NYE OFFICE OF SPECIAL INVESTIGATIONS INVESTIGATIVE REPORT Department of Education faeewere ane 30, 2015 (CoortennyeJackson-Chase General Come Re: Kathleen Elvin, Principal, File #485569 seca Yom Andrew Kenney, Assistant Principal, File #819700 - Eunice Chao, Assistant Principal, File #832510 (Christopher Dion Joseph Antonucci, Assistant Principal, File #702005 ee: 21K540 - John Dewey High School ores W. Knows ‘Asoc Decor Marianna Werth, Assistant Principal, File #839033 25Q165' - Edith K. Bergtraum School OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X. ORIGIN OF COMPLAINT Between April 17, 2014, and October 22, 2014, the Office of Special Investigations (“OSI”) received multiple referrals from the Special Commissioner of Investigation (“SCI”), which generated seven separate OSI cases, concerning the conduct of the above-named subjects. On March 24, 2015, OSI received an additional referral fiom SCI concerning the conduct of Mr. Orsini and Mr. Antonucci Each of the referrals contained allegations regarding credit and/or grading improprieties during the 2013-2014 school year. In OSI Case #14-03665X, an anonymous complainant alleged that Ms. Elvin “pressure[d]” unidentified teachers to pass at least 85 percent of the students in their classes. In addition, it was alleged that Ms, Elvin and Mr. Kenney instituted a program called “Project Graduation,” which failed to meet Department of Education requirements for credit recovery. The complainant alleged that students participating in Project Graduation were required to complete packets of work that were created, collected, and graded by unknown staff members; the complainant noted that teachers assigned to Project Graduation courses taught subjects outside of their respective license areas. The complainant wrote that, after an unidentified teacher informed Ms. Chao that he would not give grades to students, “Grades were issued for the credit recovery class anyway and we think it was done most probably by Chao or by Kenney.” It was additionally alleged that unidentified teachers noticed that their class lists on Skedula® had increased in size, and that the new students added to their classes already had grades assigned to them for the classes in question. Finally, the complainant alleged that “Senior House” was a program in which failing students were “put on a fast track to graduation,” and that the program was “rife with the appearance of impropriety.” | During the 2013-2014 school year, Ms. Werth was assigned to 21K540 as an assistant principal. ° This referral was added to existing OSI Case #14-06058X because it was very similar to the allegations that were already Jodged, and Mr. Antonucci and Mr. Orsini were added to the case as subjects. * Skedula is a non-DOE computer program used by some schools in New York City in which authorized users can create lass lists as well as input grades and track other student data. In.a school that utilizes Skedule, each teacher assigned to the reievant school can search for class lists by teacher or student. See wwrw.datacation. com.OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X In OSI Case #14-05475X, an anonymous complainant alleged that“PM Schoo!” and Senior House were “fraudulent credit recovery programs” implemented by Ms. Elvin and Mr. Kenney, and that Ms. Werth had directed unidentified teachers to give students passing grades for these programs “if [the students) showed] up.” The complainant noted that Mr. Zeno, Mr. Personette, Ms. Trombetta and Ms, Boyle all taught PM School classes in which students were simultaneously receiving credit for multiple unrelated subjects.4 In OSI Case #14-06058X, an anonymous complainant reiterated the above allegations concerning Project Graduation and PM School. The complainant added that Ms. Elvin, Mr. Kenney, and Ms. Chao, in addition to Ms. Werth, had also directed unidentified teachers to give unidentified students passing grades for PM School based solely on attendance, “as [Was] the case for Project Graduation.” ‘The complainant identified Mr. Zeno, Mr. Personette, and Ms. Trombetta as PM School teachers,’ The complainant alleged that Ms. Boyle and Ms, ‘Varghese worked “closely” with Mr. Kenney to “push students along” in the school’s credit recovery programs. In the additional referral added to OSI Case #14-06058X, teacher Kai-Ming Wu° alleged that Mr. Orsini and Mr. Antonucci told her that she should pass students in her Project Graduation class if the students “show[ed] up or if they [did] the work.” In OSI Case #14-06216X, an anonymous complainant made unspecified allegations of “credit fraud” and alleged that Ms. Boyle, Ms. Varghese, and Ms. Ponce were “complicit in the fraud.” The complainant reiterated the allegation that Ms. Werth told unidentified teachers to give students passing grades if the students attended PM School, regardless of whether they completed the work assigned to them. The complainant additionally alleged that unidentified teachers at 21K540 were “asked to pass everyone.” The complainant added that Mr. Messinger, Ms. Chao, and Ms. Gutierrez gave Michael Klimetz, teacher, “a hard time” because he failed to input Project Graduation grades for subjects in which he was not licensed. In OSI Case #14-06274X, an anonymous complainant made allegations that, under the direction of Ms. Elvin, Mr. Kenney, Ms. Chao, and Ms. Creveling, the grades for Project Graduation and PM School were based on attendance, rather than student work product. The complainant also alleged that, during the Integrated Algebra Regents exam in June 2014, unidentified students shared calculators, and some students did not receive calculators until 45 minutes after the test began. Moreover, the complainant alleged that, during the Algebra L/Trigonometry Regents exam in June 2014, “there were rubries’ visible to the students as they took the test.” In OSI Case #14-06541X, Alan Lemer, teacher, alleged that, after he gave failing grades to Students A and B, he noticed that an unidentified individual changed the grades in Skedula to passing grades without consulting him, In OSI Case #14-08089X,* an anonymous complainant alleged that Ms, Elvin pressured multiple teachers, one of whom was Mr. Zeno, to give students passing grades for PM School classes, even if they failed to attend. In * Mr. Zeno, Ms. Trombetta, and Mr. Personette were not listed as subjects in this case. With regards to Mr. Zeno, the ‘complainant noted that he or she mentioned his name “not to incriminate him, but to point out how vulnerable frst year teachers are” * SCI listed the three teachers as subjects inthe original SCI referal, although the complainant stated that they were “unwilling” teachers, who were “particularly vulnerable as far as credit recovery goes.” “Ms. Wu provided her personal email address, but not her name, when she originally filed her complaint. During the course of the investigation, however, she elected to identify herself. Ms. Wu was assigned to K540 as a teacher during the 2013-2014 school year. tthe time of her complaint, she was assigned to the Absent Teacher Reserve. Teremains unknown to what type of “rubrics” the complainant was referring. In OSI Case #14-08089X, it was further alleged that Ms. Elvin improperly used Title Ill funds to pay for classes of ‘mixed English Language Learners ("ELL") and “mainstream students,” and directed Mr. Kenney to “double code” said Comal’ Off Spel aves 5 Cout Sect -Room 922 Beostyy, NY 1120, “eepbone 718-935-3200OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X addition, the complainant alleged that, on September 8, 2014, Student C brought a knife into school and was not suspended as a result of the violation because Mr, Lustig convinced police not to give Student C a summons? EXPLANATION OF TERMS ‘There are a number of methods by which students can make up credits for courses that they have previously failed that fall within DOE rules and regulations. Credit recovery is one such method.!° Credit recovery is “targeted, intensive instruction in the student's identified deficiency areas of a course,” for students who have failed a high school course. Credit recovery courses are not required to meet for 54 hours per term, as regular credit-bearing courses are, In order to be eligible for credit recovery, a student must have attended two-thirds of the class that he or she failed, and may only make up a course that he or she failed in the semester or summer immediately following the one in which they failed the original course. In addition, a student may earn no more than three core academic credits through credit recovery during his or her high school career. More information ‘on credit recovery can be found in this report’s conclusion. Students who are ineligible for credit recovery may simply re-take courses that they previously failed, and thereby attempt to obtain credit by fully meeting all of the original requirements for the entire 54-hour course. ‘The anonymous complainants and a number of the witnesses interviewed indicated that Project Graduation, PM School, and Senior House were credit recovery courses; however, the evidence obtained during this investigation indicates that the individuals in question incorrectly conflated “credit recovery” with any method by which a student cams credit for a course that he or she has previously failed, During the 2013-2014 school year, the credit recovery courses offered at 21K540 were separate and distinct from Project Graduation and PM School courses. ‘This investigation has determined that Project Graduation