Students Transfer in History Class

[Guest Guest]

He compared global warming to dishonest propaganda. If that's not misinformation, what is?

Yes, I have more info now. I thinkt he blog was a bit ambiguous, and it sounded to me like it was about a few students and not a whole class. However, it stands that it was Paszkiewicz who requested the switch, so you're wrong about that.

(A better question is "How can he possibly teach when he is apparently so uninformed about the very subject he teaches?")

Oh, please. He's the one running his mouth. It's obvious he's part of the 'scientist conspiracy' mindset--if not from what he said about evolution, then from what he said about global warming. He's a kook, plain and simple. Notwithstanding his apparent incompetence with history, he should stick to it, rather than blabbering about stuff he doesn't know the least bit about. Anyone who would continually do that should be called on it.

If you were paying attention, you would know that Paul's problem with that was not that it occurred (though again I express pity for the class that is now being taught by that nutjob), but with the fact that it was done suddenly and without notice, which led to a bunch of kids accusing Matthew of being behind it and getting mad at him for no reason. If the board had used their heads, that wouldn't have happened. Just a bit of notice is all Paul would have wanted.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since you like speaking for PAUL, what would he have done if he were notified of the class change?

[Strife767]

Is your backround in science? Or are you a lawyer?

I though you were a lawyer!

If you are a lawyer where do you get off in telling someone what they believe or their opinion is wrong? Or they are scientifically illiterate as you said. If you are such an expert in science please shows us all of your credentials IN SCIENCE, please.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Having a legitimate high school education in science is more than enough to point out the errors in Paszkiewicz's anti-science rants. No further 'credentials' are necessary, as pathetic as that is.

[Guest Paul]

Is your backround in science? Or are you a lawyer?

I though you were a lawyer!

If you are a lawyer where do you get off in telling someone what they believe or their opinion is wrong? Or they are scientifically illiterate as you said. If you are such an expert in science please shows us all of your credentials IN SCIENCE, please.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Neil Degrasse Tyson, the astrophysicist who heads the Hayden Planetarium in New York City, is the one who called Mr. Paszkiewicz scientifically illiterate. As for myself, I do read on the subject and unlike Mr. Paszkiewicz and his supporters I value science and its methods.

Had Mr. Paszkiewicz spoken accurately about science, those remarks would not have gotten him in this mess. So if you'd like to question something I wrote on the merits instead, you are free to do that. Obviously you're not in a position to do that: you've just told us how much you know about science, and you probably aren't even aware that your argument comes right back on itself. The criticism of Mr. Paszkiewicz isn't that he is a non-scientist discussing science, but that he is a scientifically ignorant man mutilating science in his classroom, and misinforming his students.

I don't understand why you who are defending Paszkiewicz think you can accomplish anything good in the way you're going about it. Instead of getting angry, how about considering the possibility that we on this side might have a point.

[Guest Paul]

You still have not answered. What would you have done if you were notified of the class transfer?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We would have discussed the matter with school officials and come to an agreement about how to handle it. Exactly what that might be I'm not sure, because under any circumstances at least some of the students weren't going to like the transfer. However, one part of the solution is obvious: the situation should have been explained in advance. That would at least have minimized the damage.

[Guest Guest]

We would have discussed the matter with school officials and come to an agreement about how to handle it. Exactly what that might be I'm not sure, because under any circumstances at least some of the students weren't going to like the transfer. However, one part of the solution is obvious: the situation should have been explained in advance. That would at least have minimized the damage.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul- You've stated that you are upset that you were not notified, so, you must have had something in mind on how the administration should have handled it, therefore I ask you again, by you being notified in advance, what would you have told the administration to do on how to handle it?..... and how would it have minimized the damage? .....and what damage occurred? .....and is the "damage" still happening?

[Guest Student]

We would have discussed the matter with school officials and come to an agreement about how to handle it. Exactly what that might be I'm not sure, because under any circumstances at least some of the students weren't going to like the transfer. However, one part of the solution is obvious: the situation should have been explained in advance. That would at least have minimized the damage.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You would have complaint anyway. You would have found a way. The students don't like the transfer, they are upset. If you were so concerned about your son and the teacher who was teaching him history, you should have requested a switch immediately, but why didn't you do it? I think the answer is obvious! The other students' parents have a reason to complain, you don't!

[Guest Guest]

We would have discussed the matter with school officials and come to an agreement about how to handle it. Exactly what that might be I'm not sure, because under any circumstances at least some of the students weren't going to like the transfer. However, one part of the solution is obvious: the situation should have been explained in advance. That would at least have minimized the damage.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What damage? I thought Matthew could handle the pressure very well!

