Sunday, May 18, 2008

NY State State Test ELA Used for Teach For America Propaganda

WOW! Wendy makes the ELA exam. This one by A Voice in the Wilderness at The Chancellor's New Clothes even surprised Susan Ohanian, the expert on outrages.

Here's a question for the next ELA:
TFA is a tool:
A. to bust teacher unions
B. to create divisions between newer and senior teachers
C. to promote the coporate agenda in schools
D. all of the above

Jamaica High School: Sabotage and Shock Doctrine

The ICE blog prints James Eterno's letter published by the NY Teacher over their error in publishing that Jamaica HS, where James is the chapter leader, will be closing. Let's see now. The UFT makes "simple" mistake on Jamaica HS closing - one of the centers of the opposition and a place where many votes came from in the election for high school executive board in recent elections. Do you think they are not planning ahead to the next election where they will try to maintain the New Action phony opposition members on the Exec Bd and keep ICE/TJC out again? And if Jamaica closed - no more James to deal with at chapter leader meetings, delegate assemblies, etc. And it will be less likely they will have to read honest reports on the DA written by James.

And on Charlie Rose, Randi said "after getting help" - what exactly is "help", like maybe cutting class size in a struggling school which apparently is not part of the UFT formula - schools should be closed (Shanker used to say the same thing). No matter how many resolutions the UFT passes, they are not opposed to closing schools and Peter Goodman (Ed in the Apple and Edwize) has made some nice bucks working on committees that lead to closing schools.

Call the article in the NY Teacher wishful thinking.

Below, George Schmidt gives a broader perspective.

After reading the information provided by James Eterno on the destabilization of Jamaica High, it all sounded too familiar.

The privatization formula is simple. First the public school is destabilized, then they come in with a "solution" off the privatization and public school replacement script.

I wish we had had enough staff and will in Chicago to track every instance of this, since Chicago provided many of the templates. But I was glad to read that you are documenting these realities in real time. Thanks.

Let's get together in Chicago during AFT and figure out how to maintain our tracking of these things in the big cities.

Next on your agenda, if the pattern is followed:

Complete privatization via charter schools is the next wave they implemented in Chicago -- with the "failing" high schools as the primary targets.

You're already in trouble in NYC because your local union (thanks, Leo) has cocked up support for the "charter ideal" with those silly samples.

Starting this year, Chicago has been replacing its "failing" small schools with "turnarounds" and charters. You're next. And with the help of your own union leaders, you've already given a green light to the privatization via charters.

George Schmidt
Editor, Substance


Notes on a visit to a school in New York City

See how schools have improved under BloomKlein? Susan Ohanian reprints a letter from teacher Bill Schechter.

I grew up in New York City and graduated from its (non-exam) public schools. For 35-years, I worked as a history teacher at a progressive, upper middle-class high school in a Boston suburb. These two poles anchor my educational history.

Last Tuesday, I traveled down to the city to watch one of my former students teach at Chelsea High School (formerly Chelsea Vocational High School) in SOHO. The visit was a shock that managed to deepen my already very deep sense of the folly of punitive high stakes testing.

The school is in a state of advanced physical dilapidation. I felt like I was walking through the pages of Kozol’s Death At An Early Age –the 50-year old school building that my school district demolished was a palace by comparison)– or had gotten dropped into the Third World. Chelsea High received an “F” from the NYC Board of Ed, and the teachers there have been given the message that these kids have to drilled to pass those tests so the powers-that-be will finally be
appeased.

Read more of Bill's letter at Susan's place.
Bill adds a P. S. to this very distressing account:
To those who deal with these realities very day, I send my admiration.

On a less depressing note, Susan reports some of the great satire from
The Eggplant
(Index is here):

4th grader Completes Last of High Stakes Exams, First in Nation To Take Tests in All 50 States.


Washington D. C.--
Greeted by a standing ovation from members of Congress, meeting in joint session with the Business Roundtable and National Education Association president Reg Weaver, nine-year-old Bingo Benny arrived to celebrate his feat of taking state assessments required by NCLB in all 50 states.

"From the October NECAP (New England Common Assessment Program) in Jericho, Vermont, to the May WASL (Washington Assessment of Student Learning) in Seattle, Washington, Benny proved that he is indeed standardized," exclaimed Sen. Edward Kennedy, chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee.

"Benny refuses to be left behind," chimed in George Miller, Chair of House Education and Labor Committee, and, like Kennedy, determined to reauthorize the contentious NCLB law.

Benny agreed that it was exciting for Mayor Bloomberg to be on hand to wish him well when he took the CTB/McGraw-Hill tests in January. "I didn't have time to use the key to the city he gave me," Benny said. "I was in a rush to catch a plane for the ITBS (Iowa Test of Basic Skills) in Las Vegas and the PAWS (Proficiency Assessments for Wyoming Students).

Bill Gates was on hand in Washington to congratulate Benny on his rigor, and in Long Beach, California, Eli Broad presented him with a special award of merit for competition in the global economy.

Read the rest here.


Saturday, May 17, 2008

Rubber Room News: David Pakter's 3020a Hearing (Number 2)

Make sure to read David Pakter's essay over at Norm's Notes on his upcoming 3020a hearing - this is the hearing that can lead to a tenured teacher's firing. The kind of hearing being attacked by anti-tenure people who want to be able to fire people for things like not brushing their teeth.

3020-a trials always begin with a pre trial conference between the opposing lawyers and the Hearing Officer where technical matters are argued over such as the Demands for Discovery. Both sides state reasons for what they will and will not surrender into evidence etc. Lots of technical arguing over the specifics of the charges.

One of the charges is he brought in a large plant to decorate outside the auditorium without permission. Was it a Venus flytrap that ate kids? Or named Audrey?