and PM School are credit-bearing courses that met for $4 hours per term. The two courses are similar in structure, but Project Graduation meets during the school day, while PM Schoo! meets after school. In any given Project Graduation or PM School course, the students in the class are deficient in various unrelated credits and must sit in a classroom and complete packets of work under the general supervision of a teacher. This investigation found that no instruction is provided in these courses. ‘This investigation also found that “Senior House” was not a course or program; rather, the term refers to a cohort of over-age and under-credited students at the school. classes to “avoid detection,” (Title Il funds are Federal funds that are designated to be used for supplemental services and programs for ELL students.) This allegation was previously investigated and unsubstantited under OSI Case #14-03826K and will not be addressed in this report. * This investigation found no evidence to support the allegation against Mr. Lustig. The relevant OORS Report reflects ‘that, on September 8, 2014, Student C brought a knife into school, which was discovered during scanning, According to emails between the Office of Safety and Youth Development (“OSYD") and school administrator, obtained by Investigator Liu, Stadent C received a six-day suspension as a result ofthe incident. The OORS report and emails are ‘enclosed in the case file. » See the DOE High School Academic Policy Reference Guide: schools.nye.gov/NR/rdonlyres/27BF8558-B895-407A- 8ESB-78B1B69F030A//AcpolicyHlighSchoolA cademicPolicyReferenceGuide pdf. ‘Chaselr’s On of Speci Inverts (5 Cour rest -Room S72 Boots NY 11201 Teepooe 718535900,OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION DOE AND/OR NON-DOE STAFF WITNESSES INTERVIEWED: Michael Solo, UFT Chapter Chairperson, teacher: During the course of this OSI Investigation, Mr. Solo was interviewed on three separate occasions. Investigator Liu first interviewed Mr, Solo on May 27, 2014, at 21540, He was subsequently interviewed by Investigator Liu again, at OSI, on June 19, 2014, Finally, Mr. Solo appeared at OSI for his third and final interview on August 28, 2014, in the presence of Arthur Solomon, UFT Special Representative. This final interview was conducted by Investigator Liu and Investigator Higginbotham. ‘Mr. Solo’s statements were consistent with one another except where noted below, During his initial interview with Investigator Liu, Mr. Solo stated that students who took credit recovery courses were given packets to complete, but that their work on the packets had no bearing on whether a student received credit for the course, Mr. Solo insisted that, if'a student had a good attendance rate for a credit recovery course, he or she would receive the credit. During his initial interview, Mr. Solo also stated that he was unable to provide supporting examples of these allegations, but stated that he would gather more information and contact Investigator Liu at a later date with additional information. During his subsequent interviews with Investigators Liu and Higginbotham, Mr. Solo indicated that Project Graduation, PM School, and Senior House were alll credit recovery programs; he indicated that he assumed that these were all credit recovery programs only because it was his understanding that the students in these programs were making up credits for classes that they had previously failed, and because some of the classes convened during “Period 9,” “Period 10,” and “Period 11,” which K540 does not have during the school day. In addition, Mr. Solo acknowledged that he did not teach any of the relevant courses, but that UFT members ‘hed informed him that all of these programs entailed having students complete packets of work related to various subject areas in which they were deficient in order to obtain course credit. Mr. Solo explained that, because teachers were unable to provide simultaneous instruction in unrelated courses and subject areas, none of the students in question received any instruction; rather, students were assigned to rooms in which they completed their packets of work while the assigned teachers took’ attendance and supervised the students without providing any instruction. He noted that many of the students in these courses had obtained credits in subject areas in which their respective teachers were not licensed. When asked, Mr. Solo was unable to provide any information regarding the criteria used to select students to participate in Project Graduation, PM School, or Senior House courses. Furthermore, when asked to do so, Mr. Solo refused to identify any of the staff members who had shared information with him about these courses. Upon being informed that the investigation would be unable to proceed without more specific information about the students, teachers, and courses in question, Mr. Solo stated that he would speak to the teachers who had provided him with information and ask them if they were willing to be identified. "On September 21, 2014, Mr, Solo emailed Mr. Solomon to provide him with the names of several teachers who were willing to be identified and to provide a statement to OSI in Mr. Solomon’s presence. Mr. Solomon provided that email to Javestigator Liu, and itis enclosed in the case file. In October 2014, Mr. Soloman agreed to meet Investigators Liu and ‘Higginbotham at K540 on December 3, 2014 to facilitate the interviews of the witnesses identified by Mr. Solo. ‘Chuear’s On af Spec Invergtone 65 Com Steet -Room922 Brose, NY 11201 ‘elephone: 718.535.3900 4OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X. Mr. Solo confirmed that he had heard from unidentified UFT members that students were forced to share calculators during the Algebra I Regents Exam, and that “rubrics” had been displayed in rooms in which the Algebra Il/Trigonometry had been administered. However, he could not identify any of the proctors of these exams, nor could he identify the testing room(s) in which these improprieties allegedly occurred. Joseph Antonucci, Assistant P: al [Witness Interview] On September 12, 2014, Investigator Higginbotham was present at 21K540 and interviewed Mr. Antonucci in the presence of Sarah Milardo, OSI Investigator. Mr. Antonucci stated that, after the June 2014 Regents exams were administered, he had heard from unidentified staff members that there were not enough calculators during the June 2014 Integrated Algebra Regents exam. Mr. Antonucci stated that he could not confirm that this was accurate, and that he had no information about what led to the calculator shortage on that date. Mr. Antonucci stated that he did not have any information about “rubrics” being displayed during the Algebra I/Trigonometry exam. On December 3, 2014, Investigator Liu and Investigator Higginbotham were present at 21K540 to conduct the following staff interviews in the presence of Mr. Solomon, Mr. Solo, and Richard Mangone, URT. Roseann Ponce, Guidance Counselor: Ms. Ponce explained that, as a guidance counselor, her involvement with 21K540’s credit recovery program was limited to selecting students from Senior House who were eligible for credit recovery based on DOE rules and regulations, so that they could be programmed for credit recovery courses. She explained that there was a “panel of people”™* that planned and supervised credit recovery courses. Ms. Ponce denied any knowledge of misconduct regarding the administration or programming of credit recovery courses, or grade changing at 21540. Cheryl Varghese, Guidance Counselor: ‘Ms. Varghese stated that, as a guidance counselor, her involvement with credit recovery wes limited to selecting students who were eligible for credit recovery, based on DOE rules and regulations, so that they could be programmed for credit recovery courses. Ms. Varghese relayed that she would check the grades of students who were deficient in credits, see which courses they needed, and placed them in Project Graduation or Senior House. She stated that Mr. Kenney would occasionally check on her progress, but he never directed her to place students in credit recovery, Project Graduation, or Senior House if they did not meet the criteria. Ms. At the time of ths interview, Mr. Antonucci was not listed as a subject in any case, and there was no indication that he ‘was involved in Project Graduation, PM School, Senior House or credit recovery. Mfr. Antonucei was lator interviewed as a subject when allegations against him arose during the course of this investigation His subject interview can be found further in this report. The individuals interviewed were those identified, in late September 2014, by Me. Solo as witnesses who were willing to cooperate withthe investigation. Investigator Higginbotham was not present for the interviews of Cheryl Varghese, ‘Roseann Ponce, or Alan Lerner. "The High School Academic Policy Guide requires that a school-based panel (consisting of, at minimum, the Principal, @ subjectatea licensed teacher, and a “guidance director or other administrator”) approve a student's participation in oredit recovery, Additional information ou credit recovery requirements can be found further inthis report. ‘Comers foe of Specie nvesgatne (63 Court Staet-Room 22“ Broke, NY 11201 eepbene 718988800, oyOSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X ‘Varghese denied any knowledge of misconduct regarding the administration of credit recovery courses, or grade changing at 21K540. Alan Lerner, Teacher: ‘Mr. Lemer stated that Student A and