Parents United & Austin's Double-dipper lie about QSAC scores

Here we go!

At last week's debate, Parents United claimed "QSACs are down!"

Parents United appears to be picking up the trash from Texas.  University of Texas at Austin that is. Courtesy of crapademic, Anthony Petrosino.

Just like Parents United,  Petro is ranting on his blog about QSACs "failing" under Kids First.

Parents United and Petro the Texas Truth-Twister got it all wrong.

Here is how Parents United and Petrosino create the lie: they only use ONE of the FIVE DPR Areas to represent  the "District QSAC Score".

(DPR = District Performance Review)

Parents United and Petrosino always take the lowest DPR Area score, redact the other FOUR perfect or almost-perfect scores to draw their FALSE conclusion ("The scores are going down".)

In fact, the only year that the Hoboken District has FAILED with an average DPR score less than 80% was 2008-2009, when the "Dark Side" controlled the BoE and Anthony Petrosino was Assistant to the District Superintendant.

Note, 2008 was the FIRST year QSACs were given in Hoboken.

Every year since 2008 (when Reform took control of the BoE majority) the District QSAC average has risen steadily and every year has passed with an average QSAC score above 80%.  

Okay people, ready for some history so you understand which way the gas is blowing?


Petro, like his name, is gaseous.   Petrosino worked for the Hoboken School District for two years, in 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 as Assistant to Superintendent Jack Rasowsky.

His annual base salary for September through June was $140,000  plus $4,795 in health benefits. You can find this information on the BoE website.

click image to read
Petrosino base salary: $140,000, Horizon health benefits: $4,795, Contract:  240 work days

Oh, did you know at the same time Petrosino was working "full-time" in Hoboken at a $140,000 base salary Plus benefits, he was teaching a class at the University of Texas at Austin?  (Read more about the Double Dipping Texas Truth-Twister here.)

The following documents were provided to the Board of Education for use in their 2011 counter-suit against Anthony Petrosino; they show University of  Texas at Austin payroll to Petrosino  while he was employed full-time in Hoboken.

Holy Double-Dipper!

 Exhibit, Anthony Petrosino v Hoboken Board of Education , Docket L-5230-09

 Exhibit, Anthony Petrosino v Hoboken Board of Education , Docket L-5230-09

Recap:  GA has provided the above documentation showing Petrosino's big, fat BoE contract that his Dark Side BoE buddies approved for 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 and proof that Petrosino was teaching a class in Texas during his full-time employment contract with the Hoboken District.  

Whatever happened to this double-dipper's dream-gig?

In 2009 the Dark Side BoE majority FLIPPED to Reform.

Petrosino's big juicy contract for the double-dipping Austin Truth-Twister was NOT RENEWED by the Kids First School Board majority.  Nope.

The district schools performed miserably during the Petrosino Era of neglect and education money-grabbing.

Consequently, Petrosino sued the Hoboken BoE.

The Hoboken BoE filed a counter-claim against Petrosino.

Petrosino  LOST his suit, the Hoboken BoE WON theirs.

And Petro lived Happily Ever After?


Ever since his double-dip cone lost its $140K scoop (plus bennies),  Petrosino weaponized his 'Education blog' against Kids First, Parents for Progress, Reach Higher, and now, Forward Together.  

So... if we don't learn from history,  we're doomed to repeat it.

GA has no doubt that Anthony Petrosino wants his big, juicy scoop back.

Please, don't let him get it.

VOTE 1-2-4.


  1. Vengeful Miserable SOB.

  2. I agree he is a miserable SOB- but isn't a score of below 80 considered not passing by the state? what is the most recent QSAC score in instruction?

    1. The 2015-2016 QSAC DPR Area average score is above 90%, a 40 + point gain from the Petrosino Era (QSAC average score 54%).

      Yes, in 2015-2016 Instruction was 76%-- a 42% rise from Petrosino's miserable 34%.

      The QSACs have risen dramatically since Reform took over. Currently, instruction is 4 points away from passing. It will pass. The other scores are excellent, which is why Petrosino has redacted them on his ScribD and blog site and won't provide the information to the public. It spoils the narrative, like a true scam artist. Check out the giant black blotches he puts over the Districts great DPR Area scores.

      VOTE 1-2-4.