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

No, I'm upset because the latest round of abuse Matthew has endured as a result of students thinking he was responsible for the transfers was avoidable had the administration planned for it, notified eveyone properly and tried to defuse the situation in advance. The students are upset because they draw unwarranted conclusions on the basis of no knowledge, as you have done in your post. However, given their past behavior this was predictable, and the administration should have acted accordingly.

Perhaps you can explain to us how a man's words can be twisted on an unedited recording.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's amazing you can look at yourself in the mirror each night. How can you not think it's NOT your son's fault ? All this is you and your son's mess. And you have no way of clearing it up unless you completely destroy this entire school system. How the hell do you know that each of the students are upset? Mine isn't so stop putting lies in people's mouth. Mr. P is a very good teacher and so is Vartan so what is your problem? I guess you are saying now that Mr. P is a good teacher? So what if they did not consult the LaClairs first. It's not always about the Paul and Matt so get off your horse or the your head out of the back part of one.

What a "responsible" parent would have done is remove the child from the situation instead of making him the poster boy for his own egotistical agenda. Or are there no other schools good enough? Or is the high priced lawyer too cheap?

[Guest Paul]

Paul- You've stated that you are upset that you were not notified, so, you must have had something in mind on how the administration should have handled it, therefore I ask you again, by you being notified in advance, what would you have told the administration to do on how to handle it?..... and how would it have minimized the damage? .....and what damage occurred? .....and is the "damage" still happening?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Had the situation been explained to the students in advance and in an appopriate way, it is less likely that they would have harassed Matthew on the basis of assumptions, which were false. At the very least, it was their obligation to try.

[Guest Paul]

You would have complaint anyway. You would have found a way. The students don't like the transfer, they are upset. If you were so concerned about your son and the teacher who was teaching him history, you should have requested a switch immediately, but why didn't you do it? I think the answer is obvious! The other students' parents have a reason to complain, you don't!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There is no basis for these remarks.

[Guest Paul]

What damage? I thought Matthew could handle the pressure very well!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Would you care to trade places with him?

[Guest K]

"He compared global warming to dishonest propaganda. If that's not misinformation, what is?"

He did not compare global warming to propaganda...what he did was illustrate the power of the media. To show how quickly the media can spread a message, he used the example of the recent story regarding global warming.

He did not really take any position on global warming, but he did inform his students as to what the scientific thought was when he was in high school.

You have just once again illustrated how YOU see and hear what you want to!

[Guest K]

Had the situation been explained to the students in advance and in an appopriate way, it is less likely that they would have harassed Matthew on the basis of assumptions, which were false. At the very least, it was their obligation to try.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So I guess it's okay for you to make assumptions and take action without notifying all the parties that might be effected......do as I say and not as I do?

[Strife767]

What damage? I thought Matthew could handle the pressure very well!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just because someone can handle something, doesn't mean they should have to, especially if it's preventable.

[Strife767]

All this is you and your son's mess.

No, I don't believe it was Matthew or Paul preaching in a public school classroom.

Mr. P is a very good teacher

A "very good" history teacher would not perpetuate the kind of history-revisionist BS that religious wackjobs are infamous for. He gets basic US history, the very subject he was teaching, wrong. If he's "very good," who's bad?

[Guest Paul]

It's amazing you can look at yourself in the mirror each night.  How can you not think it's NOT your son's fault ?  All this is you and your son's mess.  And you have no way of clearing it up unless you completely destroy this entire school system.  How the hell do you know that each of the students are upset?  Mine isn't so stop putting lies in people's mouth. Mr. P is a very good teacher and so is Vartan so what is your problem? I guess you are saying now that Mr. P is a good teacher?  So what if they did not consult the LaClairs first.  It's not always about the Paul and Matt so get off your horse or the your head out of the back part of one.

What a "responsible" parent would have done is remove the child from the situation instead of making him the poster boy for his own egotistical agenda.  Or are there no other schools good enough?  Or is the high priced lawyer too cheap?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You don't know what you're talking about, either factually or practically. Practically speaking, removing Matthew from the class wouldn't have solved the problem. The abuse wasn't coming from his being in the class. It was coming from outing a proselytizing teacher who happens to be popular; that issue was full-blown after the first week of class.

Factually speaking, I asked Matthew every week if he would like to be removed from Mr. Paszkiewicz's class. He was adamant that he wished to remain because he had done nothing wrong, and leaving would have sent the wrong message. It was a reasonable position, and so he remained.

So you post statements about me that are flatly not true, and then you wonder how I can look in the mirror? I'm sleeping just fine, thank you, and Matthew has now won two awards for his stance on this issue.