Student B failed his Participation in Goverament class in the Spring 2014 semester, but that, when he checked Skedula, the two students were reflected as having passed his course. Mr. \Lemer maintained that no one consulted with him regarding the students’ grade changes. Mr. Lemer explained that he suspected that the grades were changed improperly by an unknown administrator because, on an unspecified date, he received a text message from Assistant Principal Larry Orsini,'° who asked if there was “anything that [Mr. Lemer] could do” for three students, one of them being Student A. Mr. Lemer stated that he told Mr, Orsini that he could not do anything to help the students improve their grades and that this concluded their conversation on the matter. Michael Klimetz, Teacher: Mr. Klimetz stated that, during the 2013-2014 school year, he was assigned to teach a Project Graduation course. Mr. Klimetz indicated that Ms. Chao gave him a list of students and discussed the course with him at the beginning of the 2013-2014 school year; based on that discussion, Mr. Klimetz stated that it was his understanding that he was expected to supervise students and provide “material support” while the students completed “projects” in order to “restore their transcripts.” He stated that Ms. Chao informed him that the course was a “unified science” course, but he leamed that students in the class needed credit for a variety of courses. Mr. Klimetz stated that he was uncertain who conceptualized the projects for subjects other than science, his subject area license. ‘Mr. Klimetz further stated that, during his initial conversation with Ms. Chao, the issue of how students would be graded for Project Graduation was “never discussed.” Mr. Klimetz explained that he did not do any substantive instruction, nor could he have, as students were in the class to obtain credits in unrelated subjects such as English, math and science. Mr. Klimetz expressed his belief that the class he supervised was a “credit recovery” course, an assertion he based on the fact that students taking his Project Graduation course were doing so to get credit for courses that they failed’ He acknowledged that he had no additional information regarding the manner in which students were selected to participate in Project Graduation. According to Mr. Klimetz, as Ms. Chao had requested during their initial conversation, he took attendance and collected the work of the students who completed their assigned projects for Project Graduation. He stated that, although he was the teacher of record for the class in Skedula, he refused to input grades for students who had been working towards obtaining credits in subject areas in which he was not certified. He stated that, after he informed Ms. Chao that he would not input these grades, he gave Ms. Chao the completed projects; he then saw that the students who had been previously assigned to him were assigned to Ms. Chao in Skedula and had received pass or fail grades. When asked about his knowledge of PM School, Mr. Klimetz explained that PM School was indistinguishable from Project Graduation in terms of the manner in which courses were administered. He stated that, although he did not teach PM School, he had heard that the program was intended for students who were either failing or struggling to obtain credits. "A copy of the text message exchange is enclosed in the case file. Chscabers Offs of Spex nvr 65 Cour Steet -Room522- Brot, NY 1120) ‘Tepe: 7185353800 6OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08080X When asked, Mr. Klimetz stated that Senior House was a program for seniors who were deficient in credits; he had no additional information about Senior House. ‘Mr. Klimetz was informed that, in OSI Case #14-06216X, he was named as a teacher who was being “given a hard time” by Ms. Chao, Mr. Messinger, and Ms. Gutierrez because he refused to comply with instructions to center grades for students in subjects for which he was not licensed in. Investigator Liu asked him to provide details of how he was “given a hard time,” Mr. Klimetz explained that Ms. Chao and other administrators sent him repeated emails asking him for the grades of students assigned to him towards the end of the semester. He specifically recalled receiving an email from Ms. Chao on one occasion, and was asked, “How do you think [the students] are doing?" Mr. Klimetz confirmed that students were forced to share calculators during the June 2014 Algebra I Regents because there were not enough calculators, although he did not know why this occurred. He stated that he did not proctor the Algebra II Regents, nor did he hear anything about “rubrics” being posted in classrooms where the test was administered. Jennifer Bovle, Guidance Couns Ms. Boyle stated that she was assigned to the school-based panel for 21K540’s credit recovery program during the 2013-2014 school year. She explained that the panel—comprised of her, other teachers, guidance counselors, and administrators—reviewed student records to determine their eligibility for credit recovery; after a student was approved to participate in credit recovery, a subject-area licensed teacher created a packet of work for the student to complete. Once the student completed the work, a subject-area licensed teacher would grade it. Ms. Boyle explained that students who were doing credit recovery were not required to attend class or meet with teachers for instruction while completing their packets; rather, students were directed to meet with subject- area licensed teachers for assistance if needed. Ms. Boyle stated that she was certified in all four major subject areas (math, science, ELA and social studies) and that she, therefore, participated in handing out and grading assignments for students who were doing credit Tecovery. She explained that this was the reason why so many students appeared under her name in Skedula, Ms. Boyle denied that she was ever pressured to give passing grades to students who had not completed the required work for credit recovery, Ms. Boyle further stated that she was not involved in Project Graduation or PM School during the 2013-2014 school year, and that neither of these programs were credit recovery programs. She also explained that Senior House was not an academic program or type of course, but rather, a cohort of seniors who were under-credited. When asked, Ms. Boyle stated that she did not have any knowledge of the allegations that students shared calculators or were able to view rubrics during the June 2014 Regents exams, Alexander Zeno, Teacher: Mr. Zeno confirmed that, during the 2013-2014 school year, he taught PM School. Mr. Zeno explained that he was assigned to meet with a group of 10-15 students after school who were deficient in math, Global Studies, “S Mr. Klimetz provided copies of some of the relevant emails, which are discussed in the “Documentation” section of this report. Coase fe of Sec vegas (65 Cour Srext-Room 922 Broke, NY 11201 “Teepooe 718.935.3900, 7OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X US History, and other subjects, or who had failed Regents exams, in order to “tutor” them.!” While he was unable to recall all of the details of his conversation with Ms. Werth regarding PM School, he recalled that she directed him to assist some students who were preparing for Social Studies Regents exams. He denied that she provided him with additional details regarding the manner in which he should assist the students, ‘When asked, Mr. Zeno stated that Ms. Werth had informed him, during a conversation about the course at the beginning of the school year, that some of the students in his PM School class had not passed Regents exams or courses; he did not have any additional information about the manner in which students were chosen to participate in PM School. Mr. Zeno further stated that he took attendance for the students and assisted them individually with their work in the best way he could, but he did not provide instruction. He could not recall who created the packets of work that he distributed to students for them to complete during class. Mr. Zeno indicated that, towards the end of the 2013-2014 school year, he spoke with Ms. Werth about the course and the grades that he was giving for it, and that, at Ms. Werth’s direction, he input passing grades for the students who did their work satisfactorily. Mr. Zeno denied that he was pressured into passing students who had not attended PM School, or that Ms. Werth or any other administrator directed him to give students passing grades based solely on their attendance. Mr. Zeno confirmed that he had heard from unidentified staff members that students were forced to share calculators during the Integrated Algebra Regents exam, but he did not proctor that exam. He had no knowledge of the allegation that students were able to see “rubrics” during the Algebra Il/Trigonometry examination. Martha Blitzer, Teacher:'* ‘Ms. Blitzer confirmed that she proctored the Integrated Algebra and Algebra II/ Trigonometry Regents exams in June 2014. She noted that she was also one of the individuals responsible for distributing calculators for the Integrated Algebra Regents exam. Ms. Blitzer stated that, on the day of the June 2014 Integrated Algebra Regents exam, there was “confusion” that caused a delay in calculator distribution. When asked, Ms. Blitzer was unable to provide any information about what caused the “confusion,” and she could not identify the other individuals who assisted in distributing calculators. Ms. Blitzer stated that it took 45 minutes to distribute the calculators, and that, during the distribution, it became obvious that they did not have enough. Ms. Blitzer stated that she informed Ms. Elvin of the shortage, and that Ms. Elvin stated that the students could share calculators; no other staff members were present for this conversation with Ms. Elvin. Ms. Blitzer indicated that she distributed enough calculators to each room so that groups of two to three students could access one calculator at a time. Ms. Blitzer stated that, during the Algebra Il/Trigonometry exam in June 2014, each student was assigned his or her own calculator. Ms. Blitzer also confirmed that there were rubrics posted in some of the rooms in which students were taking the exam. She could not identify any of the rooms in which the rubrics were visible, nor could she identify the proctors who supervised these exams. Ms. Blitzer acknowledged that teachers should have removed rubrics before the beginning of the exam, but she stated that the administration failed to direct teachers to remove such materials fom their classrooms. 