LAST EDITED ON 04-06-04 AT 04:15 AM (EST)

It would seem that life in a second-grade classroom would be enough reality for anyone.

Not for Rachel Goetz, though. She has lost her job as a Clarkstown teacher for appearing on NBC's "Average Joe: Adam Returns," instead of being in her classroom at the Lakewood Elementary School in Congers.

http://www.thejournalnews.com/newsroom/040204/b0102averageteach.html

• RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,denver, 12:43 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Leadoff, 04:02 PM, 04-06-04
    • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,denver, 04:31 PM, 04-06-04
      • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,buscemi, 04:40 PM, 04-06-04
        • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,merkrn, 10:57 PM, 04-07-04
      • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Chrissy gal, 04:45 PM, 04-06-04
        • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Handola, 05:14 PM, 04-06-04
          • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,merkrn, 11:04 PM, 04-07-04
      • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,schmoe, 04:54 PM, 04-06-04
      • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Ivorywire, 01:52 AM, 04-13-04
    • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Zeus, 06:40 PM, 04-07-04
• RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,lisajames, 03:25 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Chrissy gal, 04:29 PM, 04-06-04
    • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Ricky, 07:30 AM, 04-07-04
• RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,SurvivorBlows, 05:00 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,Chrissy gal, 05:07 PM, 04-06-04
• RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,ladro, 11:10 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,fred_garvin, 01:58 AM, 04-07-04
    • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,BrykMantra, 09:56 AM, 04-07-04
    • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,ladro, 10:34 AM, 04-07-04
      • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,pmspml5, 07:29 AM, 04-27-04
  • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,schmoe, 12:36 PM, 04-07-04
    • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,ladro, 01:44 PM, 04-07-04
      • RE: Rachel is now Unemployed ,schmoe, 02:35 PM, 04-07-04
• Article in People,KScott, 08:57 AM, 04-13-04
  • Didn't someone lose their job on Big Brother?,ValenciaJoe, 06:42 PM, 04-27-04

Are you happy now Adam?

>Are you happy now Adam?

Pardon me, but why is this Adam's fault? He didn't put a gun to her head to force her to be on the show. The woman took off from her job for three weeks to be on the program. Try taking three weeks off of YOUR job and see what happens! I think that the school district is within its rights to fire her.

People in this country really need to stop whining that it's someone else's fault when they make a decision in which there are life consequences, and realize that they and they alone are responsible for their choices!

Let me expand on my comment. Lots of American take three weeks or more off work a year. There is nothing extreme or unusual in her request to do so. I've seen substitues fill in for months at a time. Rachel sacraficed pretty much everything to be with Adam. It seems America agreed she would make the perfect life partner. Adam's parents, who know him better than any of us, even thought Rachel was the perfect match for their son. Rachel clearly paid a very high price for "real" love. I would hate to have that on my conscious.

Yes, they do, but look at this quote:

"On Feb. 9, five days before the vacation, she wrote to Heebink requesting a 15-day unpaid leave to pursue 'the opportunity of a lifetime.'"

Now, I know several people who have gotten long term substitute teaching positions. In all of those cases, the teacher put in for the time off several months ahead of time. I really see nothing wrong with the school district (or any employer) rejecting an application for 3 consecutive weeks off when the request is made less than 1 week before the proposed vacation. Now, sure, if there are extenuating circumstances, the time off should be granted on short notice; I just don't see going on "Average Joe" as one of those circumstances.

if rachel had more notice herself, i'm sure she would have put her request in sooner.There are plenty of sub teachers out there who would have loved to have had the chance to fill in for her.

My husband and I have been married for 22 years and his parents still don't think I am the perfect life partner for him. They wanted him to marry a woman who loves horses even though he hates horses. They wanted him to marry a woman who he didn't love and they can not accept the fact that he fell in love with someone who didn't live right around the corner from him all of his life. Moral - parents don't always know their grown children as well as they think they do. Moral #2 - not everyone wants the same things out of life.

Here here! Adam said it best when he pointed out that his parents aren't the ones who live with his choice, nor is America. Just because Rachel appeared to be perfect for him, doesn't mean she was and he just didn't feel it in his heart for her. If he had, he would have gone for it. I think Adam is getting a bad name because of his choice and it's not fair. I said in another thread-remember: he sent those supermodels home! And Rachel is a pretty girl, so he had a choice between two hotties as far as I'm concerned and he went with the one he was passionate about. Nothing wrong with that.

And, Rachel is the only one to blame for being fired. Adam had nothing to do with it. She'd be fired even if he chose her!

Now, whether or not Samantha is shallow and not appropriate for him, that's another story. Slick editing can show us anything the producers want us to see. Adam must have seen (or felt) something that we didn't.

