On 11/19/08, without any prior warning or hint of dissatisfaction, [Supervisor] summarily switched my secondary class to a different class, with the stated objective of forcing me to do more observations. He never consulted me on this, although he met secretly with my cooperating teacher to tell him of his intentions.

Undocumented Observation Requirement

Dean Callan told me in our 12/3 meeting that [Supervisor]’s primary reason for switching out my classes was to encourage me to spend more time teaching in a large classroom, rather than working with small groups. This may be something that was added after the fact, but it’s absolutely untrue that [Supervisor] told me this. He clearly presented the move as corrective, although I was unclear as to what specific behavior was being corrected. My supervisory partner confirmed my understanding in email that he never mentioned any objective other than to give me time for forced observations. Moreover, such a switch wasn’t needed. I already worked three classes, including the Algebra II/Trig class that became my secondary. I might have mildly objected if [Supervisor] had just told me he wanted to formally switch my secondary classes to reflect his priority for my teaching large groups, but [Supervisor] quite clearly wanted me to stop working the Algebra Support class and go on mandated observations. He has also articulated this requirement to [cooperating teacher] in email. I ask that [Supervisor]’s emails to [cooperating teacher] be requested and included as part of this grievance.

[Supervisor] insists that I have refused to do observations of other teachers, when in fact I have done all the observations required on the Integration Plan. I believe my supervisory partner will confirm that I never once refused to do observations and that never once did my supervisor make observations an issue until 11/19. He would periodically ask if we’d done any observations. [Supervisory partner] likes to observe and had done quite a few. I preferred to work three classes, rather than just two, and told him that if there was any minimum number of observations I needed to do, to please let me know. Otherwise, I would do the ones required for class. He told me consistently that there was no minimum.

I have since received an emailfrom [director of clinical practice] mandating a fixed number of observations in the Winter quarter that I must do at the direction of [Supervisor], yet she is not requiring this for any other student--even those who did far fewer observations than I did. Furthermore, the Integration Plan for Spring does not require any specific number of observations. A few days after [director of clinical practice] sent me that note, a STEP staff member sent out a note to the entire math cohort with "suggestions" for observations, and no required amount.

At no point did [Supervisor] or [director of clinical practice] inform me of any reason why they singled me out for mandating observations. They have not provided me with any developmental reason why I should be forced to observe by their mandated schedule.

I have concluded that both of them are actually displeased because I made the mistake of saying that I would rather teach three classes than keep three hours permanently open for doing the occasional observation (and doing homework the rest of the time, as many STEP candidates do). In fact, I don’t mind doing observations at all, and quite enjoy working with other students and teachers. I simply wanted to work three classes and thought I had the choice of how to spend my 20 hours at STEP, just as other students do. I was happy to do additional observations outside those three classes, and did so when I became aware of the requirements. I can find no documentation at STEP that requires students to verbally acknowledge the value of observations; nonetheless, I believe that is the unwritten rule that I violated.

When I began to become concerned that I was being held to a different standard, I sent out an email to all STEP teacher candidates, asking them how many observations of other classrooms they had done. I received twenty email responses and another eight verbal responses. The emails have been included in this grievance, with names redacted. Many students have done no observations beyond those mandated by coursework. Others have done more than I have. I am about in the middle of the STEP pack, so far as observations go, and have been given no reason to justify my being forced to do additional observations.

What I find most surprising—and disturbing--is that neither [Supervisor] nor [director of clinical placement], who came into our 11/19 meeting, seem to be aware of the Integration Plan requirements, when the Integration Plan is a key requirement in our Clinical Work Agreement. Both of them told me repeatedly that there "was no minimum number of requirements", and asserted time and again that the requirements I had done for coursework were not to be counted as observations. The Integration Plan expressly contradicts both of these statements.

Moreover, [director of clinical placement]'s email to me doesn’t mention the Integration Plan for the Winter/Spring Quarters and contradicts some of the requirements. Teacher candidates are not required to do observations in the Spring, while I am supposedly required to complete several.

[Name omitted] is the head of the clinical work department, and surely should know of the documented requirements. Instead, she is holding me to a manufactured standard, all the while denying her knowledge of the plan that she makes all candidates sign.

