first time and went on in great detail about her concerns that I wouldn’t be able to meet the demands of the program.