The mess is not the fault of the person who blows the whistle on a wrong-doer. The mess is the fault of the wrong-doer who presumes to interject himself into the religious education of other people's kids, and in this case the administration that tries to cover for him.

The solution does not require destroying the Kearny school system. Just the opposite, this situation presents an opportunity to educate. The Board of Education has already agreed to do in-service teacher training on separation of church and state, which was our first issue. If they would also hold seminars for the students on church-state separation and reinforce the science curriculum against Mr. Paszkiewicz's flat-earth attacks, they would have done what we asked. However, in the intervening months they have completely failed Matthew by sending all the wrong messages.

If your idea of a solution is that he back down, you've got the wrong kid. The Constitution and the quality of education are important to him, and I admire him for having the courage to take a stand. If you think for one second that any parent can push a sixteen-year old into this --- well, yet again you don't know what you're talking about. It doesn't work that way, and if you're a parent you should know that.

Since you're a parent in Kearny, why not call me personally so we can discuss it. I'm in the book. Or are you the one with another agenda?

[Guest Guest]

Would you care to trade places with him?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If I had done what he did, not at all! But he was the one who did it, so I guess he is the one who needs to deal with it. Trust me, I feel bad for your son because it looks like he wants attention and he wants to make his daddy happy. By the way, Paul, did you give your son a hug today?

[Guest Guest]

There is no basis for these remarks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why didn't you switch his class right in the beginning? If Mr. P is such a "horrible" teacher, you should have requested a switch. I am sure that Mr. Somma or his counselor wouldn't have a problem with that. Don't you want the best education for your son?

[Strife767]

Why didn't you switch his class right in the beginning?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Answer:

I asked Matthew every week if he would like to be removed from Mr. Paszkiewicz's class. He was adamant that he wished to remain because he had done nothing wrong, and leaving would have sent the wrong message. It was a reasonable position, and so he remained.

[Guest TomRam]

It's amazing you can look at yourself in the mirror each night.  How can you not think it's NOT your son's fault ?  All this is you and your son's mess.  And you have no way of clearing it up unless you completely destroy this entire school system.  How the hell do you know that each of the students are upset?  Mine isn't so stop putting lies in people's mouth. Mr. P is a very good teacher and so is Vartan so what is your problem? I guess you are saying now that Mr. P is a good teacher?  So what if they did not consult the LaClairs first.  It's not always about the Paul and Matt so get off your horse or the your head out of the back part of one.

What a "responsible" parent would have done is remove the child from the situation instead of making him the poster boy for his own egotistical agenda.  Or are there no other schools good enough?  Or is the high priced lawyer too cheap?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Apparently this isn't working out as you wish. But you're not forced to be here, so what's the problem? Why the anger?

Even if Matthew or Paul, or both of them were trying to get attention, the New York Times and all the other news organizations that have carried this story wouldn't be the least bit interested if the teacher hadn't been so far out of line. The New York Times even ran an editorial in the New Jersey section wondering why the admininstration was so silent --- why it didn't address the problem.

So you are entitled to your opinion, but the LaClairs aren't the only ones who see another issue here. Exactly the opposite, most of the world sees it. Only in Kearny, NJ, do people appear to be blind to it.

Why is that? Are you bigoted? Biased? Personally smitten with the teacher to such an extent that you'll overlook anything? Have you asked yourself any of these questions? When the world sees it one way, and you see the exact opposite, is it possible that local prejudices are the real source of your problem? The world seems to think so.

Isn't it time for you to ask whether you might be wrong?

[Stixx3969]

If I had done what he did, not at all! But he was the one who did it, so I guess he is the one who needs to deal with it. Trust me, I feel bad for your son because it looks like he wants attention and he wants to make his daddy happy. By the way, Paul, did you give your son a hug today?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Unless you know Paul and Matt personally and are privvy to the dynamics of thier relationship, then you should really shut the hell up!

[Guest Paul]

"He compared global warming to dishonest propaganda. If that's not misinformation, what is?"

He did not compare global warming to propaganda...what he did was illustrate the power of the media. To show how quickly the media can spread a message, he used the example of the recent story regarding global warming.

He did not really take any position on global warming, but he did inform his students as to what the scientific thought was when he was in high school.

You have just once again illustrated how YOU see and hear what you want to!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, it is just the opposite. By Mr. Paszkiewicz's own admission in his letter to the Obesrver, published last week, he used global warming (spun off against another hypothesis on the same subject) as the sole example of Hitler's big lie. That comparison is poorly taken for many reasons, which have been outlined in another post. The fact that he makes the comparison also says plenty about Mr. Paszkiewicz's anti-scientific biases. The fact that you and he attempt to justify this by referencing the media reflects another of his, and perhaps your biases: Hitler was not media, so how can the comparison be justified on those grounds? It cannot. Making the comparison in class says something about his judgment.

