I'd like to know how the principal found out about the magic trick. Did a child tell their ridiculous parent that their teacher showed them a magic trick and the parent told on him? Or did the principal see it themselves?
Principal interviewed the students when issues like insufficient supervision, and not following the curriculum were reported by the teacher when they returned from absence.
Because wizardry is obviously the clinching factor when deciding to fire an inadequate teacher. Lazyness, insubordination, showing up late, not folllowing the ciriculum is something they can tolerate. But wizardry? That just goes too far!
if this is the case, then answer me this... WHY THE HELL DID THEY WAIT UNTIL THE "MAGIC" ACT TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT?!?!?!
Excatly how you you let him get away with all those accusations but have a zero tolerance on a magic trick ..... the way I look it they're should be alot more people fired than just the Wizard.
Not that I'm trying to turn this into a religious debate, but my suspicion is that this also has to do with the Harry-Potter-is-devilworship religious people of yonder south.
Because when you are an At-will state, they don't have to be rational or have an inquiry or a long drawn out process. A parent complained about it. It wasn't the first complaint that has been made against him, just the most recent. Dude wants to obscure the other charges leveled at him so he is trying to make it about magic. Frankly if doing magic tricks prevents him from getting his job done and puts the kids behind and screws up the teacher he was subbing for by having the class behind, then 'NO MAGIC'. Everything that has been said was there were numerous other reasons, each of which are plenty of reason to can the guy... and being an At-will state, they have no reason not to. There is a phenomenon where a 'person' spins the story into something absurd and then these articles float around and begin "internet lynching" of the offending party and puts them on the defensive which many times the personw ho first went to the press is exploiting the press to get something out of it. Dude sounds like a shitty sub who is more interested in being kids friends and pals opposed to educating and keeping the class in order and is a liability to the school system and he is attempting to blurr his personal record to embarrass the system into giving him his job back. Which is why when I see an 'internet lynching' like in this thread, do some research have some perspective and uh oh... the story is absurd but the real situation is not. If the guy is legit and a good teacher then he should have no problem getting another job. Remember that story where the waiter got 'fired' for chasing down a criminal? No, he got 'fired' for being a terrible employee and they had made the paperwork to 'fire' him before he showed up to work. He just happened to leave the job to catch a purse snatcher and he then made a big deal about how he was fired for being a good samaritan. Everyone screamed foul but the evidence was he was a bad employee and deserved to be fired. And other people gave him the benefit of the doubt and he was a bad employee for him too.
Nick, the principal said, specifically, 'Wizardry.' Not 'wasting class time with off-curricular activities,' or 'excessive sleight-of-hand.' If this was really about the other charges, why would it even need to be mentioned? The fact that the charge of witchcraft is ANY kind of factor is enough to make this newsworthy. The fact that it is implicated in a teacher's dismissal makes it national news.
How do we know that was the final straw? I bet this guy was on the way out before his little trick. No, but I do remember that one report where a high school girl accused a guard of breaking her arm for dropping cake. And then someone who knew an actual witness at the school revealed that she didn't drop the cake, but was involved in a food fight, and that the guard didn't break her arm, she broke it herself when she resisted arrest after cussing out said guard and that her mother, who claimed to be 'unfairly' arrested also, was actually arrested for assaulting the guard. The media likes to favor the little guy, without any real evidence at all. Maybe he's the one making the "wizardry" bit into a big deal and the School barely even mentioned it in any way? All interviews seems to be from his side in his words in where he claims all the other accusations are "window dressings" to hide the "real reason" he was let go. When in the end, the school doesn't even need a reason to fire him. Until there is a written, legal document signed by the school that says he was fired due to "wizardry" then this dude is just full of it. http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/ma...zardry-accusation-cost-h/?news-breaking&imw=Y
That is not what it said in 4-5 of the other articles where it was explicitly said of his other issues. Was he not told? or did the guy not want to hear it... or has he been told 'before' and he ignored it? This is all the stuff many of the articles conveniently leave out. And it doesn't give him rights, he is not actually a teacher. He is a substitute which in most places requires no educational degree, no certification and no skills, simply an AA in *ANY* subject. I don't buy it. And most stories either leave out the school systems 'side' or report he was a poor employee. And I agree with the school system from what I can read.
That will never be known for sure but what I'm getting at is if he was as bad as was said about him then why is he even on the way out instead of being long gone. Why should there be a laundry list of how bad of an employee he was to justify the firing if he dosen't get to defend himself anyways. If this is an At-will state shouldn't of he been fired before this whole ordeal since you already know him to be a bad teacher and you are a school who's job is solely to teach. That's why I think there should be more heads rolling that just his or a possible rushed cover-up.
I'm not sure how long he was contracted to sub for, a day? a few days? a term? Regardless, sometimes subbing or relief teachering sucks balls. I get it occasionally when my own timetable is quiet, I also talk a fair bit to the sub-teachers that come into my school on occasion to cover abscences. And, it can suck. Sometimes you get to cover a lesson, completely unrelated to your subject area or knowledge base, with instructions for 'curriculum' being: 'Students to finish worksheets from my desk'. Yet you can't find the frigging worksheets anywhere. Or the worksheet gets finished by most kids in 10 minutes, leaving 50 minutes of... dead air. Or the teacher leaves notes that are long, involved and way beyond your own comprehension in the subject. eg: 'Students read textbook pages 57-64. Then need to complete a paragraph on the links between the writing of music in the 1700's combined with socio-political movements of the time. Then teacher to lead a class wide discussion on the implications of this for future music writing and appreciation, asking questions related too... blah blah blah' And as a science picking up that class for 2 days from the absent music teacher, you read it, blink, look at the class roll and notice the class is 50% behaviour management issue students who won't follow that plan and you go phoocopy pages from the 'big book of wordfinds'. Or you draw a relief class for a PE class, and the teacher notes say 'Take students to oval to play touch football'. Which legally you can't do as you aren't sport trained or a PE teacher, and hence aren't covered. So saying that a relief teacher isn't following curriculum doesn't mean much to me.
I'm not at all surprised by this. Considering the little respect and pay teachers receive in this country it is no wonder it is slowing degenerating. There was also the teacher fired for being a bikini babe during the summer.
I agree. Subsitutes get treated like crap even more than regular teachers anyway. At least this one did magic tricks to entertain the monsters. We had a couple that were ex-cops and told us cop stories. Ever have a sub try to teach the material? It's impossible. Everyone is a bunch of disrespectful douche nozzles.
No, thank you. I'd rather stick to the facts. OK, yes, I know, that was terribly immature. But really, dude - I understand there's a need for objectivity, and I know that the little guy can be a jerk too. We clearly don't know everything about the situation. That said, the big guy can be a real bastard. And whatever the law may say - it's surely not always right.