David said in an email:

...the hearing officer was fairly amazed the DOE would pull something so insane as to make it a charge that the NEW YORK TEACHER ran a story on my case which the DOE claims embarrassed them if you can believe such insanity.

The story is at http://www.uft.org/news/teacher/top/axed/

In any case because the Hearing officer realized this case contains major Constitutional issues involving the Bill of Rights, especially the First Amendment, he said this case could last a very long time involving countless witnesses and therefore he does not want to even start the actual calling of sworn witnesses without holding several more private Pre-Hearing Conferences.

I believe it is the first 3020-a in the history of New York in which the DOE had the chutzpah and the unbounded Hubris to think they could defecate on a teacher's Constitutional Rights so openly and brazenly. It really is an amazing situation.The other charges are equally ludicrous of course.

David has asked for an open 3020a, which all people have a right to do, and we'll be posting the dates in case anyone wants to see the show. I hope to make a few of them myself and will report back.

More rubber room news:
Sorry, I can't say without getting some people in trouble. But I hear at least one bizarre story a week. Like the one about a teacher recognized as being excellent who is in the rubber roo
m for having an altercation with a child - her own. Can a parent complain about the actions of a teacher when she herself is the teacher?

or - a child charges an extremely competent teacher (the entire staff has been horrified that this could happen to this long-time senior teacher with a great rep) with saying "you're an idiot" when the teacher really said "you didn't get it." So far, 4 months in the rubber room, the entire class that the teacher taught in total chaos as subs come and go. Why did the principal do it when it would have been so easy to believe the teacher's version? Senior teacher with a higher salary? Or just Another Leadership Academy Loon? (A-LAL?)

Oh, and has anyone seen that UFT Rubber Room SWAT (right) team around lately? If you spot them let us know.


Friday, May 16, 2008

Russo Thoughts on Ed Blogger Summit

Here.
Russo says teacher bloggers were a big hit, as opposed I guess, to ed policy wonk types and quasi reform politicos.
Does anyone get the message that teachers are the keys in this whole ed reform thing?
Those that can or those that can't do whatever or something like that. Roy Romer? Jeez.

Like how about some real power for teachers as part of ed reform? Like let them choose the principal. Yikes! How radical an ed reform idea! But they do it in Europe. Way too radical for our namby pamby teacher unions, who might even ask for a trial - I bet our teacher-run schools kick the corporate reform model schools' asses.

Wait 'til the NYC Ed Blogger Masked Summit which will be held at a top secret location to protect all the people who must remain anonymous due to witch hunts by Tweed and Ed Sector wonks.

I'm making my Eduwonkette mask as we speak.

Anyone know where I can get a good buy on that dress?

NY Times Drinking the Kool Aid on Teach for America

Today's NY Times had an editorial praising TFA. They will grasp at any straw.
Some excerpts:

To maintain its standing as an economic power, the United States must encourage programs that help students achieve the highest levels in math and science, especially in poor communities where the teacher corps is typically weak.
... a new study from a federal research center based at the Urban Institute in Washington suggests that the country might raise student performance through programs like Teach for America, a nonprofit group that places high-achieving college graduates in schools that are hard to staff.

Critics have challenged the program’s usefulness, pointing out that the teachers it places are neophytes and that a majority leave the classroom after two years. But the new study suggests that talented young people can have a lasting effect even if they do not make a career of teaching. According to the study, Teach for America participants who worked in North Carolina between 2000 and 2006 had more impact on student performance than traditional teachers did, as measured by end-of-course tests. The difference was observed in several areas of science and was strongest in math.

Two years is by anyone's estimate a minimum amount of time to learn even the basic ropes of teaching. Traditionally trained first year teachers for all the critiques of these programs do get a lot of teacher training than can prove useful. I was also an instant wonder in a special program to attract men avoiding Vietnam to elementary schools in the late 60's and was very deficient compared to the teachers who came through education programs. It took me about 2 years to make up the gap.

Make sure to check out the Debunking TFA blog for counter research.

And Eduwonkette is right on the case today with this:
A special shoutout goes to the New York Times editorial board for making national policy recommendations based on the Urban Institute's study of Teach for America in North Carolina, which included a whopping 69 Teach for America teachers - a .5% sample of all TFA teachers placed during those years.
Set policy based on 69?
Does it remind you of the big deal TNTP's Tim Daly made of those 14 U-rated teachers who were ATR's, also debunked by wonkette.

While the instant teacher concept of TFA people who do not stay as opposed to traditionally trained teachers needs debunking, I know TFA people who do stay are many are fabulous teachers. Some even have gotten over the training they receive that older, traditional teachers are to be shunned. I resent the 2 year wonders (some numbers I've seen are that over 70% leave) who become instant experts on education. Believe me, when you to this as a career, you get insights, often from returning students and their children and even grandchildren, that make it clear the emphasis of the ed reform, union busting movement (TFA is a prime component of that strategy which is the real reason the business community so loves them) will not work until they invest in kids and schools to the same extent they do in wars and bailouts.

Eduwonkette did more extensive do not miss analysis of the study in a previous post here.
A short excerpt:

the authors presuppose that teacher turnover has no effect on the school as an organization, and that teacher quality is solely an individual attribute, rather than the joint product of individuals and organizations. (And what do we make of the tiny effects of experience? Is it possible that the most talented math and science teachers left to pursue more lucrative opportunities?)

It’s nearly impossible to build a stable school community and an ethos of sustained change in the face of regular turnover. Herein we have the classic chicken and egg problem in education: how do we create places where good teachers want to work - a key component of which is a stable professional community – if we can’t get strong teachers to stay? Programs like TFA are a fine band-aid, but they are hardly a solution.

Suggestion to NY Times: DO NOT PASS GO BUT GO RIGHT TO THIS POST AND THEN RETRACT OR MODIFY YOUR EDITORIAL OR AT LEAST PUT UP WONKETTE"S POST AS AN OP ED.