1” Mir, Zeno holds a generalist certificate to teach students with disabilities; bis generalist certificate qualifies him to teach all four core academic subject areas: ELA, math, science, and socal studies, ° According to the proctoring schedule obtained-by this investigator on September 12, 2014, Ms. Blitzer was assigned to proctor the Integrated Algebra Regents and the Algebra I/Trigonometry Regents exams in June 2014. ‘The proctorig assignments are enclosed in the case file. (Cecel’s Ox of Spec nvengtons 65 Cot Sheet -Ream922- Brook NY 11201 ‘Wagons: 718.935.3800 8OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X Ms. Blitzer indicated that she was told by Ms. Elvin and members of the administration that she “must try to have an 85 percent passing rate,” but denied that she was ever directed to change the grades of students who were failing to passing. Ms. Blitzer mentioned that she had been instructed by Ms. Elvin and a male assistant principal’ not to submit any student grades until the male assistant principal reviewed the grades. She complied with the instructions, but denied that the grades of her students were altered in Skedula or that students received grades that she bad not given to them. Wade Goria, Teacher: ‘Mr. Goria stated that he assisted in administering the Integrated Algebra Regents exam in June 20142? Mr, Goria stated that he waited for calculators to arrive before starting the exam; however, there were not enough calculators for the test he was proctoring, and some of the calculators that his room received had not been charged. Mr. Goria stated that he called someone to report the shortage, but he could not recall whom he informed, Mr. Goria stated that he did not have any information about rubrics being posted in classrooms during the Algebra Il/Trigonometry Regents exam, ‘Mr. Goria informed investigators that he was “pressured” by the administration to maintain a passing rate of 85 percent. When asked to articulate what he meant by “pressured,” Mr. Goria explained that members of the administration were “constantly checking on passing rates,” and that, if a teacher was not meeting the 85 percent standard, he or she would be asked why the goal was not met, Mr. Goria specifically stated that Ms. Elvin frequently questioned staff members about their passing rates. Mr. Goria denied that any student assigned to him had ever received a grade in Skedula that he had not assigned to the student, He also denied that any of the grades he assigned had ever been changed without his knowledge or by a third party, Loretta O’Hara, Teach: Ms. O’Hara stated that, during the administration of the Integrated Algebra Regents exam, unidentified staff members came to her room to take some of her calculators because of a purported shortage in other rooms. She stated that, after the calculators were removed, there was one calculator for every two students. ‘Ms, O'Hara stated that she did not have any information about the allegation that “rubrics” were displayed in classrooms during the Algebra Il/Trigonometry exam. Ms. O’Hara relayed that Ms. Elvin and other members of the administration had questioned her if her passing tate was lower than 85 percent in a given term; specifically, she had to meet with Ms. Elvin and other administrators and was asked if there was classwork that failing students could complete to help them pass her class. Additionally, Ms. Elvin asked Ms. O’Hara, “What more are you doing to bump [the failing student's} grade up?” She denied that anyone ever instructed her to change a failing student’s grades. » Ms. Blitzer could not recall the identity of the assistant principal in question. 3 Mr. Goria isnot listed as a proctor for that exam, according to the proctoring assignments enclosed in the case fle. *' Ms. O’Flara was assigned to proctor the integrated Algebra Regents exam in June 2014, according to the proctoring assignments enclosed in the case file, (tsestn's Oe f Spec nveignns (65 Cout Suet - Room 922 Breda, NY 11201 ‘Teepbone 71895.3800 -o-‘OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X Kai-Ming Wu, Teacher: On April 16, 2015, Ms. Wu emailed an audio file to this investigator; the file contained a recorded conversation that Ms. Wu claimed occurred between her and Mr, Antonucci on June 14, 2014.” The recording opens with Mr. Antonucci telling Ms. Wn that she must “follow up” and that she can “talk to [Bunice] Chao” about an unknown concem. Ms. Wu then asks Mr. Antonucci if Project Graduation classes ‘occur during students’ lunch periods, and he confirms that this is correct. Ms, Wu then says, “OK, so Orsini, ‘Mr. Orsini told us before, he said, if the kids show up, or they do their work, then pass them.” Mr. Antonucci replies, “Yeah.” There is a pause in recording, in which no voices or background noises can be heard. The recording then restarts with Mr. Antonucci saying, “...if it’s not in an area that’s your specialty-obviously if it’s not math-you give it to the department and they grade it, but just make sure that the grade is given.” Ms. Wu responds, “That’s the school’s policy?” and Mr. Antonucci responds, “Yeah, alright? It’s not hard.” On April 30, 2015, Ms. Wu appeared at OSI to be interviewed in the presence of Mr. Solomon, UFT Representative, When asked to identify the administrators who spoke to her about Project Graduation during the 2013-2014 school year, Ms, Wu stated that Assistant Principal Frank Benpensata gave her the teaching program for the 2013-2014 school year but did not provide any instructions regarding Project Graduation. She explained that Larry Orsini told her and teacher Sawsan Hamidi that they should pass students for Project Graduation courses if they attended class or if they did their work, which Ms. Wu interpreted to mean that she should pass students who attended the class but did not complete any of the work. She stated that there were students in her Project Graduation course who were getting credit in English or Spanish, although she is licensed in math, Ms, Wu stated that Mr. Orsini told her to “tutor” students in math, while the other students who needed credits in unrelated subjects would complete their own work. Ms, Wu stated that, at the end of the term, “they” took folders of work completed by students who were receiving credit in a subject other than math, so that it could be graded. Ms. Wu could not recall who collected this work or originally distributed it to her, and she was unable to say who graded the work that was in a subject area other than math. When asked about the pause in the recording that she provided to OSI, Ms. Wu initially stated that the reason for the silence was that she and Mr. Antonucci were silent during that time. When this investigator inquired about whether she had provided a continuous recording because of the lack of ambient noise, she said that “a friend” who assisted her with the recording “removed” a portion of the recording. When asked about the content of the removed portion of the recording, Ms. Wu would only say that “nothing important” was said during that time.” Sawsan Hamidi, Teacher On May 28, 2015, this investigator spoke with Ms. Hamidi over the phone. At that time, Ms. Hamidi confirmed that she and Ms. Wu had a meeting with Mr. Orsini about the Project Graduation courses that they were assigned to teach during the 2013-2014 school year. Ms. Hamidi noted that she assisted another teacher in a Project Graduation course, and that she, therefore, was not responsible for assigning grades to students, She stated that she could not recall exactly what Mr, Orsini said during the meeting: however, when asked directly, ® The recording was copied to a disc and is enclosed in the case ile. ® On Jume 14, 2015, Ms. Wu provided this investigator with a copy of the recording, which she claimed was unedited. ‘The conversation in the edited and unedited recording is identical, and there appears to be no break in the recording in the unedited version. The unedited recording will be added to the case file upon being re-formatted. Charl’ Ofc of Spel nvetipons {8 Coun Suet -Room 922 -Drokya, NY 1261 “Telpbne 718935800 -10-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089K she denied that he instructed Ms. Wu to pass students if they did their work or if they attended class, regardless of whether they completed their assignments. She stated that Mr. Orsini never made any statements indicating that students should receive passing grades on the basis of attendance. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE: Skedula Records, Emails, and Class Schedules Provided by Mr. Solo and Mr, Klimetz:™ Mr. Klimetz provided an email that he stated he sent to Mr. Antonucci and Ms, Chao on January 30, 2014, in which he refused to grade the Project Graduation course because, for that class, he had been “given the assignment of facilitating students with their independent study projects...[which] range from US History, to Global History to Geometry to Living Environment.” He did not provide any indication of what Ms. Chao’s response to his email had been. Mr. Klimetz also provided emails that he received from Ms. Chao, in which she requested that he inform her which students had received credit for his Project Graduation course. ‘Mr. Klimetz provided multiple student records from Skedula. Although the student records belong to the students he listed as being in his Project Graduation course during the 2013-2014 school year, the only records that contain his name as the teacher of record are the ones in which he gave students credit for AP Physics, ‘There is no indication that he was the teacher of record for any other course credit eamed by the students in question. Mr. Solo provided a list of the classes assigned to Joseph Autovino, teacher, ftom Skedula. Based on those records, it appears that Mr. Autovino was scheduled to teach Living Environment, Earth Science, Geometry, US History, Global Studies, and Algebra Il/Trigonometry during 6th period on Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays, in Room 135. Mr. Solo also provided several student records, which reflect that students received pass or fail credit for a course entitled “Project Graduation,” which occurred during 6th Period and was taught by Mr. Autovino and Ms. Hamidi, Mr. Solo provided a list of the classes assigned to Ms. Wu from Skedula, Based on those records, it appears that Ms. Wu was scheduled to teach Chemistry, Living Environment, Project Graduation, Global Studies, English and US History during 4" Period on Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays, in Room 135. He also provided several student records, which reflect that students received grades for a course entitled “Project Graduation,” which occurred during 4th period in Room 135. Mr. Solo provided a list of the classes assigned to Mr. Zeno from Skedula. Based on those records, it appears that Mr. Zeno was scheduled to teach Integrated Algebra, Art in Society, US History, CUNY Math, Global Studies, Economics, Algebra Il/Trigonometry, Living Environment, Earth Science, and Environmental Science, during 9th Period on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Mr. Solo provided several student records, which reflect that students received credit from Mr. Zeno for some of these subjects. Mr. Solo also provided Ms. Boyle's class list from Skedula, which listed her simultaneously teaching many classes in different subject areas during Period 11 2 The relevant excerpts of the records are enclose in the case file, andthe entire body of documents provided by Mr. Solo was secured in OSI’s evidence locker. Not all ofthe records provided by Mr, Solo are enclosed inthe case fle because many of the records were redundant. The records were provided to these investigators by Mr. Solo on June 19 and August 28, 2014. Mr. Klimetz also provided documentation related to his Project Graduation course daring his interview with OSI in December 2014, (Carl's Off of Spec nents 65 Cou Soe Room 922» Boch NY 11201 "Tebphose: 71895-3800 “leOSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X According to the Skedula records obtained and analyzed by Investigator Liu, Student A’s and Student B’s Skedula records did reflect that they both failed Mr. Lemer’s class with a grade of 55, but that no changes were made under Mr. Lener’s name to reflect that the students passed his class. Student Transcript and Academic Reporting System (“STARS”) records:”* On April 15, 2015, this investigator reviewed the official DOE transcripts of Students C, D, E, F, G, and H. Students C, D, and E were assigned to Mr. Klimetz’s Project Graduation course during the 2013-2014 school year..* Students F, G, and H were assigned to Mr. Zeno’s PM School course during the 2013-2014 school year! ‘There is no teacher of record listed on the transcripts for Students C, D, E, for the credits that they obtained in Geometry, Living Environment, and Earth Science, respectively, through Project Graduation. None of the codes for the relevant courses indicate that these credits were earned through credit recovery courses* The grades for these classes were pass or fail grades. The master schedule audits” for Mr. Klimetz do not indicate that Mr. Klimetz was ever added as the teacher of record in STARS for the above classes. ‘The teacher of record on the official transcripts for the credits that Students F, G, and H eamed through Project Graduation, in Algebra II/Trigonometry, Art in Society, and Living Environment, respectively, is Mr. Zeno. None of the codes for the relevant courses indicate that these credits were earned through credit recovery courses. The master schedule audits for Mr. Zeno indicate that Mr. Kenney added his name as the teacher of record in STARS for the above classes on March 14, 2014, ‘The teacher grid schedule™ indicates the following regarding the courses taught by Mr. Autovino, Mr, Klimetz, Ms. Wu, and Mr. Zeno: ‘In the second term of the 2013-2014 school year, during 6th Period, Mr. Autovino was programmed to teach English, Economics, Global Studies, US History, Integrated Algebra, Geometry, Earth Science, Living Environment, and Health, + In the first term of the 2013-2014 school year, during 9th Period, Mr. Klimetz was programmed to teach Earth Science, Project Graduation, and Project Graduation I. © In the second term of the 2013-2014 schoo! year, during 4th Period, Ms, Wu was programmed to teach English, Global Studies, US History, Integrated Algebra, Geometry, Algebra’ Il/Trigonometry, Chemistry, Earth Science, Living Environment, and Project Graduation. * STARS is the official DOE web-based system for recording and tracking student programs, student test scores, teacher programs and course schedules, as well 2s generating offical student transcripts, The relevant STARS records are enclosed in the case file. This investigator obtained all ofthe STARS records that are referenced directly from STARS ‘Technical Support. * These students were not only identified from the class lists provided by Mr. Klimetz, but were also the students referenced in the email exchange between Ms. Chao and Mr. Klimetz regarding his Project Graduation course. 2 These students were identified through the Skedula records provided by Mr. Solo, ** DOE's High School Academic Policy requires that credit recovery courses be assigned course codes with an “r” es the seventh character. See http://schools.nye gov/NR/rdonlyres/27BF8558-B895-407A-SF3F- ‘78B1B69F030A/0/AcpolicyHighSchoolAcademicPolicyReferenceGuide-pdf. The relevant excerpt from the High School Academie Policy Guide is enclosed in the case file 5 The master schedule audit provides 2 record of changes in STARS made to the teacher of record for each course. °° The teacher grid schedule report is a record of which courses are assigned to which teacher, by class period. Chascber’s Ofer of Speci overs (65 Court Sect -Room522 rst, NY 11201 ‘Tekan 718535-3900 -12-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X. © In the second term of the 2013-2014 school year, during 9th period, Mr, Zeno was programmed to teach Global Studies, US History, Economics, Integrated Algebra, CUNY Math, Algebra Ii/Trigonometry, Living Environment, Environmental Science, Earth Science, and Art in Society. New York State ficat Mr. Autovino is licensed to teach Social Studies. Mr. Klimetz is licensed to teach Earth Science and General Science, ‘Ms. Wu is licensed to teach Mathematics and Chinese. Mr. Zeno is licensed to teach students with disabilities and holds a generalist certificate, SUBJECTS: 48-Hour Notice: On December 4, 2014, Investigator Liu and Investigator Higginbotham separately notified Ms. Werth, Ms. Chao, and Ms, Elvin, via email, that they were the subjects of this investigation. On January 20, 2015, these investigators notified Mr. Kenney, via email, that he was a subject in this investigation. On April 20, 2015, Investigator Higginbotham notified Mr. Antonucci, via email, that he was a subject in this investigation. Mai tant Principal On December 16, 2014, Ms. Werth was interviewed at OSI in the presence of Robert Colon, a representative for the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators (“CSA”). ‘When asked to describe Project Graduation, Ms. Werth stated that she did not know anything about the program other than the fact that Project Graduation was a course offered at K540. Ms, Werth explained that she did not do any work with Project Graduation while assigned to KS40, Ms, Werth stated that PM School was “an interdisciplinary course for students who were credit deficient.” When asked if she supervised PM School, Ms. Werth responded, “I suppose to an extent.” Ms. Werth stated that she did not know if the students who participated in PM Schoo! had failed courses or had simply not taken enough classes and fallen behind. She explained that Ms. Elvin, Mr, Kenney and the guidance counselors at the school had chosen the students to participate in PM School. Ms. Werth was asked