CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:11−cv−62525−WPD - United States ...
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:11−cv−62525−WPD - United States ...
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 0:11−cv−62525−WPD - United States ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Case 0:11-cv-62525-WPD Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2011 Page 14 of 31<br />
when another type of hate crime to hnnn plaintiff and her career with no reason but hate.<br />
10- Other schools the sub-coordinator wrote in her evaluation that ( Plaintiffwas rude to<br />
several people while there was no communication w1t.1 any people and without any cause of<br />
action by me to indicate such description about plaintiffevaluation on Dec. 05,2008 West<br />
Broward high school exhibit M 4. While in this date 1 did work as mediator between the first<br />
cl%s students and the administration who refused to connect technology as directed in the<br />
teacher's lesson plan to me on Dec. 05.2008. n e issue was between students and administration<br />
who provided another lesson plan when teclmology department informed me that no net work<br />
connection wil be made and no video will be seen. But was directed in the teacher's lesson plan<br />
to me when 1 tried to operate the system to start the video which included in the content of the<br />
lesson plan as I listed on the board before the class started. Therefore another lesson plan<br />
provided by the oëce when smdents knows previously from their teacher about the plan as a<br />
continuation and application to their pervious studies to take note as review for upcoming exam.<br />
Plaintiff also provided another solution to student if they don't like to do the new assignment<br />
given by the omce by using their text book to review snme knowledge and l explnined to them<br />
how to tolerate. accept and make adiustment to unexpected circumstances undesirable for vou to<br />
move on with our daily Iife any where. Sub-teach-er o-r ev-en--teacher can't enforce students to do<br />
their work but they do their best tllrough mmw different instmctional methodology. martial<br />
available and other types ofinluences and enMorgements. Nevee eless it is not otlr issue in this<br />
case the issue is there wms no mw evaluation proven to be true or there wms any cause of action<br />
done by plnintiff nor anv violation to alw law or rule but vise versa agninKt plaintiffbv six<br />
employees from 30.000.00 while nlaintiff was visiting al public schools except elementary<br />
schools.<br />
1'm only demonskate the lesson plan provided by teacher in her/his absent according to<br />
his/her materials content provided to me, or by department head for emergency lesson plan or by<br />
the offke as it happened in this day. ln addition l provide %sistant for students to their work and<br />
answer any question. But why teclmology refused to connect the net work 1 have no answer for it<br />
and it not my personality to say something about things l don't know. Therefore students refused<br />
14