Teachers Who Say NO to Testing

I've been working with the NYCORE Justice Not Just Tests group this year (coming soon: a blog). We've talked about teachers boycott or subvert the testing mania but that means instant death - if people do it individually. Imagine if people did it en masse? Imagine if there was a union that led such a movement instead of making mealy mouth complaints of how high stakes testing subverts education, while at the same time pushing for merit pay for entire schools based on these tests? Not in our lifetimes (but then I don't have all that long to go, so maybe there's hope for some of you young 'uns.) Send Doug and Carl messages of support.

From Susan Ohanian: http://susanohanian.org/show_nclb_atrocities.html?id=3404


Doug Ward, ethical North Carolina teacher of exceptional children, explains on YouTube his refusal to give the state test to his students. He speaks of his exceptional children's deep spirituality. He also speaks of being inspired by a fifth grader who reflected on doing what is right.

Doug's school is
Cullowhee Valley School
240 Wisdom Drive
Cullowhee, NC 28723

Here is a parent's comment:

Doug is a dedicated teacher who works hard to create inclusion experiences for his students. My son with autism is not in Doug's class, but will take the Extend1 EOG and fail. He has made amazing progress this year thanks to his teachers at CVS. No standardized test measures the value of my son's inclusion in his regular classroom,the friendships he's made or the compassion his classmates have learned. I want my child LEFT BEHIND to learn and progress at his own pace. You Go, Doug!!

— Doug Ward
YouTube.com
2008-05-15
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tj_bJkGTC8U

The May Substance just arrived. It contains Yvonne Siu-Runyan's excellent interview with test resister [from Washington State] Carl Chew.

I refrain from posing this interview because we need to support the only newspaper of the resistance.

Subscriptions are only $16.00 a year. You can contact Substance by phone - 773-725-7502, or by email, Csubstance@aol.com. http://www.substancenews.net.

Order Susan's book:
When Childhood Confronts NCLB
$8.95
Box 26
Charlotte, VT 05445

Klein's Cajones: Budget Cuts? Blame the UFT


"Sol" and I developed this cartoon based on a recent post by Eduwonkette. Read it here.
Oh, and that's Andy Eduwonk holding up the Broad Prize.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Corruption in the World of BloomKlein


"Next time someone goes on about the corruption and waste that pervaded the system in the days before Mayoral control, perhaps you might mention one of the examples [below.] - Leonie Haimson

"One day BloomKlein will be taken out with bags over their heads." - ednotes online.

At a recent Manhattan Institute breakfast where Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee were guest speakers, former Daily News reporter Joe Williams, on a follow-up panel, in defending the BloomKlein tenure of NYC schools, talked about how bad the system was in the BBK (before BloomKlein) years. He gave such an inane example, I've forgotten what it was.

Williams now heads Democrats for Education Reform – you know the drill: critics of BloomKlein are entrenched forces opposing changes in the status quo even of these changes are beyond inane. Charters are the answer to everything, preferably charters where there is little union presence.

When it comes to Ed Reform, there is little difference between Republicans and Democrats.

One area Williams never reports on is the much more massive corruption (and incompetence) that has gone on under his BloomKlein heroes.

Leonie Haimson's post below summarizes a piece of it. Note the mention of Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, a man with mayoral ambitions. I was a fan of Marty since the days he was a student activist at Brooklyn College. He once came to my building on Ocean Avenue to organize the tenants. But for the last few years I suspected some deal with the mayor. I wrote about Martine Guerrier, Marty's appointee to the Panel for Educational Policy, who received a lot of notoriety for voting NO against 3rd grade retention at the Monday Night Massacre. When BloomKlein gave her a $150,000 position as Parent CEO, there was much bragging about how they took in a "critic" we were pointing out that her criticism died down very quickly the closer Marty grew to Bloomberg. (The NY Times at the time painted her as a persisent critic and when I accused them of sucking up , then ed reporter David Herzenhorn sent me a very nasty email personally attacking me.)

I guess $900,000 goes a long way in Brooklyn.


Leonie's post to the nyceducationnews listserve follows:

See today’s NY Times about the federal indictments of four DOE employees as a result of the bus scandal investigation – accused of soliciting bribes for amounting to at least $1 million, in exchange for giving preferential treatment on safety inspections to companies that provide transportation to thousands of special ed students.

These indictments result from a terrific investigative series of reports last summer by the Daily news– not anything uncovered by DOE itself or by Richard Condon, the school special investigator. See our blog for links to these stories. In fact, the News reporters complained of stonewalling by the DOE in the process of researching the safety problems and abusive behavior on the part of these companies’ drivers.

In addition, today’s NY Post reveals a list of community groups that received money through the Mayor’s “own secret taxpayer-funded cash stashin the reporter’s words, amounting last year to $4.5 million, which the Mayor used “to reward favored lawmakers” like Councilman Simcha Felder (who got $1.9 million for his favorite community groups), Brooklyn BP Marty Markowitz ($900,000) and others.

Also on the list is Councilman Erik Dilan – who coincidentally or not, along with Felder is one of only four Council members who have refused to sign the resolution opposing budget cuts to schools. The Mayor’s office supplied $60,000 to a community group that happens to be run by Dilan’s wife.Unlike those groups allocated discretionary funds directly from the Council,

“Bloomberg's slush funds were channeled through various city agencies to 45 groups and weren't listed on the document released each year by the council oped in Daily News – suggesting that the recent naming of a Queens campus of public schools by the DOE for Senator Padavan might be considered a form of graft:

The state's Public Officers Law is clear on this: Elected officials cannot receive extra compensation or any gift of more than nominal value. Placing someone's name in a prominent place, whether it's an actual building or a tract of land, has monetary value. ….Naming a school after Padavan appears, at the very least, to violate the spirit of the law, which says that an elected official cannot "solicit, accept or receive any gift having a value of seventy-five dollars or more whether in the form of money, service, loan, travel, entertainment, hospitality, thing or promise, or in any other form ... in the performance of his official duties or was intended as a reward for any official action on his part.