to explain what she meant by “interdisciplinary.” She explained that, for example, an English-certified teacher could teach a class that covered two English courses. Ms. Werth stated that she could not recall the certifications of the teachers assigned to PM School, nor could she recall for which courses students received credits. However, she stated ‘that teachers assigned to PM School were expected to have a curriculum and provide instruction. ‘Ms. Werth confirmed that Mr. Zeno taught PM School. She stated that Mr. Zeno taught math courses at K540 during the 2013-2014 school year. She could not explain why Mr. Zeno was assigned to give students credits in math, science, art, and history for his PM School class, and she denied any knowledge of the fact that Mr. Zeno ‘was assigned to give so many credits in different unrelated subject areas. She denied telling Mr. Zeno that he > The relevant records regarding the licenses of the teachers below are enclosed in the case file. Chase's Oe of Spel neg one (6 CoutSteet-Reow 92“ Broly, NY 11201 “Teepbone: 718935-3890 -13-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X should be assisting students with social studies, and could not explain why Mr. Zeno stated that she had done 50. Ms. Werth further denied that she requested to see grades before they were entered by PM School teachers, and that she ever discussed basing a grade for PM School on a student’s attendance, Ms. Werth stated that Senior House was a cohort of under-credited and over-age students. She explained that it ‘was not a program, but an attempt to schedule many of these students for the same courses and keep them together, so that they did not fee! as if they did not fit in with the rest of the school community, Ms. Werth stated that, during the June 2014 Integrated Algebra Regents exam, the special education students ‘whom she supervised had “ample supplies,” including calculators. She had no knowledge of any impropricties that occurred during the Algebra Il/Trigonometry Regents exam. Eunice Chao, Assistant Princip: On December 17, 2014, Ms. Chao was interviewed at OSI in the presence of Alex Castillo, a representative from CSA. When asked, Ms. Chao stated that Project Graduation courses were “interdisciplinary courses” in which students received credit for courses in which they were deficient. She explained that, for example, if one student needed credit in Global History and another needed US History, they could be in the same class and get credit for both. Ms. Chao stated that the same could be said of a class covering Algebra and Trigonometry; she noted that administrators “did [their] best” to ensure that the subject areas taught in each Project Graduation class were closely related. Ms. Chao denied that Project Graduation courses were eredit recovery courses. She stated that teachers were expected to have a curriculum and provide instruction, and that students were chosen for the program if they were missing credits or had failed courses. Ms. Chao stated that, although attendance was taken into account in students” grades, she had never told anyone to give a student a grade solely based on attendance. When asked directly, Ms. Chao stated that she did not recall Mr, Klimetz or any other teacher refusing to enter Project Graduation grades because they were not certified in the subject area in question, and she denied entering grades on any teacher's behalf in Skedula. Ms. Chao stated that she was not familiar with the manner in which students were chosen for PM school or the manner in which the program was administered. She was also unfamiliar with Mr. Zeno’s role in the program. Ms. Chao confirmed that Senior House was not a program, and that the term instead referred to a cohort of students who were over-age and under-credited. When asked about credit recovery at K540, Ms. Chao stated that she was on the credit recovery panel with Ms. Boyle during the 2013-2014 school year. She confirmed that students were given packets of work to complete based on the deficiencies that led them to fail the courses in question, and that students were not provided with “direct instruction.” She indicated that students were instructed to confer with teachers who were licensed in the relevant subject area if they had any questions. Ms. Chao stated that, to her knowledge, all students who took the Integrated Algebra Regents exam had access to an individual calculator, and calculators were distributed before the test; however, she acknowledged that she did not directly supervise the test. Ms. Chao further stated that she had no Inowledge of rubrics being posted in ‘Comber’ Oxo pci lnvespsons (65 Coat Sest-Room $22 “Broke, NY 11201 Teepone 718958 3800, 14.OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X testing rooms, but she stated that, every year, teachers are told that they must remove such material from the walls of their classrooms. Ms. Chao could not recall whether these instructions were written or verbal during the 2013-2014 school year. Kathleen Elvin, Principal: On December 18, 2014, Ms. Elvin was interviewed at OSI in the presence of Marlene Lazar, a representative from CSA. On June 8, 2015, at the request of her union representative, Ms, Elvin was offered the opportunity to appear at OSI in order to provide this investigator with an additional statement regarding the allegations. She subsequently appeared at OSI on June 26, 2015, and was interviewed in the presence of Robert Colon, a representative from CSA. December 18, 2014 Interview: Regarding PM School, Ms. Elvin stated that the program was intended for students who had failed classes or who had not taken a required course. She explained that guidance counselors identified students who could benefit from PM School, and she and other administrators registered the students in the appropriate classes. She noted that Mr. Kenney was primarily responsible for programming students into the appropriate class. She stated that PM School was not part of the credit recovery program; rather, she explained, PM School was an “interdisciplinary” course”? with “full instruction.” When asked if a PM School class could cover unrelated subject arcas, she responded that “it depends” on the circumstances. Ms. Elvin acknowledged that “it is possible” that, during the 2013-2014 school year, teachers who were assigned to supervise students earning credits outside of their license area would have distributed work that another teacher conceptualized. Ms. Elvin stated that, in this scenario, the teacher who was certified in the relevant area would grade the work, rather than the teacher who was actually supervising PM School. She explained that the grades would still appear under the name of the teacher who was supervising the relevant PM School class, rather than the teacher who graded the work. Ms. Elvin could not explain how a teacher might provide meaningful instruction in this scenario. ‘When she was specifically asked about Mr. Zeno’s PM School class, she stated that she had no recollection of him being assigned to teach so many unrelated subject areas, Ms, Elvin further confirmed that she was on the credit recovery panel during the 2013-2014 school year with Ms. Boyle and other subject-area certified teachers. She confirmed that students were not required to attend class or receive instruction in order to receive credit through credit recovery; however, she insisted that students had “contact” with teachers while completing their work for credit recovery, in that the students who were obtaining credit through targeted credit recovery and the relevant subject-area certified teachers should have been aware that they were required to meet about the credit recovery work during their respective free time. ‘Ms, Elvin noted that Ms. Boyle was licensed in all four core academic areas, but she indicated that the work completed by students doing credit recovery was graded by a variety of other teachers who were licensed in the relevant subject areas. When asked, Ms. Elvin posited that Ms. Boyle may have input all of the grades from credit recovery and that is why it appeared that she was assigned to teach 52 classes. Ms. Elvin stated that Project Graduation was a program intended for students who should be close to meeting the requirements for graduation but were deficient in credits, either because they failed or never took required classes. Ms. Elvin stated that the students who completed Project Graduation classes were not eligible for credit recovery. Ms. Elvin further explained that, like PM School, Project Graduation classes were “interdisciplinary”” ® Ms. Elvin provided this investigator with a limited excerpt from the section of the High School Academic Policy Reference Guide that references interdisciplinary courses. The document provided by Ms. Elvin is enclosed in the case file. Cancels fic of Special avetgtns ss Can Srest-Room92 = Booty NY 11201 “Teepe 718.935.3900, -15-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X and the work of the students in the classes could be created and graded by a teacher other than the one who was in the classroom with them. Ms, Elvin denied that teachers had to get approval from administrators before entering their class grades for any of the above programs. She stated that, while attendance was a factor in any grade, no administrator had ever directed a teacher to give a student a grade based solely on attendance, ‘When asked, Ms. Elvin stated that she did not recall that Mr. Klimetz refused to enter grades for his Project