Reflection Timeframe

[Supervisor] never mentioned a hard and fast due date for our response to formal observations, known as "reflections". While he would occasionally remind us to do our reflections (verbally or in email), he did so in the sense of "hey, it’s still on your to-do list", not "you are three weeks overdue on a deadline". He never mentioned a reflection due until at least two weeks after the actual observation. [Supervisor] observed my supervisory partner, [name omitted], several weeks before he observed me for the first time, and [supervisory partner] did not turn in her reflection for at least three weeks. [Supervisor] reminded [supervisory partner] during supervisory, and it was very much a joshing reminder, not an order. He would occasionally email me reminders, but at absolutely no point prior to 11/19 did he declare the requirement he later instituted, that reflections must be done within 48 hours of the observation--something that even the course doesn’t require.

Suddenly, during the 11/19 meeting, [Supervisor] told me that I have failed to complete reflections in a timely manner and that this would be duly reflected on my assessment. I was completely astonished, for several reasons. First, as just described, [Supervisor] had never expressed such a requirement. Second, I knew that [supervisory partner] had been extremely late on one of her reflections and may have been late on more. Finally, I had several times requested assistance with reflections. While [Supervisor] apparently perceives me as an arrogant person who "knows it all", I had continually expressed my confusion about the required reflections, as is evidenced by the following events:

• I met with [supervisory partner] on October 6th for our supervisory, when [Supervisor] was absent. Most of the meeting involved my querying her about her reflection--what she’d done, what she’d focused on.
• A week or so later, I emailed [Supervisor] with a draft reflection, asking him for guidance. He didn’t email back, but in supervisory that week, he gave us verbal feedback on reflections. He said "ideally" they should be done 48 hours after the observation, made it clear that we were not supposed to wait for the debrief but at no point said that this was a course requirement. He said that we should just write about something that interested us in the observed class. I told him at the time that his response didn’t clarify anything for me, but that I would try again. Had [Supervisor] given me the Observation Cycle document at that time (more on this later), it would have been extremely helpful; however, I suspect that he is unaware of it, just as he’s unaware of the Integration Plan document.
• I wrote a second reflection about a debate (at least, I thought it was a debate) we’d had about correcting students. I really enjoyed writing that reflection, and thought for once I’d figured out what he’d wanted. Instead, he sent it back to me angrily, telling me I was "critiquing his observation". I was stunned and confused, and again sent him an email asking for guidance on writing reflections. He didn’t answer. At that time, I was working on three different critical papers and, under the illusion that the reflections were a lower priority, finished up the papers before I turned back to the reflection. In the meantime, [Supervisor] criticized me for "not bothering" to write reflections, something I found particularly unfair given how many times I had asked for help and been ignored.(note: I have the emails and reflections, but given Stanford's reaction to classroom discussions, I'm leaving out anything that might identify students).

After I began having trouble with [Supervisor], I began searching the website for guidance on the reflections issue. I came across a document, STEP Observation Cycle, that described what was supposed to happen. While the course curriculum says that the reflection must be completed within a week of "the observation", the observation cycle document clearly defines a formal procedure.

[Supervisor] never followed this observation cycle. In [director of clinical practice]'s email of 1/6/09, she describes the process she wants me to follow—and it’s not the observation cycle, either.

Here is what the Observation Cycle requires: First, the supervisor and teacher candidate were to have a pre-conference review. Second, the observation occurs. Third, within 24 hours, the supervisor and candidate were to have a debrief session. The supervisor is to give a document that goes through the class and his observations. Finally, within 48 hours of a debrief session, the candidate is to provide a written reflection.

[Supervisor] and I never had a pre-conference review for any observations. I did provide him with lesson plans.

[Supervisor] observed me five times.

• 9/17: Algebra II/Trig class, second period. We did not have a pre-conference. He provided a readable debrief on 9/25. We never met about it.
• 10/4: Algebra II/Trig class, fourth period. We did not have a pre-conference. We met briefly after this class with my CT. While he initially said he "owed me a debrief", several weeks later he told me that he had decided not to bother with a formal debrief when I asked him about it.
• 10/21: Algebra Support class. We did not have a pre-conference. We did not meet after class or at any time. He provided me with a debrief on 10/29.
• 10/31: Algebra II/Trig class, fourth period. We did not have a pre-conference, but I provided him with a lesson plan (he had never asked before). We met briefly after class with my CT. He provided me with a debrief on 11/03.
• 11/04: Algebra II/Trig class, fourth period. We had no pre-conference, but I provided a lesson plan. Bill videotaped me and left early. We did not debrief, although Bill provided some comments in an email. Then, on 11/17, he emailed me that his debrief was "essentially non-existent" when he videotaped.