Worse still, according to the chancellor's regulations, "schools may not be named after living persons." The chancellor and others worked around this rule by arguing - get this - that it doesn't apply to a campus. The naming is especially egregious in this case because Republican Sen. Padavan's district is a major battleground in the war over control of the state Senate, which is one seat from a tie and two from flipping to the Democrats.

But perhaps all this pales compared to the unfortunately legal, but incredibly wasteful spending practices of the DOE, which while proposing huge budget cuts to schools also intends to spend nearly $8 million next year on its so-called Accountability office – with only 18 staff members, averaging $432,757 per person!

See this entry by the invaluable blogger, Eduwonkette:

On page 446 of New York City's FY09 budget, we learn that the Division of Assessment and Accountability is budgeted at $8,287,282. $7,789,623 will buy you 18 staff - that's $432,757 per person! What else could you buy for this money, according to Eduwonkette?

A)3,894,812 subway rides
B) 15,579 pairs of Prada heels
C) 1812 hours with the Emperors VIP Club
D) 315 years of education at the Brearley School

I would also add a lot of smaller classes, after school tutoring, and art programs as well.

Next time someone goes on about the corruption and waste that pervaded the system in the days before Mayoral control, perhaps you might mention one of the examples above.



Baltimore Union Elections: Referendum on Andres Alonso?

It's really hard to generalize with so few teachers voting. With even worse turnout than we had in NYC last year (22% of working teachers voted) only 16% of Baltimore teachers voted to re-elect incumbent Marietta English to a 5th term. English captured 609 votes, while Sharon Blake had 342 votes. A total of 1,042 votes were cast, representing just 16 percent of the 6,400-member union.

But the two candidates seemed to take different stands on school leader Andres Alonso who left the NYCDOE last year to run the system in Baltimore. We predicted at the time that as a follower of Joel Klein he would alienate the teachers.

From the Baltimore Sun, May 12:
The election is, in some ways, a referendum on the leadership of city schools chief Andres Alonso, who is finishing his first year on the job. English called for Alonso's ouster last fall when the union and the school system were in a dispute over teacher planning time. Asked what the biggest difference is between her and Blake, English replied that her opponent is "pro-management."

"I think there needs to be an effort [by] the union leadership to work collaboratively with the system," Blake said.

For what it's worth, the teachers who were interested enough to vote chose to vote against management.

Articles posted at Norm's Notes.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Blogger Summit - I Registered But I Ain't A-Goin'

Given a choice of heading down to Washington to join in the Ed Bogger Summit or attend today's UFT Delegate Assembly, I am choosing the DA. No, it's not going to the bar afterward. The Summit is having a cocktail party at 6pm later today. Followed by a film.

Could it be Newt Gingrich, the keynote speaker?
Or that they feature Gov. Roy Romer's blog?
Or that the event is being sponsored by Ed in '08, (supported by the Broads and Gates Foundations) where enough anti-teacher bias for the entire so-called ed reform movement can be found? (Click here for Ed '08 steering committee - try to find one sign of a public school teacher.)

Or maybe it was this from Ms. Frizzle:
"Don’t carelessly exclude us from the conversation!"

So there’s this summit in DC…
called Ed in ‘08, which sounds like it would be interesting, at a minimum an opportunity for networking and debate, and I went right ahead and sent out an email to a couple of folks I thought might agree (turns out one of them is not only going, he’s speaking) but then, luckily, before passing it along to another half-dozen NYC education bloggers whom I know, I stopped and took a closer look. Most of the people I know who blog about education also happen to be teachers… and this summit is on a Wednesday-Thursday. It makes me a little sad & irritated that a summit intended to be about education reform would occur at a time that is virtually impossible for any actual working educators to attend. We have an obligation to our kids to be present pretty much every weekday between now and the end of June. That doesn’t mean we don’t have opinions or experience relevant to education policy - on the contrary, what is policy without the voices of practitioners? We’ve put our voices out there through our blogs - some more overtly political, some more personal, but each trying to share stories because we think someone can learn something from them. Don’t carelessly exclude us from the conversation!


Sorry, ms. Frizzle, it wasn't careless, but intentional. They only want to hear the voices of teachers who agree with them.

I just love that category of "Blogging from the Trenches." I'd love to see that trench.
Ed in '08 would be the first to trash teachers for leaving the kiddies to go to a blogger summit in mid-week.

I did vote for my favorite blogs amongst the finalists for best ed blog, NYC Educator and Eduwonkette – both of whom are not going to be there to accept an award, multiple times.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

The Education Sector's Biased Survey

Check that apple for worms

Last week the Education Sector held a pat themselves on the back event ( Teacher Voice: How Teachers See the Teacher Quality Debate) in Washington where they supposedly heard the voice of the classroom teacher as they released the results of their survey of a thousand teachers.

Our posting on the event led to Andrew Rotherham calling us a crazy and challenging us to read the report and listen to the event. The EdNotes gnomes have been busy poring over the audio and the report itself and we'll be posting some analysis over a period of time. Here is some preliminary stuff.

A few days before the event, the Justice Not Tests group here in NYC that has been organizing to get schools to reject merit pay held a conference call with one of the three teachers appearing at the event to review some of the ideas the Ed Sector is pushing. We didn't expect the actual voices of the teachers to get much play at the event and from what we hear they didn't. (I still haven't listened but I'm stocking up on liquor to get me through the 2 hours.)

