As you all know the November ballot took the report of the Evaluation Commission, unfortunately TEFIEE today entered when she had made the final report from this committee and we could not participate in the evaluation of teachers. We therefore request the School Board to allow us to have a meeting with the commission. At that meeting take place, we find some surprises. these are some errors that had committed:
SALINAS CASE:
teacher reviewed the record of Salinas and found a typing error.
1 .- Training and Update: On page 7 of the record, the total sub B3 results showed 3.3, but obtained by the respective sum
3.3
2 .- Teaching Material: The teacher had brought as teaching banded leaves, then disorganized because there was in the pages, had different formats (there were leaves and other computer was on hand) were solucionario I. mate problems It seems that the teacher had gathered the students work and handed him the ring and presented as teaching material. According to the Chancellor's Resolution No. 616 Article 25, subsection d, says that texts and reprints should be in print or digital ( Salinas teacher's text did not meet this had parts that were made by hand) . In addition, the text should have the approval of the relevant Vocational School, or with the approval of the Dean (something that did not have the text of Professor Salinas). In this regard, we highlight the text presented Hualpa professor, who presented a guide laboratory that meets all the requirements set by the Chancellor's resolution mentioned above.
also worth noting that Professor Salinas additionally presented a pamphlet of 50 pages or less, which was entitled "LIMIT I" to the surprise EDITORIAL Cuzcano said.
as TEFIEE We present our complaint to the committee by pass these faults and give points to the teacher, who must receive the minimum score (zero) to bring a text that could not find or order seriously and consider the prospectus LIMITER I as a university text.
Unfortunately, the committee had submitted its report and could not make changes. Therefore, our only solution was that the Faculty Council re-examine the record of Professor Salinas. However, the teachers voted for the report by all who were on the list are designated.
Eng Ramos, Mr. Peralta, Mr. Butler asked that the records of Virginia Professor and Professor Sergio Romero Madrid (who had been disqualified by the evaluation commission) are checked again that injustices were committed against them. The Faculty Council voted for these records to be reviewed again.
SALINAS CASE:
teacher reviewed the record of Salinas and found a typing error.
1 .- Training and Update: On page 7 of the record, the total sub B3 results showed 3.3, but obtained by the respective sum
3.3
2 .- Teaching Material: The teacher had brought as teaching banded leaves, then disorganized because there was in the pages, had different formats (there were leaves and other computer was on hand) were solucionario I. mate problems It seems that the teacher had gathered the students work and handed him the ring and presented as teaching material. According to the Chancellor's Resolution No. 616 Article 25, subsection d, says that texts and reprints should be in print or digital ( Salinas teacher's text did not meet this had parts that were made by hand) . In addition, the text should have the approval of the relevant Vocational School, or with the approval of the Dean (something that did not have the text of Professor Salinas). In this regard, we highlight the text presented Hualpa professor, who presented a guide laboratory that meets all the requirements set by the Chancellor's resolution mentioned above.
also worth noting that Professor Salinas additionally presented a pamphlet of 50 pages or less, which was entitled "LIMIT I" to the surprise EDITORIAL Cuzcano said.
as TEFIEE We present our complaint to the committee by pass these faults and give points to the teacher, who must receive the minimum score (zero) to bring a text that could not find or order seriously and consider the prospectus LIMITER I as a university text.
Unfortunately, the committee had submitted its report and could not make changes. Therefore, our only solution was that the Faculty Council re-examine the record of Professor Salinas. However, the teachers voted for the report by all who were on the list are designated.
Eng Ramos, Mr. Peralta, Mr. Butler asked that the records of Virginia Professor and Professor Sergio Romero Madrid (who had been disqualified by the evaluation commission) are checked again that injustices were committed against them. The Faculty Council voted for these records to be reviewed again.
0 comments:
Post a Comment