Graduation class. Ms. Elvin also denied that Ms. Blitzer or any other staff member had informed her that there were not enough calculators for the students taking the Integrated Algebra Regents exam in June 2014, She noted that Ms. Blitzer was responsible for properly distributing the calculators, and that, to her knowledge, no students shared calculators, Ms. Elvin noted that the school had given an interim assessment earlier in the 2013-2014 school ‘year, and there had been enough calculators for that assessment. She also noted that the school ordered 100 additional calculators in the spring of 2014, which were available at the time of the Regents exam in question. ‘Ms. Elvin stated that she visited every classroom in which testing would be conducted during the June 2014 Regents exams, and there were no “rubrics” posted. She stated that all of the tests took place in the room in. which they were originally scheduled to be administered. Moreover, Ms. Elvin denied the allegation that Student C. was never suspended for possessing a knife on school grounds, and she provided investigators with documentation from OSYD indicating that Mother C entered a plea of “no contest” for Student C regarding the aforementioned incident and that Student C ultimately was suspended for six days. Sune 26, 2015 Interview: At their request, Ms. Elvin and her representative, Mr. Colon, were reminded of the allegations against her. Ms, Elvin stated that almost no students received credit through Project Graduation in Fall 2013-2014 school year. When questioned specifically about Michael Klimetz’s Project Graduation course, Ms. Elvin stated that “the kids were dropped” from that class and that they did not receive credit. In response, this investigator presented her with Student D’s transcript and explained that the student was assigned to Mr. Klimetz’s Project Graduation course and had received a passing grade for the credit that the student had been assigned to earn in that course, Ms. Elvin stated, “This is the first time I am seeing this.” She was ultimately unable to explain why the credit appeared on Student D’s transcript. Ms. Elvin further stated that, in September 2014, she reviewed a list of all of the students who had received credit for the Project Graduation courses that took place in Spring 2013-2014 school year, after hearing that Mr. Solo had made a complaint regarding the program. She stated that, at that time, she saw that teachers had been programmed to simultaneously instruct students in many unrelated subject arcas. Ms. Elvin noted that, although the courses were “intended” to be interdisciplinary courses, they had not been programmed correctly. Upon making this observation, she spoke with Mr. Kenney and Mr, Messinger. Mr. Kenney explained to her that unnamed “counselors” had been confused about the definition of “interdisciplinary” and that they would no ® A copy of the email from OSYD to Ms. Elvin and other administrators at KS40 is enclosed in the case file. Csecel's Of of Spec aves tons 65 Cwut Shes -Room22- Becky NY 1120) “Tekpooe: 71835-3800 -16-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089% longer offer such courses. Ms. Elvin could not recall whether she asked Mr. Kenney if, while he was programming the courses in question, he had noticed that these “counselors” had made this error. ‘When asked why she failed to provide this information in December 2014, when she was originally questioned about Project Graduation, Ms. Elvin responded, “I didn’t know what you were after....I’s very scary, you know.” Ms. Elvin stated that she was unaware that similar programming errors had been made for the PM School classes until her OSI interview in December 2014. She stated that, subsequently, she spoke with Mr. Kenney and Mr. Messinger, and Mr. Kenney told her that this had been a mistake and that PM School was no longer administered in this manner. Ms. Elvin could not recall any further details of the conversation that she had with Mr. Kenney about PM School. ‘Ms. Elvin stated that, after discovering the problems that occurred with the programming of Project Graduation courses and PM School, she did not discuss her discovery with any assistant principal other than Mr. Kenney or ‘Mr. Messinger. ‘Ms. Elvin re-iterated her belief that every student who had been involved in the credit recovery program at John Dewey High School had received direct “instruction” from a teacher as part of that program. She added that, in addition to her and Ms. Boyle, the majority of the assistant principals, as well as teachers Nasir Abdalla and Bonnie Altman, served on the credit recovery panel during the 2013-2014 school year. Andrew Kenney, Assistant Principal: On February 6, 2015, Mr. Kenney was interviewed at OSI in the presence of Robert Colon, a representative from CSA. Mr. Kenney stated that K540’s credit recovery program did not include an instructional component and that students were only required to complete work that was created by a subject-area certified teacher in order to receive credit. Mr. Kenney stated that, although students could meet with teachers for assistance upon request, they had the option of completing the work without ever meeting with a teacher. Mr. Kenney stated that neither PM School nor Project Graduation were credit recovery programs, He explained that the programs had been discussed during a cabinet meeting with all of the school’s administrators, and that it was his understanding that there was instruction being given in both programs. Furthermore, he believed that assistant principals had been charged with creating the curricula for the classes in question. He acknowledged that the courses were “interdisciplinary,” and that math and science credits were given in the same classes, and English and social studies credits were given in the same classes. Mr. Kenney was informed by this investigator that Mr. Zeno had taught a PM School class in which students received credits for math, science, and social studies. He stated that this scenario did not “sound familiar,” and that it had been his understanding that Mr. Zeno was teaching math and science during PM School. He explained that, if such disparate subject areas were being taught, two teachers, such as an English teacher and a math teacher, should have been assigned to the class, and he could not explain why that did not occur. Mr. Kenney stated that guidance counselors made the decisions about each individual student's credit deficiencies, then told him for which PM School or Project Graduation classes the student should be programmed. He acknowledged, however, that he was responsible for programming all student and teacher schedules. Chase's Oe of Spec aveignone {65 Cout Sue - Room 972 Brkya, NY 11201 ‘elbow: 71825-9800, -17-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X Joseph Antonucci, Assistant Principal On April 21, 2015, Mr. Antonucci was interviewed at OSI in the presence of Carol Atkins, a representative from CSA. Mr. Antonucci initially stated that he could not recall having a conversation with Ms. Wu about her Project Graduation class in June 2014. Mr. Antonucci explained that it was his responsibility to input grades at the end of each term, and that, if a teacher failed to provide his or her students’ grades, he was generally responsible for following up with that teacher; however, he could not recall if Ms. Wu failed to input her grades in June 2014. He noted that he had no involvement in Project Graduation, but that it was his understanding that the Project Graduation classes were designed for students who “needed to make up credits.” He also stated that he had no knowledge of teachers being assigned to supervise the work of students who were getting credit in numerous unrelated subjects. According to Mr. Antonucci, subject-area licensed assistant principals supervised their respective areas of Project Graduation, and Mr. Kenney programmed students for Project Graduation classes, ‘Mr. Antonucci stated that students were never given passing grades for attendance alone, as this would be against academic policy. This investigator then played the full audio file provided by Ms. Wu in Mr. Antonucei’s presence. After hearing the recording, Mr. Antonucci stated that it was “obviously” his voice on the file, and that he now recalled the conversation. When asked why he had answered in the affirmative when Ms. Wu asked if she should pass students if they appeared in the class or did their work, Mr. Antonucci stated that he “answered to the best of {his} ability.” “He added that he answered in the affirmative because Ms. Wu alluded to a conversation with another administrator, and because he wanted to conclude his conversation with Ms. Wu as quickly as possible. Even after hearing the recording, Mr. Antonucci stated that he could not recall directing Ms. Wu to give student work to another department for grading, and he could not provide any context for this portion of the recording. Katie Hansen, Deputy Director of Academie Policy: Between January 13 and January 20, 2015, Ms. Hansen corresponded with these investigators regarding the allegations in this case.