Why didn't he choose a more apt example, like WMDs in Iraq? That is a much closer example, where a political figure and national leader cooked information and spun it to the public for his own purposes. The reason why Mr. Paszkiewicz would not use that example that says something about his biases, too.

This wouldn't be such a big deal if it wasn't for Mr. Paszkiewicz's conduct in the past, which is dismissive of science that does not fit with his politics. An educational institution like a public high school ought to understand that young minds at that age are highly impressionable, and that this kind of anti-scientific bias coming from a popular history teacher is cause for concern. The New York Times, Star-Ledger and Jersey Journal all understood the problem with the comparison, as is obvious from their reporting on it.

[Guest Guest]

You don't know what you're talking about, either factually or practically. Practically speaking, removing Matthew from the class wouldn't have solved the problem. The abuse wasn't coming from his being in the class. It was coming from outing a proselytizing teacher who happens to be popular; that issue was full-blown after the first week of class.

Factually speaking, I asked Matthew every week if he would like to be removed from Mr. Paszkiewicz's class. He was adamant that he wished to remain because he had done nothing wrong, and leaving would have sent the wrong message. It was a reasonable position, and so he remained.

So you post statements about me that are flatly not true, and then you wonder how I can look in the mirror? I'm sleeping just fine, thank you, and Matthew has now won two awards for his stance on this issue.

The mess is not the fault of the person who blows the whistle on a wrong-doer. The mess is the fault of the wrong-doer who presumes to interject himself into the religious education of other people's kids, and in this case the administration that tries to cover for him.

The solution does not require destroying the Kearny school system. Just the opposite, this situation presents an opportunity to educate. The Board of Education has already agreed to do in-service teacher training on separation of church and state, which was our first issue. If they would also hold seminars for the students on church-state separation and reinforce the science curriculum against Mr. Paszkiewicz's flat-earth attacks, they would have done what we asked. However, in the intervening months they have completely failed Matthew by sending all the wrong messages.

If your idea of a solution is that he back down, you've got the wrong kid. The Constitution and the quality of education are important to him, and I admire him for having the courage to take a stand. If you think for one second that any parent can push a sixteen-year old into this --- well, yet again you don't know what you're talking about. It doesn't work that way, and if you're a parent you should know that.

Since you're a parent in Kearny, why not call me personally so we can discuss it. I'm in the book. Or are you the one with another agenda?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I guess you are the only one here that really knows what you are talking about. You can’t take other peoples opinions because they are not yours. Can you hear yourself talking? And by the way I do know what I am talking about since I have someone in the same school as your son. So factually, since you are not in the class you do not get firsthand what goes on in there as well. So get off your cloud.

Wow two awards. At what cost. And you said you weren't after the money. Just who do you think you are kidding? Who do you think is paying for this entire in-service teacher training? Who is going to pay for the seminars also?

So who else besides your son is causing such harm to school system? Not one of the other students seem to have issues? A whistle-blower or a trouble maker; we both have different views on this and so does most people.

Do you realize that Valentines’ Day was originally a religious holiday? Are you going to take that away from the school system too? Please do tell me what I posted about you that is not true? I am sure you can sleep just fine. Being without a conscience I am sure you can sleep just fine. You seem to believe that your righteous stand and that you are judge and jury with your accusations. Getting a few rabble rousers here to back you while the rest of the masses suffer does not bother you one bit. But I am sure you can sleep just fine. So every week you ask him if he would like to be removed from class? And you say this doesn't bother you?

[Guest bik49ypik@yahoo.com]

No, I don't believe it was Matthew or Paul preaching in a public school classroom.

A "very good" history teacher would not perpetuate the kind of history-revisionist BS that religious wackjobs are infamous for. He gets basic US history, the very subject he was teaching, wrong. If he's "very good," who's bad?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So I guess you were there? Its not preaching its teaching. So now he is a wackjob? So if every word you said was put under a microscope like this teacher is having done, you would be not last. Ohh wait, working for the town you don't have to worry about mistakes, do you?

[Guest Steve_C]

Why didn't you switch his class right in the beginning? If Mr. P is such a "horrible" teacher, you should have requested a switch. I am sure that Mr. Somma or his counselor wouldn't have a problem with that. Don't you want the best education for your son?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If Mr. P would just do his job there would be no reason for Matt to switch.