Chayvonne Harper

Chayvonne Harper

P.S./I.S. 270

Chayvonne Harper

Chayvonne Harper

PS/IS 270 (The Gordon Parks School)




Ms. Harper previously served as an AP at PS 147 where she assisted Principal Julia Drake in discontinuing teachers who refused to follow unethical and illegal demands of the administration. Harper conducted unfair observations of targeted teachers.


Inside Schools (see comments)


  1. During my one year working in the NYC public schools, Ms. Harper was my assistant principal at PS 147. I was hired to teach ESL, but throughout the year the principal and assistant principal piled on other assignments above and beyond what is normally expected of a teacher, let alone one in her first year- teaching ELA to the entire 3rd grade, covering all other teachers as a substitute any time one was needed, and serving as both the school’s sole Social Studies instructor (which I was not hired to do at all) and the sole ESL teacher. After I stood up for the rights of my ESL students to being taught by me, the requisite number of hours mandated by the state of New York, Julia Drake and Chayvonne Harper saw to it that I would be discontinued. Ms. Harper conducted many of my observations, all of which resulted in U’nsatisfactory ratings, no matter how many of her recommendations I implemented, and wrote me up numerous times for contrived counts of ‘insubordination’ and ‘failure to follow state testing guidelines.’

    • To add on to my story above- Here is what happened that led to my “failure to follow state testing guidelines.”
      This happened during the week of the NYSESLAT, state test that assesses ESL students’ English ability and provides the opportunity for them to place out of ESL if they score high enough. Most of my students were fluent in English and struggled about the same amount that their peers did, but they were stuck in the system because at this school, very few students (native English speakers or not) had the skills to pass that test. I saw it as my goal to help them place out of ESL so that they would be able to dedicate their full attention to the reading, writing, and math, which was what they needed the most, rather than constantly having their day disrupted for English lessons when they were just as proficient in English as their peers.
      Anyway, the week of the test arrived and I learned all the proper testing protocol. The tests are very long and many of my ESL students also had the challenge of attention deficit. With only 7 students in the testing room at a time, I allowed them opportunities to stand and do jumping jacks during breaks. Whenever students were up I would watch them to make sure they stayed in their own areas. With only 7 students in a classroom that could fit 30, there was plenty of space without having a threat of cheating; and anyway the testing booklets were closed during breaks. I later found out that Ms Harper had been watching and saw me allow students to do jumping jacks. She wrote this up as my allowing students to get up and run around the room, and that I was not always visible from the window which is not allowed. I also had to move around the room to ensure there was no cheating!
      Later, during the test, one student told me he needed to use the bathroom. There was a proctor in the hallway in case students needed to use the bathroom. I couldn’t leave the room myself because there were still 6 students taking a test! So I opened the door and looked down the empty hallway at the proctor. She looked in my direction and saw the student leave the room. I didn’t want to shout at her down the hall, because the hall was filled with other classes taking tests. But I assumed she would do her job and watch the student to make sure he went to the bathroom and came back. I was later confronted by Ms Harper with the assertion that my student had been running around the school on a different floor and this was the grounds for my “failure to follow testing protocol.” The hall proctor corroborated the story for Ms Harper and Ms Drake (perhaps to cover her own failure to follow protocol). This story was added to my file and was used at the end of the year as grounds for my discontinuation.
      What would you have done? Many probably would have refused to let the student go to the bathroom or to allow exercises. But considering that we are expecting 8 year olds to sit still and focus on a high stakes test for 3 hours at a time, to me that would be unethical.
      PS- According to testing records that are publicly available, that year more students placed out of ESL than ever at PS 147 before or since.

    • Deez nuts

  2. Horrible principle

  3. Annonomous brother

    i love women and boys

  4. She tried to touch my no no area

  5. This principal has brought down the quality of the school tremendously. Teachers are not united especially because she has favorites. All she cares about are test scores. Toxic environment.

  6. In a nutshell, this principal has a few favorite teachers that she gives money opportunities to and doesn’t offer it to the rest. She also treats them better. She is rude to the staff and only cares about test scores and improving her quality review. She does not support the staff and try to help them. She does not directly supervise any grade. She gives all the work to her assistant principals. She doesn’t want to give out effectives or highly effectives to teachers because she doesnt like teachers. She pushed for departmentalization of the elementary school and does not support the teachers. Teachers get no supplies. Children dont have programs. Parents are not even involved. This school is a mess.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.