NAPTA:LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE

LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE

"There's a time to wink as well as to see."
Benjamin Franklin

IT IS TIME TO SEE!

One has only to read the teacher stories in BACKGROUND to see a repeated claim. "My principal, my superintendent, the union, the state, my lawyer, or public officals lied. Fabrication is the fuel that drives many of our present day schools. (Keep in mind that not all businesses are like Enron; not all public schools are corrupt either. But based on our collective experiences, they are not doing better than our corporations, and seem to be doing worse. ) The amazing similarities all over the country suggest that either many of our administrators attended Pinnochio University or that lying is embedded deeply within school culture today.

Lies occur in varying degrees. Of course there are the blatant, outright false statements. There are less of them since it is too easy to catch them in these lies. Then there are the spins, or manipulations intended to mislead the public while sliming out of direct ownership for the lie. Lastly, there are the winks or those socially agreed upon lies - "everyone does it so we look the other way" issues.

As Benjamin Franklin said in his customary wisdom, there is a time to see. At one time he was a loyalist, supporting England's right to rule. In time, he moved to the other side as he observed the truth of the matter. It is time to take a piercing look at what is really happening in education and winking at administrative power trips is not cute anymore. It is a serious issue, considering the state of our schools and the exodus of many of our best teachers, not to mention the serious harm done to teachers and students.

We are listing the tip of the iceberg of the lies circulating within our educational arena. We welcome your additions. Our intention is to reserve this page for documented lies. We are including documentation that these were authentic. NAPTA will keep the documents on file and forward them to the media or concerned skeptics upon request. Obviously, the majority of lies can not be documented as they were verbal. Readers of this site will have to judge more by patterns and consistency of teacher statements. However, we hope to include a healthy list of examples that will prove what our schools are about. Please email me with the lies and we will arrange to receive the back up documentation. In most cases we will not link to the actual document unless you specifically request.

Lying used to be safe prior to NAPTA. Schools have had the upperhand knowing they could conceal information and not be held accountable. Our goal is to help balance the playing field by embarrassing those who choose lying as a means to control rather than negotiating as a means to work together.

BLATANT LIES

SPINS

WINKS

Soon to be filled with lies.

According to Eyewitness News, New Mexico News, KOBTV.com, the Los Lunas administration told parents that the teacher who showed pornographic pictures to his students at a school in the Los Lunas School District in New Mexico was suspended, when the truth was that he was transferred to another school in the district. Parents were livid that this situation was not taken seriously by the administrators and equally angry that they were lied to.

Question: "And it was a majority of the quorum who agreed with you?"
Answer: "Absolutely. I believe there was only one vote otherwise. It was a large consensus and for the reasons I stated I was not alone in that feeling of it affecting the community and the children." 5325 Transcript, Board Member Swibel, Avoca School District, Wilmette, IL. Actually, five members voted to terminate Horwitz, one voted against termination, and one voted present. By spinning the information, she made it appear that six board members agreed to terminate Horwitz. A forthright answer would have been five members voted to terminate Horwitz, since a "present" vote is clearly not an agreement. She couches her response with the word "believe", but could she have forgotten the vote for terminating a teacher? If terminating a teacher to her was not important enough to remember, would she be a fitting member to carry out such important duties, or would she be more suited to advising Saddam? Steve Rubin, hearing officer in Horwitz v. Avoca case, decided that Horwitz was unprofessional for telling a parent of a student in her science class that Horwitz did not have a science background. He determined she was obligated to "save face" for the district, which contradicts current federal law that states that from middle school up, schools are obligated to reveal the truth about their teachers' backgrounds. The government decided "winking" about this was no longer acceptable. Rubin is still winking.

Top

POLITICS

BLATANT LIES	SPINS	WINKS
Soon to be filled with lies.
According to Eyewitness News, New Mexico News, KOBTV.com, the Los Lunas administration told parents that the teacher who showed pornographic pictures to his students at a school in the Los Lunas School District in New Mexico was suspended, when the truth was that he was transferred to another school in the district. Parents were livid that this situation was not taken seriously by the administrators and equally angry that they were lied to.	Question: "And it was a majority of the quorum who agreed with you?" Answer: "Absolutely. I believe there was only one vote otherwise. It was a large consensus and for the reasons I stated I was not alone in that feeling of it affecting the community and the children." 5325 Transcript, Board Member Swibel, Avoca School District, Wilmette, IL. Actually, five members voted to terminate Horwitz, one voted against termination, and one voted present. By spinning the information, she made it appear that six board members agreed to terminate Horwitz. A forthright answer would have been five members voted to terminate Horwitz, since a "present" vote is clearly not an agreement. She couches her response with the word "believe", but could she have forgotten the vote for terminating a teacher? If terminating a teacher to her was not important enough to remember, would she be a fitting member to carry out such important duties, or would she be more suited to advising Saddam?	Steve Rubin, hearing officer in Horwitz v. Avoca case, decided that Horwitz was unprofessional for telling a parent of a student in her science class that Horwitz did not have a science background. He determined she was obligated to "save face" for the district, which contradicts current federal law that states that from middle school up, schools are obligated to reveal the truth about their teachers' backgrounds. The government decided "winking" about this was no longer acceptable. Rubin is still winking.