My submitted reflections:

• For 9/17 observation: I submitted a draft on October 10/16, asking for guidance. After his verbal rejection, I was still confused, but submitted a reflection on 10/30 that was accepted.
• For 10/4 observation: None submitted, as [Supervisor] did not provide a debrief and never requested a reflection, even though this was his first observation of my primary class.
• For 10/21 observation: I wrote an observation on 11/5, but didn’t realize I hadn’t sent it to him until 11/15, when I immediately emailed it. [Supervisor] not only rejected this reflection, but seemed very angry about it. He felt I was "telling him he was wrong", which I certainly had no intention of doing. I wrote him back saying again that I was deeply puzzled by the reflection requirement, that I absolutely meant no offense, and that I would try again. I resubmitted a reflection on 12/2, for reasons described earlier.
• For 11/4 videotaped observation: I was unaware I needed to write a reflection until 11/17, and two days later [Supervisor]’s angry behavior with me, coupled with two huge assignments due on 11/21 and 12/1, drove it from my mind. I submitted it in early December.

In short, [Supervisor] never followed the procedure that was supposedly required (and is mentioned in the practicum course description). He never gave [supervisory partner] or me formal procedures to follow. At times, he violated the procedures (for example, not writing debriefs after observations).

I would never object to any of this except suddenly, on November 19th, [Supervisor] pretended that he had been using a formal observation procedure all along, and that I hadn’t been following it.

Again, what I am most troubled by is [Supervisor] and [director of clinical practice]'s apparent ignorance of STEP’s own procedures and requirements. Had I been given the Observation Cycle document, I could have read its clear instructions on how to write a reflection and been able to complete the requirement in a timely manner.

I asked my STEP students (in the same email mentioned above) how many of them were turning in their reflections within 48 hours. Over half the respondents said they had not. Two said that their supervisors expressly told them that their school work was more important. Others hadn’t even done formal reflections in a few cases.

Supervisor Dissatisfaction

[Supervisor] underwent a dramatic change in behavior towards me during the week of 11/19 and beyond, and I am at a loss to explain it. In that meeting, after he dismissed [supervisory partner], he told me that I was impossible to work with, that he was "at a loss" for ways to instruct me. He said that I made supervisory an unpleasant experience and that I was constantly arguing with him. I was devastated. I had liked and respected [Supervisor], valuing his good opinion.

In my assessment review of 12/3, [Supervisor] actually became angry when I told him that I had done several observations in the two weeks between 11/19 and that evening. Far from accepting that I was willing to do required observations, he insisted again that I had refused to do observations. When I asked him to reconsider my evaluation in light of my observations and the knowledge that I had, in fact, been complying with the Integration Plan all along, he insinuated that my observation log was "just a piece of paper", that I had obviously lied about my intent not to do observations and could have lied again. He repeated this charge in front of [director of clinical practice] and my cooperating teacher, and I have reported this charge to Dr. Lotan. Neither [director of clinical practice] nor Dr. Lotan, nor Dean Callan has ever evinced any concern about this charge, but my cooperating teacher, [name omitted], was so shocked when [Supervisor] repeated the charge in a meeting on 12/4 that eventually my supervisor conceded that "perhaps calling it a lie" was inappropriate and grudgingly apologized.

I don’t understand [Supervisor]’s characterization of our supervisory meetings. My supervisory partner, [supervisory partner], confirmed in email that the majority of our supervisory discussions were "enjoyable and interesting". Without question, I often had different perspectives on teaching than [Supervisor] did, but I didn’t think he was "wrong". I simply disagreed, and enjoyed hearing his reasons for his views, just as I enjoy hearing from other people. If my engagement with [Supervisor] was inappropriate, he never indicated this prior to the meeting of 11/19. Both [supervisory partner] and my cooperating teacher have said they observed a distinct change in his manner and behavior towards me after this point.

I believe that STEP staff agrees with [Supervisor]’s assessment of my honesty, and are unconcerned by his basic hostility. In their view, if I understand various comments that Dr. Lotan and Dean Callan have made, I warrant his distrust and thus need to win back his confidence.

I find this perspective inexplicable; if I am dishonest, then surely the school should move forward on this in some disciplinary fashion. Otherwise, a man who bears a great deal of power in my future has expressed the belief that I lie, and only apologized for the term, not the charge. He has also made it clear that he has a great deal of distaste for me, something that he hid for a long time. Moreover, he has met with my cooperating teacher secretly, and communicated with him secretly about plans for me that he fully intended to blindside me with. Dr. Lotan, [director of clinical practice], and Dean Callan have all told me that his behavior is completely within the norm of supervisory behavior. I find this very difficult to believe.