** Ms. Hansen stated that it was her assessment that the K540 credit recovery program did not meet the requirements of the DOE’s Academic Policy because “equivalent, intensive instruction” must be provided in order for students to obtain credits in this way. Ms. Hansen stated that, because students were not required to meet with a teacher, this requirement was not met. ‘Ms. Hansen further stated that any other credit-bearing course, such as a Project Graduation or PM School course, is required to provide 54 hours of “meaningful” instruction per semester, and that this requirement ‘would not be met by students convening in a classroom to individually work on unrelated projects. The relevant email exchange is enclosed in the case file, Canela’ Oe of Spec avenge {8 Cout Suet -Reom 922 -Broelya, NY 1120) "elphoe 718.95 3800 -18-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X CONCLUSION ‘There is no dispute that students were not required to receive instruction to obtain credit through credit recovery. According to the DOE High School Academic Policy Reference Guide,” “Eligible students can make up credit through credit recovery: targeted, intensive instruction in the student’s identified deficiency areas of a course. To award credit through targeted credit recovery, schools must meet the following requirements, in alignment with New York State Commissioner's Regulations: ‘The program must align with applicable New York State commencement-level learning standards; address. student course deficiencies; and ensure that students receive equivalent, intensive instruction in the applicable subject area under the direction or supervision of a teacher certified in the subject area in which the student is making up credit.” Although Ms. Elvin insisted that students were required to have “contact” with teachers while completing credit recovery during her December 2014 interview, her statement was disputed by multiple administrators and ‘teachers, including Mr. Kenney. Despite her claim on June 26, 2015 that students received “instruction” while completing credit recovery courses, Ms. Elvin was unable to articulate in any detail the manner in which students received targeted, intensive instruction. The allegation that Ms. Elvin implemented a credit recovery program that did not meet the standards set by DOE is, therefore, substantiated. It should be noted that, other than a lack of instruction in the credit recovery program, OSI found no evidence to support allegations of improprieties regarding the manner in which students were selected for eredit recovery, or regarding the number of credit recovery courses they completed. During the 2013-2014 school year, PM School and Project Graduation courses met for 54 hours per term, is required for regular credit-bearing courses. The administrators interviewed claimed that the courses were “interdisciplinary courses,” which, according to the High School Academic Policy Reference Guide, are courses that combine “leaming standards from two different content areas in a single course.” It is clear that, based on the witness interviews and the corroborating records obtained by this investigator, there were far more than two content areas covered by these courses, making appropriate academic instruction impossible. The administrators interviewed denied any knowledge of teachers being programmed to teach more than two different subject areas simultaneously, and they indicated that instruction was provided. According to the High School Academic Policy Reference Guide, “All credit-bearing courses must address high school commencement level standards, meet instructional time requirements (180 minutes per week throughout the semester/school year, or the equivalent), and be taught by a teacher with a New York State secondary certification in the course's subject area.” This investigation determined that no instruction was provided during these courses, and that no instruction was possible because of the vast variety of subject areas covered by PM School and Project Graduation. Although he denied knowledge of the allegations involving PM School and Project Graduation, Mr. Kenney was the sole individual responsible for programming the PM School and Project Graduation courses, and this * The relevant sections of the document are enclosed in the case file Chucor's Onn of Spt nvertgtons 63 Cour Ste -RoomS22 Braye NY 11201 “Tlphooe: 7185353800 -19-OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X investigation found evidence that, in March 2014, he programmed Mr. Zeno to be the teacher of record for three simultaneous credits that were in unrelated subject areas, The allegation that Mr. Kenney committed misconduct by programming these courses in a way that conflicted with academic policy is, therefore, substantiated. As Principal, Ms. Elvin was responsible for the conception and implementation of the Project Graduation and PM School courses. Ms. Elvin failed to supervise Mr. Kenney and the teachers at her school by allowing the courses to be programmed in a way that instruction could not be provided. As such, an allegation of employee ‘misconduct based on the foregoing is substantiated against Ms, Elvin, ‘As no instruction was taking place in these courses, the allegation that teachers were forced to teach out of license is technically unsubstantiated, however, it should be noted that teachers were forced to supervise students who were completing work in subject areas that fell outside of the respective teachers’ license areas. ‘There is no evidence to support allegations of misconduct against Ms. Creveling, Ms. Gutierrez, Mr. Messinger, Mr. Personette, or Ms. Trombetta. During his interview, Mr. Kenney acknowledged that he was solely responsible for programming student and teacher schedules in STARS. There is insufficient evidence that Ms. Chao, Ms. Werth, Ms. Creveling, Ms. Gutierrez, or Mr. Messinger were directly involved in the planning, programming, and implementation of PM School and Project Graduation, or that they instructed teachers to submit fraudulent grades. The allegations against them are, therefore, unsubstantiated. ‘There is no evidence that Ms. Boyle, Ms. Varghese, Ms. Ponce, Mr. Personette, Ms. Trombetta, or Mr. Zeno engaged in fraudulent grading practices or were involved in the planning, programming or implementation of Project Graduation or PM School. The allegations against them are, therefore, unsubstantiated. Based on the recording taken by Ms. Wu, the allegation that Mr. Antonucci told Ms. Wu to grade based purely on attendance is substantiated. There is no evidence to support the same allegations against Mr. Orsini, Other ions: ‘The majority of the witnesses interviewed corroborated that there was a shortage of calculators at 21K540 during the June 2014 Integrated Algebra Regents exam, forcing students to share calculators. ‘The reasons for this shortage remain unknown, According to New York State Education Department (“NYSED”) School Administrator's Manual 2013 for Regents exams, “Schools must ensure that each student has the appropriate type of calculator when taking....Regents Examinations in Integrated Algebra, Geometry and Algebra 2/Trigonometry.”** The NYSED Guidelines for Graphing Calculator Use for Commencement-Level Mathematics explicitly states tat “schools must make a graphing calculator available for the exclusive use of each student while taking Regents Examinations in mathematics.”*” As Principal, Ms. Elvin was ultimately responsible for ensuring that Regents exams at 21K540 were administered in accordance with NYSED rules and regulations. The allegation that she failed to do so is therefore substantiated. 56 The relevant section of the manual is enclosed in the case file. *” A copy of the guidelines is enclosed in the case file, Cuneta’ Oc of Speci nvegtne (65 Cou Sect -Recw 922 -Broklya, NY 11261 ‘Telephone 7189353800 -20-‘OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08080X Although teachers at 21K540 confirmed that students were added or removed from their class roster during the course of the school year, this investigation could find no evidence that students who were newly assigned to a class already had a grade assigned next to their names. As such, this allegation is unsubstantiated. Although a number of witnesses confirmed that Ms. Elvin encouraged teachers to have an 85 percent pass rate in their courses, none of the teachers interviewed articulated that Ms, Elvin requested that teachers change grades or otherwise acted improperly. While this could be construed as suggesting that she pressured teachers to meet that target, not one of the teachers articulated that there was any improper behavior. Rather, the witnesses interviewed indicated that Ms. Elvin spoke with them about legitimate ways in which they might improve student performance. This allegation of misconduct is, therefore, unsubstantiated. ‘The allegation that an unidentified individual changed the grades for Student A and Student B that were recorded under Mr. Lemer’s name in Skedula is unsubstantiated. ‘This investigation found insufficient corroboration for the allegation that “rubrics” were displayed during the administration of the June 2014 Algebra I Trigonometry exam. This allegation is, therefore, unsubstantiated. Chanel’ ice of Spec nverigtons 5c Stee -Roam 922» Brat, NY 11201 “Telepoe: 718-935-3800 21.OSI Cases #14-03665X, 14-05475X, 14-06058X, 14-06216X, 14-06274X, 14-06541X, 14-08089X RECOMMENDATION It is the recommendation of this office that a copy of this report be referred to the Administrative Trials Unit (“ATU”) so that a Technical Assistance Conference (“TAC”) may be convened, and appropriate disciplinary action may be determined for Kathleen Elvin, Andrew Kenney, and Joseph Antonucci, SUBMITTED BY: Le Katheri ibotham Confidential Investigator APPROVED BY: (hanes: Oc of Spec aengatene 65 CoutSeext-Roow $72 Broke, NY 11201 Tebepone 71835-3800 -22-