Our view of the entire exercise is that it is insidious - designed to use the natural range of opinions of teachers to make the case that teachers ultimately want the kinds of reforms being pushed by the Ed Sector and to win over those that don't – designed to show that many teachers really want market-based concepts but their voices are being stifled by their unions.

Note the title of title of the report: Waiting to be Won Over.

Won over to what? Why the Ed Sector point of view of course.

Teacher quality is important, class size - nil
In Ed Sectorville, teacher quality matters more than lower class size. Of course they never asked the obvious question as to where teachers stand on this issue. I posted a follow-up piece on this issue here.

The focus on removing teachers is practically pathological. Here is a result based on one of the tenets of the Ed Sector type reforms:

Still, according to these survey results, most unions do not appear to be engaged in efforts to deal with ineffective teachers. Only 17 percent of teachers say that the union in their district “leads efforts to identify ineffective teachers and retrain them.”

Somehow, "good" unions - like their buddies in the UFT - are associated with taking part in removing teachers rather than defending them.

As a whole, teachers today are what political analysts might describe as “in play”and waiting to be won over by one side or another. Despite frustrations with schools, school districts, their unions, and a number of aspects of the job in general, teachers are not sold on any one reform agenda. They want change but are a skeptical audience. For instance, nearly half of teachers surveyed say that they personally know a teacher who is ineffective and should not be in the classroom. But, although teachers want something done about low-performing colleagues, they are leery of proposals to substantially change how teachers can be dismissed. [my bold]

So nearly half the teachers know of a teacher who should not be in the classroom. I've met as many bad principals as bad teachers. Did they ask how many know of a principal who should not be running a school? Who helpless teachers have to endure? Who have some political angels protecting them? Who cultivate bad teachers as spies? Next time try asking what teachers think about having them elect their principals. (It's done in many places in Europe.)

One of the things we discussed during our conference call was the idea of removing bad teachers. I asked all the participants in the call what percentage of people they have worked with they consider bad teachers. We all agreed on a rough number - about 5%. This included tenured and untenured. We agreed that many are still there because administrators either find them useful or just don't have the will to remove them. 5% - and this is a consistent figure I get from most teachers – becomes the end-all and be-all of the entire Ed Sector reform movement. I claim that no matter what you do there will be 5% "bad"- in all professions (maybe more in the Ed pundit field). Where are the calls to remove bad doctors, who can actually kill people, another question that should have been asked as a control? I bet more than 50% will say they know of at least one bad doctor. And lawyers? And education pundits who did not teach?

The amount of focus on removing bad teachers as the solution to the problems in education is dangerous. Look at the south in right to work states where the lack of a union and no tenure would seem to make it easy to remove anyone. Education is no better and in fact worse.

Three in four public school teachers (76 percent) agree that, “Too many veteran teachers who are burned out stay because they do not want to walk away from the benefits and service time they have accrued.” And this view resonates with majorities of teachers whether they are newcomers to the profession (80 percent) or veterans (68 percent).

What does "too many" mean? Of course the follow-up can become – let's cut these benefits to "improve" education? But there was no joy in Ed Sectorville on this point:

Educators and policymakers frequently discuss ways to attract and retain high-quality teachers. One idea getting attention these days is to swap some of the benefits teachers enjoy later in their careers for more money in the early years. The survey finds teachers are protective of their pensions, and the vast majority of teachers overall do not like the idea of raising starting salaries in exchange for fewer retirement benefits.

Class size not a factor in Ed Sectorville
On attracting and retaining teachers, there are seven options. There is no hint of attracting and retaining people with low class sizes, which many of my private school teacher friends point to as a reason never to teach in a public school. Many teachers who leave cite class size as the single most important factor. Hey! Why bring up a topic that is off bounds in your world of ed reform?

The only mention of class size:
Fifty-five percent of teachers overall say the union in their district “negotiates to keep class size down in the district.”

On how unions can improve teaching? Again, lowering class size was not an option.

There was even less joy in Ed Sectorville at this result:

Most teachers see the teachers union as vital to their profession. When asked how they think of teachers unions or associations, 54 percent of teachers responded that they are “absolutely essential.” This is an increase of 8 percentage points from 46 percent in 2003.
...most teachers do not think that union presence hinders the reputation of the profession. Just 21 percent of teachers agree that, “Teachers would have more prestige if collective bargaining and lifetime tenure were eliminated.”

We see this movement towards unions as a result of the imposition of they very market-based concepts the Ed Sector is pushing. I bet the figures on NYC would be considerably higher on the essential need for a union except for the fact that many teachers feel the UFT lines up way too often on the Ed Sector side of the fence.

I can't wait for the 2011 biased survey. A sign I need to get a life.

The questions, results and audio can be downloaded from the Education Sector. Or email me and I'll send you the pdfs.


Monday, May 12, 2008

John Merrow - Only an Idiot...


...would overlook Merrow's one-sided coverage of education on the News Hour With Jim Lehrer.
(What other news are they doing one-sided reporting on?) A supposed non-commercial station, which always pleads for money because they claim to be a counterweight, is up for the highest bidder when it comes to Merrow bias.

Only an idiot would write "Only an idiot would overlook student performance, be it dismal or outstanding" and then go on to talk about the narrowest form of assessment possible while ignoring all the other assessments of student "performance" - how about attendance? how about functioning effectively in a social setting? - what's the matter, John, too hard to figure all this stuff out for a supposed "expert" on education.

It is no surprise Muroch's Wall Street Journal gives him a platform. What's next? The NY Post?

Merrow's Learning Matters is funded by Annenberg, Gates, Carnegie - the usual suspects.

Check Eduwonkette's take: Who Slipped a Mickey in John Merrow's Kool-Aid?

What Will the Tough Liberals in the UFT Do?

