User talk:Onthespot30

Mr Ramos accepted postion with RHS in July of 2006. He left New York City in 2005. Mr Ramos did not accept position due to suspension. Mr Ramos was given permanent certification in New York due to charges not able to be proved. All staff members accused of wrong doing are temporarily reassigned until a hearing. Your bias is appalling and unethical.

Your bias is appalling and unethical

---

Mr. Ramos, my information is not biased, but comes directly from formal district reports in NYC, including the one I have cited and you have deleted numerous times tonight:

http://www.nycsci.org/reports/12-04%20Ramos,Orlando-Lescaille,Fernando%20Ltr.pdf

Your information that you improved the Academy at PS 101 in NYC is unsubstantiated, I would be interested to see a link that demonstrates a comparison of these scores throughout your tenure at the school. I have not, nor will not, report on any unsubstantiated information or allegations, numerous as they are, about your past or present bad behavior as a public school leader.

OTS 30, look up www.insideschools.org-look up PS 101. There goes the link and a "substantiated claim". What exactly is your problem? If you wish to engage Mr Ramos in a conversation and get "accurate" reports feel free to call him or email him. You obviously have an issue with him.

---

Wrong again Mr. Ramos. I have already reviewed this profile:

http://www.insideschools.org/fs/school_profile.php?id=109

The reviewer sites "When we visited, Ramos was full of pride at the results of the latest standardized tests. Some 60 percent of his students, he said, had moved up one notch or more on the exams, which are graded on a scale of "1," indicating that a child is working far below grade level, to "4," indicating a child is working far above it. Granted, many children started at Level 1, but the upward movement gave him great hope for the future."

So again, the reviewers statistics are not substantiated, but come from a claim by Mr. Ramos, without facts or reports to back this up. I am happy to acknowledge that you have improved a school through measurable statistics, just as soon as you provide verifiable and accurate statistical sources. The bottom line is, and encyclopedia is about facts, and is not to promote people based on how they prefer to view themselves!

I am not interested to contact you directly, it seems this medium works fine, and is transparent. This way the community can make their own judgements. If you have contacts at the school in NYC to discuss your suspension situation, or with the testing agency to get these reports verifying your claims I am most happy to include them.

Reviewer went over test scores and so did the State of New York; did they magically go up themselves? If you did your research on this publication you will find that the author is a well known education researcher and the book/site is backed up by fact checkers. i am so sorry that you have an axe to grind. I wish you good health and a long prosperous life. A true leader goes through these things in life and unfortunately some people get fixated on them as there are shortcomings in their own live's that they should be focusing on. Mr Ramos' record of turning around schools speaks for itself. Within 5 years RHS will benefit from his strategies as well. No matter who contacts you from dept of testing or discipline investigators office you have already shown your bias and distaste for someone that has done nothing to you. Good luck to you Onthespot30. You may print whatever you like.

For the record Onthespot, That report is the investigators version, which of course did not hold up. Unfortunately they do not issue apologies or findings on the net or newspapers. Mr Lescaille is a 20 year veteran with an otherwise spotless record. It affected his health and his reputation. He is well liked and did not deserve this. As an outspoken administrator Mr ramos learned long ago that he will have to endure things like this. Were he found guilty he would have been terminated and his license revoked. Have a good night OTS30.

---

So where are the test scores that prove your success, Mr. Ramos? You do not have a record of turning around schools, rather, you have a record of claiming that you turn around schools. You may indeed be turning around schools, and if so the proof should be easy to come by. But I have not found it, nor have you provided it. Presumably, since you are turning around schools, you should be able to provide this information and end this lengthy conversation between you and I.

The report stands on its own as the most current recommendation of the NYC School District regarding their position on your hire. If there is something more current than this by all means lets resolve this now, publish the link - this is as much your article as it is mine, and the rest of the community of contributors.

I do not need your permission to publish facts about Richmond High School.

I appreciate your feedback and look forward to more information from you, and a bright future for Richmond High School.

No, this is your article. Peace and good health to you, good luck. End of conversation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Masgroovy (talk • contribs) 04:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Masgroovy (talk • contribs) 05:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Masgroovy (talk • contribs) 05:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Your question
What we'd be looking for, in this case, are things which don't basically amount to tabloid reporting. If you could find some type of sourcing for these claims (a newspaper, a journal, something) which considered the matter significant enough to report on, we certainly can as well, citing that source. But this is not the place to dig up dirt and show it to the world. If that hasn't happened yet, it certainly would be your option to report your findings to your local newspapers or the like. If they do decide to report on the issue, we know, firstly, that the matter is significant enough to report on at all, and also that their professional fact-checkers and editors have looked over the issue and made sure to include all sides and look for additional relevant information and context. That's why we require secondary sourcing, and it really is a critical requirement, especially in the case of negative or potentially controversial information. Hope that clears things up a bit! Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)