  3. GA- using the numbers from your chart, the largest increase in QSAC scores happened between 2008 and 2009-- 133 points. Remember that SOB Petro was still in the district then. Can it be that the largest increase in QSAC scores happened under Petro? Tell me I'm wrong!!!

    1. You are wrong!!!

      The failing QSAC (54% DPR average) was 2008 (2008-2009 school year). Petrosino ran the district with Jack Raslowsky 2008-2009, the year of failed QSACs.

      The 2009 QSAC (81% DPR average) was under Reform in the 2009-2010 year. No gains under Petrosino. That crew drove our district into the ground

    2. using total points like in your chart--

  4. Who was in charge in '09 reformers or OG? I'm confused

    1. OG: 2008-2009 (September through June school year)

      REFORM: 2009-2010 (September-June school year)

  5. What is the highest QSAC score you can archive and what is the state avg. I really cant make heads or tails of what Im reading. His blog has conflicting charts..

    The superintendent did not publish the results. So who's charts and numbers are correct?

    1. Really? I tried to make the graph simple and clear, just like the facts.

      Petro's graphs are never simple and clear- they are garbage in fact, jiggered data, purposefully confusing so the reader defers to the "professor's" narrative.

      Let me break it down for you.

      QSACs consist of (5) District Performance Areas (DPRs).

      The highest possible score per inividual DPR Area is 100 percent or 100 grade points.

      Passing per DPR is 80 and above.

      Methodology: You can add all (5) DPR Areas (or average them) for an accurate, inclusive assessment of the district performance.

      If you add the (5) DPRs per district, the max score is 500 (passing 400 or above).

      If you average the (5) DPRS instead, the max score is 100 (passing 80 or above).

      Six of one, a half-dozen of the other.

      But, if you are Petrosino, you can pluck out (one) low score, redact and/or exclude the other high scores. And that folks, is the essence of a crapademic graph: dishonest, confusing, misleading, politically-motivated.

      QSACs are not on the district website. They are not on the NJDoE website. There is no "state average" list. QSACs are sent by letter to the Superintendent and can be OPRAed.

      "Who's charts and numbers are correct?"


      I have the QSAC letters- some I downloaded from Petrosino's (2) ScribD accounts.

      I urge folks to take a look at his ScribD because you will see how Petro blacks out high scores, and scribbles notes on them, presumably for Parents United . Yes, the "facts" PU spouted at the debate were familiar to my ears.

      But, Petrosino has left some QSACs unredacted, presumably he didn't 'use' them. The ones he posts on his shitty propaganda blog are always redacted- except for the low score.

      Take a look:

  6. This loser is a SOB, no doubt. But he is pretty clear he is talking only about the qsac in instruction. The qsac he says he was responsible for and parents value most. You both make valid points but my head gets dizzy from the spin

    1. Ha! Petrosino's EDITED his blog since I posted this late last night. In fact, here are his visits last night to this blog:

      Oct 30 10:26:50 PM
      Oct 30 11:15:56 PM
      Oct 30 11:18:02 PM
      Oct 30 11:19:21 PM
      Oct 30 11:27:52 PM
      Oct 30 11:28:17 PM
      Oct 30 11:38:32 PM
      Oct 30 11:39:20 PM
      Oct 30 11:39:36 PM
      Oct 31 12:08:09 AM
      Oct 31 12:08:25 AM
      Oct 31 12:31:42 AM
      Oct 31 12:31:54 AM
      Oct 31 12:35:20 AM
      Oct 31 12:35:38 AM
      Oct 31 12:36:17 AM
      Oct 31 12:37:14 AM
      Oct 31 12:43:47 AM
      Oct 31 12:55:51 AM
      Oct 31 01:15:17 AM
      Oct 31 02:14:30 AM

      Huh? "he was responsible for" failure, double-dipping, and overseeing a Board that didn't follow check-writing protocol or keep a payroll ledger.

      WHO says "parents value" one DPR over another? If that is TRUE then why does Petrosino redact all the other (4) scores?

      Right? If Petrosino says the other 4 scores don't matter to parents, why does he hide them under a giant black mark?

      Petrosino redacts the other scores because it is NOT true. Parents "value" good governance and good financial management and proper operation of our schools, and of course PERSONNEL.

      QSACs under Reform are going UP, and the truth can't be hidden under one of Petrosino's big, black marks.