With a UFT Delegate Assembly coming up this week, it will be interesting to watch how Randi plays the Obama/Clinton issue, if she does so at all - we don't see how she can ignore it.

In his post (reprinted below) to ICE-mail, Sean Ahern challenges the Tough Liberals in the UFT's controlling Unity Caucus and makes the important connection between the "Tough Liberal" world of 68/72 and 08/12.

First let me try to put some of the stuff in historical context. Though I lived through all of it, Richard Kahlenberg's "Tough Liberal" bio of Al Shanker has allowed me to make many connections between the current Obama/Clinton battle with the past.

One of the striking aspects is Kahlenberg's attack on McGovernites, Jimmy Carter, the new left, the old left, and just about any progressive forces – the New Democrats. As I read the book it seemed in some ways like a campaign statement for the Clintons. I won't get into the education stuff here, but the Clintons are the epitome of the candidate TL's are looking for. No wonder the book is funded by the likes of Eli Broad and the New Century Foundation, among other backers of BloomKlein.

A book praising Al Shanker backed by the very attackers of teachers and unions? No surprise in these quarters where we have been howling about collaboration for years. It provides some philosophical underpinning of the utter betrayal so many teachers in NYC feel over the actions of their union. But you'll have to wait for our review of the book for more details when it appears in the New Politics summer edition.

Kahlenberg raises issues surrounding race time and again in terms of critiques of affirmative action. Of course, Shanker was not a racist (and I believe that) as his credentials as an activist in the Civil Rights movement are trotted out time and again, as is his relationship to Martin Luther King. But the net effect of Tough Liberal actions were and are often severe racial divisions. The parallels between '08 and '68 are astounding. Perhaps they see Obama as a recipient of some kind of affirmative action while Hillary has worked her way up the ranks. You know. The good ole' merit system, which in their world Obama appears to have skipped. (Does a wife of a president count as affirmative action?)

What irony in the replay of 40 years ago when the '68 convention, which followed the first lesser known UFT strike in Ocean-Hill Brownsville that spring and then was followed by the famous strike later that fall, an event that caused so many rifts in the Black/Jewish relationship, though Gerald Podair points out in his "The Strike That Changed New York" there were many already existing fault lines.

Similar fault lines also existed between the white– "hard working" as Hillary recently put it– working class which Tough Liberals are courting so assiduously and the pointy headed intellectual (Obama supporters today?) over the Vietnam War. Remember the attacks by NYC construction workers on peace marchers? Or the police assault on Columbia students in '68? The white working class vs. college students replayed today. Jeez. My choice to be a history major is reaffirmed every day in the fascination replay of events.

A major focus of Kahlenberg is on foreign policy. Tough Liberals preferred Nixon over any Democrat not aligned with them. Shanker was perfectly aligned with Ronald Reagan in that area despite his attacks on labor. The number of Shankerites that became neo cons is worth noting (Linda Chavez is a prime example.)

Thus, what we are seeing today in Tough Liberal Clinton's battle against what they perceive as New Democrat Obama. Again it often comes down to foreign policy. Enough damage has been done that the undercurrent I get from much of the Jewish community is that they will never vote Obama. Hillary will bomb Iran to smithereens while Obama might engage in a dialogue.
Who do they want? A Lyndon Johnson type candidate who will do non-threatening civil rights stuff while bombing the gooks/Arabs into oblivion.

Education? That takes 2nd place to wars and bailouts in the TL world. After all, their main focus is to keep any hint of socialism out. Tough Liberals will do with whatever piece of pie they are given to work with. Thus, ed reform means improving teacher quality by eliminating seniority and union rules and investing in peace corps, missionary teachers and staff development. But never in class size reduction.

So watch Unity Caucus and their supporters in New Action continue to sit and squirm - there must be some people, especially African-Americans who are not comfortable with what's going on. What Randi says at the Delegate Assembly this Weds. should be interesting. Since she reads the blogs, she will tread very carefully knowing full well her words and nuances will be out there.

This is something Weingarten is very good at and how she says it will be an indication of the way the Clinton campaign will begin attempts at reconciliation – with the 2012 conept in mind if Obama shoud have a McGovern-like disaster. (I know the paid pundits are discounting this, but I am not as anything can happen in politics.)

I'm betting on a strong statement from Randi about how all the union's resources will be out there for the Democratic nominee no matter who he - oops - is. After all, an AFT Pres. must play the proper political role. But if Obama loses in November, Hill in '12 begins.


Will the "Tough" Liberals sit out an Obama candidacy in 2008 like they did McGovern in 1972?
by Sean Ahern

Don't let the Unity Caucus slink quietly back into the woodwork until 2012. I think some of them will have to be brought into the campaign against McBush kicking and screaming. The Shankerites sat out the McGovern campaign in '72 and ended up with Gerald Ford as President in '75. Ford told the city "Drop Dead" during the fiscal crisis and 20,000 teachers were laid off. Ford was followed by Carter who sounds alot better now than he did in the 70's.

A McCain victory gives Clinton and the 'Tough" liberals another shot in 2012 or so they think. Sitting out the Obama candidacy, at least unofficially, makes sense from their view. I think the 'tough' liberals at 52 B'way will need some 'tough' love, like a proverbial slap for their own good, to awaken them to the greater danger. As for those who prefer Nader or McKinney, or some other party, I say more power to you and the people you bring out, as long as you are bringing people into the fight against McBush in one way or another. The Obama camp is the main contingent as far as I see and that where I will be, but there is plenty of room in a movement for different candidates and different platforms provided the focus is positive and not fratricidal . The polls make it pretty clear, if the people's vote is counted , the Republican control of the executive branch will end.