Adam was thinking w/ his little head when he made his chose.he is the 1 who has to live w/ his choice, i just hope he isn't to hurt when he realizes that his parents were right. i don't see sam hanging around long. adam has a lot of responsablity with his busy and i can't see sam not wanting to come 1st. but then again he can always just give her money to go shopping. i'm sure that will make her happy.

I agree that Adam made a poor choice, but he bears no responsibility for Rachel's firing. I'm not sure where your making that connection. Rachel and Rachel alone made the decision to go on a 3 week vacation. Adam wasn't under any obligation to pick her. Even if he had, she still would have been fired.

How well can one get to know another through a television show? "Love" shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as this show. Rachel barely knew Adam. Rachel knew even less before going on the show. What was her motivation for going on? This show sort of reminds me of Jerry Springer. I used to watch Springer and wonder why people subjected themselves to being on stage. I wonder the same about the people who appear on this show. If Adam didn't have a lot of money, would Rachel have gone on? I sure doubt it.

LAST EDITED ON 04-20-04 AT 06:52 AM (EST)

Rachel, there are numerous K-6 teaching positions available in Fairfax County, VA (where my wife teaches). Check out www.fcps.edu. You would make a great addition to our schools.

This is so sad! The school board acted purely to be punitive; it surely can't be for the best of the students to have their teacher fired and a long-term sub brought in for the last 3 months of school. And let's face it, the morals issue from 100 years ago is still in effect. Schools don't want their single female teachers kissing (gasp!) men on TV shows.

Rachel, take heart: Your school district may suck, but all of America (or at least those of us who watched Average Joe) loves you.

A quote from the Journal News article:

Clarkstown schools Superintendent William Heebink said it was unreasonable for Goetz to think she could leave her teaching duties for three weeks.

The leave was denied by the Board of Education, which accepted Goetz's resignation on March 25.

"It would be difficult to operate a school district," Heebink said, "when a teacher or any other employee took three weeks' time whenever there was something of high personal interest to them."

Rachel asked for 3 weeks off of work to pursue personal interests. The school board denied the request. Rachel took the three weeks anyway. She is no longer employed by that school district. I do not see how this has anything to do with her kissing Adam on TV or any "morals issue from 100 years ago". People who take unapproved personal time off work take the risk of losing their job!!

You're probably right, but I wonder if she would have took three weeks off to do missionary work in Africa or help sick kids in the hospital if she would have been fired. Possibly not.

It was her choice though, I don't feel sorry for her losing her job. Wasn't that girl from My Big Fat Obnoxious Fiancee a teacher too ? Teachers are wild these days

I like this excerpt better:

Nearly 20 million viewers watched Mesh's heart-broken moment, according to the Reality TV World Web site.

-SB

Oh, I missed that SB, very cool!! Soon you'll be as famous (or infamous) as Adam!

I think it's great. I wouldn't want my kids taught by someone that was on a Reality TV Dating Show.

Why bash her for going on the show? As their bracelets say, "YOLO". Rachel is an intelligent, educated woman. I'm sure she will have no problem finding a new position for the next school year.

Helene (Bachelor) also lost her teaching job. She seems to be doing fine these days.

If I had a chance to do something very unusual and interesting in my life, I'd go for it, regardless of having a few problems in my everyday life. The easy thing to do is stick to your routine and pass up the chance.

This is off the subject, but ...

Hey fred_garvin cool screen name!

I wonder how many people got the SNL reference ... !

---------------------------------------

http://brykmantra.blogspot.com

None of that changes the fact that *I* would not want someone that was on a Reality TV Dating Show teaching my kids.

Why?

Perhaps if your qualified your statement more I'd understand, perhaps say:

- "I wouldn't want my kids taught by someone who took 3 weeks off during the school year to appear on a reality tv dating show".

- "I wouldn't want my kids taught by someone who demonstrated poor character on a reality tv dating show". (I don't think this would apply to Rachel as she generally showed good character).

Without such qualifications, I think your statement is unneccesarily judgemental. I see nothing inherent in appearing on a reality tv dating show that makes one a poor teacher.

My primary objection is the that idea that someone would go on a Reality TV show to find romance is very naive to me. And that it indicates emotional imbalance. Nothing wrong with being emotionally imbalanced, I just won't want such a person teaching my kids.

To me, this is a non sequitur. It doesn't necessarily follow that someone who appears on a reality dating series is emotionally imbalanced.

Just read the new People and there was an areticle about Adam & Same with a little shot of Rachel. Adam and Sam are moving in together and are happy ordering take out. Rachel said that even though she lost her job she did not regret what she did. She said she had to take the chance, no regrets.

- of course it's a Slicey!

I know this is off-topic concerning the show, but didn't someone lose their job because they were on Big Brother?