  7. At the end of the day- its a true statement that the district has failed the QSAC DPR in Instruction and Program for 5 years in a row. The real question is why? And there seems to be no answers coming from anywhere...and THAT frustrates me and many others.

    1. And the District FAILED the QSACs for Fiscal Management, Governance and Instruction under management of the Parents United backers, Frank Raia, Anthony Petrosino and 'Stick' Romano.

      "At the end of the day", the District is 4 points away from 80 (passing) on Instruction. That's a 42 point increase since Raia/Petrosino/Romano were in charge.

      Don't you care about district fiscal management? We have gone from abysmal to excellence. Thank you, Reform.

      Don't you care about our school personnel? We have gone from just passing to excellence. Thank you, Reform.

      Don't you care about governance? We have gone from abysmal to excellence. Thank you, Reform.

      Don't you care about operations? We have gone from passing to excellence. Thank you, Reform.

      Don't you care about Instruction? We have gone from TRULY ABYSMAL - 34% to 76%- 4 points from passing. Thank you, Reform. And we WILL pass.

      As for "answers" they don;t fall from trees. You haven't tried very hard. OPRA the "answers" you seek from the NJDoE, like everybody else can, like I do. It is not rocket science.

      Lastly, I have a question for you: How does "Instruction" improve under Parents United? I have NEVER seen a more uninformed slate of BoE candidates. Never. I practically laughed out loud when one of them couldn't say what she would cut from the district budget because "I haven't seen the budget."

      Ummmm... they are ONLINE.

      Well, you folks seem to be a little upset at this post. I wonder why?

    2. It must really frustrate you and many others that charter nor private schools have a QSAC or equivalent measurement of performance. Transparency is key. For the last 5 years, how do you make a choices of which school to send your child(ren) when there isn’t an apples-to-apples analysis? That must really frustrate you, too.

  8. Parents United has no ideas. They can't even find a budget online. They couldn't find a board meeting either. They couldn't find that Hoboken High already had programs with Stevens, Rutgers and NJIT. They couldn't find that the High School offered several different languages including French, Spanish and Italian.

    Please don't find them in the voting booth on Nov 8.

    Please vote 1-2-4.

  9. 1) “Since the (Hoboken) district still has not satisfied at least 80 percent of the weighted indicators in instruction and program, you are directed to continue to implement the district improvement plan (DIP) to address indictors that have not met QSAC standards during the interim review.”

    2) Interim Placement in Instruction and Program DPR (8/2014) = 45%

    Letter From NJDOE to Hoboken School District - 7/6/2016

    1. "Dr." Petrosino, if you wish to post rebuttals here, I would like the same courtesy. You don't allow comments- it's like Pravda over there. How about you open up commenting on your site and show respect for the First Amendment and the intelligence of your readers?

      Your first point: what's new there? NOTHING. I have repeatedly stated already that the current (2015-2016) District Instruction score is 76%, 4 points from 80.

      2) The 45% Instruction outlier was incorporated into my graph. You FORGOT to include the rest of the QSAC DPR scores from 2014:

      96%- Fiscal Management
      100%- Operations
      90%- Personnel
      100%- Governance

      Petrosino, you must be jealous of those scores! They are ALL better scores than when you were in control of the BoE in 2008-2009- even the 45% outlier beats your 34%!

      You can't redact the truth on my blog. Only on yours. And I allow commenting. You don't.

      Are you or aren't you going to open up your blog for comments/rebuttals?

  10. The overreaction to your post shows how much Parents United was counting on the QSAC lie.

  11. There is no such thing as a QSAC "total score"-- there are 5 separate scores in 5 different areas-- there is not a combined or composite score concerning QSAC.

    1. Of course there is, "professor."

      The total of all (5) QSAC DPRs or their average is a comprehensive measure of how a district performs overall.

      In your case (2008-2009), when you ran the district, it failed 3 DPR Areas miserably, bringing your district average score to 51%. The year after you left, the district average went up to 81%. Now, the district average is above 90%.

      Btw, have you opened commenting yet?

    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    3. "professor" at 7:32-
      Your posting privileges on this site are suspended until you allow commenting on your "education" blog. Your posting privileges here will resume once there is reciprocity- I would like equal time to comment on your "education" posts as well.

    4. How the hell did any major university hire this tool? BTW, he doesn't allow comments because he knows the facts are not on his side. Only someone afraid of the truth resorts to blanket censorship of any and all points of view other than their own.


Post a Comment