It's a very dangerous gamble to bet that the Republic will survive four more years of McBush and the neo cons. It is a very dangerous thing to 'triangulate' with or embrace facists, white supremacists, right wing evangelicals, Likud fanatics thinking that you can control them for your own ends. The German ruling class thought they could use the Nazis against the Communists. The Republican oligarchs have made a similar pact to hold onto to power and prolong the Empire by embracing a very hard core right wing which they continue to believe they can control. It is dangerous for any citizen in a democratic republic to dawdle and fret over the unsatisfactory programs of both Clinton and Obama while our basic rights and the rule of law are being eliminated by the Executive Branch under Republican control.

The race baiting used by the Clinton campaign was a 'coming attractions' for the Republican campaign (assuming Obama is the Democratic candidate) but Hillary and Bill haven't told the Republicans anything new here. All Hillary accomplished was to disqualify herself. The Republicans will go further into attack mode because they have far more to loose than Hillary and Bill.The Clintons just took a page from an old playbook of the Republicans, who took it from the Dixicrats before them. (And this from the candidate endorsed by the AFT leadership, whose members are charged with educating children of color in many of the country's largest urban school systems?)

What may we expect from the Republican executive during the campaign season? An attack on Iran following some new phony Tonkin incident? A domestic terror attack just prior to election day? Hackable voting machines (no question mark here, they are already in place!), on top of the racial disenfranchisement that has already gone on, and who knows what additional schemes are in the pipeline to keep the Republicans in office. There are too many skeletons, too many crimes. The neo cons will do anything to escape the prison cells they so richly deserve and politicians only care about winning. It's a deadly mix.

The threat to freedom is real. We all have to come together, sound the alarms and stop McBush from setting the world on fire. Whether you are for the Democrat Obama, the Independent Nader, the Green McKinney, or any other candidate who opposes the current regime, get out there and agitate, organize, picket, vote. If you are a Unity Caucus member or a supporter of Clinton you can't afford to sit this one out. The world as you know it won't be there after four more years of Republican control of the executive branch.

Peace,
Sean Ahern
Sean, a former NYC transit worker, teaches high school in Manhattan.


Sunday, May 11, 2008

One Big Happy Family - The Roots of Rotherham

One Big Happy Edu-Family at Chancellor's New Clothes.
where the Ed Sector gang is compared to, well, a gang of the Godfather type – Eli Broad as Don Broadeleone. The speculation in the comment section that Bloomberg is Fredo has it all wrong. My vote goes to Kevin Carey.

This was an excellent follow-up piece, with more hopefully to come, on Eduwonkette's groundbreaking post on interlocking directorates on Feb. 14 where she published her web of intrigue and caused just s slight reaction among the Rotherham Ed Sector crowd.

Under Assault: Teaching in NYC: Picking up where I left off...

Under Assault: Teaching in NYC: Picking up where I left off...

More Obama from Fiorillo, Schmidt and Others

Some follow-up debate on Hillary in '12 and Obama from ICE-mail:

UPDATED THREADS AS THEY COME IN:
LAST UPDATE: SUNDAY, May 11, 10:30 PM

Michael Fiorillo, Chapter leader, writes (also posted on the ICE blog):
Hello All,

While it's impossible to underestimate the Clinton's compulsive will to power - which has a hint of the pathological to it - I find the idea of Hillary destroying Obama'a chances of defeating McCain, so that she can be a viable candidate in 2012, a bit of a stretch.

She already has a immovable bedrock core of people who intensely dislike her, for reasons valid and invalid, and a determined campaign to destroy Obama would send her negatives among Democrats and Independents off the charts. It's not that she, and certainly Bill, aren't capable of doing such a thing; it's that I think they are still sufficiently reality-based to see that it would likely forever poison the well against them. An honest cost-benefit analysis on their part would show that it would have only a remote chance of succeeding, while hampering their marketability as spokespersons for neoliberal trade policies, which seems to have been Bill's bread and butter in recent years.

As for Obama, appealing as he is on many levels, don't expect his election alone to successfully push forward a progressive, let alone radical agenda.

Please keep in mind that since his election to the senate, he has:

- campaigned for Lieberman against Ned Lamont in Connecticut.
- voted for all funding for war in Iraq.
- voted to renew the Patriot Act.
- voted for the 2005 bankruptcy bill that was virtually written by the banks and credit card companies.
- voted to limit the ability to file class action lawsuits. Hillary voted against this bill.
- supported merit pay for teachers and the expansion of charter schools

I raise these points not to imply that we should refuse to work and vote for him. I voted for him in the primary with - considering the political history of the past 35+ years - a fair degree of enthusiasm; I'll do so again in November if given the chance.

However, don't think that a lot will happen unless he is pushed hard from, I hesitate to say it, the left. Wall Street, and especially Hedgistan, is investing heavily in Obama's campaign, no doubt seeing it as venture capital investment to establish an equity stake in a possible Obama administration. Unless there is a surge of activism on many fronts, these people will continue to set the terms of debate. As teachers, we've borne some of this, as Wall Street, corporate and foundation money has flooded into education, buying research and policies that undermine public education and teacher's unions in the "marketplace of ideas."

Fortunately, there's evidence that perhaps the tectonic plates are shifting somewhat. The May First ILWU strike explicitly protesting the war in Iraq on the West Coast docks was a profound event, underreported as it was. UAW members have been on strike against American Axle since February, fighting a two-tier wage system. There have been protests on Wall Street against the predatory nature of the credit system. Here in NYC, we may be seeing some cracks appearing in BloomKlein's PR fortress.

By all means, let drive a stake through the Clinton's hearts - politically speaking, of course - and vote for Obama in November. Let's not just leave it up to him after that.

Best,
Michael Fiorillo

George Schmidt responds
5/11/08

I didn't say that Barack Obama was even a New Deal liberal. He's a University of Chicago neo-liberal, and part of the fan club of Richard M. Daley's version of "school reform." We've already reported that. And will continue to do so.

Obama is not a socialist, nor is he even a New Deal Democrat. If you read his policies closely, he is to the right of Richard M. Nixon on some things, and standing with Nixon's policies on others. If you want to know the environment he works in, read the blog of his colleagues Gary Becker (University of Chicago economics theologian) and Richard Posner (most prolific judge on the Seventh U.S. Circuit).

He has never distanced himself from Richard M. Daley on corporate "school reform" or the use of biased "standardized" tests for a "bottom line" on "school reform."

Fact is, his roots are closer to the working class in Chicago -- both his work and his in-laws -- than any candidate we've had since Bill Richardson or Dennis Kucinich. Michelle Obama comes from a union family, and until they slowly became millionaires, both Obamas were counting coupons every weekend.

I'll take him as President of the United States because at this point we're going to trash some white supremacy on the way to realizing all the class issues that have been covered up.

George N. Schmidt
Editor, Substance
www.substancenews.net

My 2-cents on Hill in '12 is that they have just about gone as far as they can and will begin to pull back to mend fences. The last comment about Obama's inability to win white working class votes may have been the last straw. The question I raise is "What is good for the Clintons?" (Have we not seen how the UFT operates under the same mantra - what is good for the leadership is more important than benefitting the members?) And that answer is an Obama loss, the bigger the better. The damage may have been done to Obama, so now they can begin to mend fences. And they are very good at that, though they may have lost the black community forever. Except in the UFT's Unity Caucus and New Action where people will sacrifice integrity for whatever they get.

Back to Norm:
I want to reiterate this point:
90% of African Americans have voted for Obama. Is there not one African American member of Unity caucus that supports Obama? A statistical impossibility.
Not a peep out of Unity or New Action or any caucus for that matter about the total support for Hillary. ICE-mail at least has been vetting the pro and anti Obama debate and the nuances of both candidates. The Unity machine has shut out all debate. On all issues.
That is part of the unhealthy death pall that surrounds this union.

Back to Michael:
Hello George and Everyone,

Though aware of Obama's U of Chi provenance, I neglected to mention it in my post. However, if anything it validates my argument and adds new levels of paradox to the situation. In terms of economics alone, his U of Chicago connections should send a chill down the spine of anyone seeking a more just and fair world.

Your post seems to imply that vitually the only reason to vote for Obama is as an attack on white supremacy, a morally and strategically necessary thing. However, even here there are complications and reasons for critical distance:

In the chanting that "Race Doesn't Matter" at Obama events, and in the explicit and implicit messages of the campaign, there is more than little suggestion of naivete and ideological pacification. Naivete can be forgiven; the realities of class and race in the US will take care of that for those who have the intellectuall honesty to be conscious. But willful pacification of America's "original sin" cannot be excused.

In a recent posting on Doug Henwood's indispensable Left Business Observer (www.
leftbusinessobserver.com), Adolph Reed is quoted, in regard to Obama's "post-racial" discourse, that with Obama there is a danger that

"...inequality could lose whatever vestigial connotation it has as a species of injustice
and be fully consolidated as the marker, on the bottom that is, of those losers who
who failed to do what the market requires of them or as a sign of their essential
inferiority."

Is an Obama presidency going to thrust the nation forward to new era of equality and justice, or will it be an excuse to "move on" and get "closure?"

As I said, I'm going to vote for the man; I'd sooner vote for hope than fear. But my personal hope is that his election will result in an citizenry aroused by increased democratic expectations on many fronts, and that it will force him and his handlers to respond righteously.

Best,
Michaell Fiorillo

From a retired African-American teacher:
Norm: I've read and criticized everything I can find on the flap over Hillary's speaks for itself statement on the so-called "white working class." Your piece on the permanent damage to Hillary's credibility with the Democrats' hard-core constituency in the Black communities and their voters is right on the money. And it is reasonable to assume that Hillary is deliberately disparaging of Obama to weaken him vis-a-vis the Republican front-runner, McCain. In this regard, Hillary has issued a brutal call for the white race to rally to support her opportunist campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, as if such white genies can be manipulated by her or any other politico once let out of the bottle. All this shit hinges on the fictitious assertion that Barack Obama is too "elite" to connect to such "hard working white people," despite the fact that Obama, grounded in his own working class roots, has been getting a remarkable degree of support from working people of all ethnic groups, against the Clintons' usually disguised white race call-out in state campaign after state campaign.
So Norm, keep on pushin'.
Critically yours,
C

Anonymous:
As delegates left last month's assembly and got outside the door, many took off their Hilary buttons immediately. White and black.

Fassella and Prisco

It all could have been avoided back in 2000.
If the UFT had endorsed then teacher, and subsequently one of the founders of ICE, Gene Prisco when he ran for Congress against Vito Fassella.
But NO! You see, the Unity machine would rather sit on its hands and help put a right winger into office than support a critic of Unity even though his policies would be better for the union and workers everywhere.

Even the NY Times saw fit to endorse Gene and he received a respectable 37% of the vote in a Republican district, where he was outspent probably 100-1. Gene sure could have used some of those UFT Phone banks.

Gene, Paul Baizerman (another ICE co-founder) and myself through Education Notes raised hell about it all at the Delegate Assembly.
The entire affair - oops, maybe I shouldn't use that word – was such an embarrassment for Randi Weingarten, she took action. She apologized profusely. Acted like it was up to the Staten Island UFT and she had little role in it. (She did the same thing in absolving herself off responsibility for the red-baiting of Kit Wainer, her 2007 opponent.)
She even formed a committee (standard operating procedure in deflecting issues). Even put Paul on it.

At that time, we still had hopes Randi would take the union in a new direction.
Shame on us.
But we learned from this incident how she operates and didn't get fooled again.
(The affair - oops - was one of the ideas that led to ICE 3 years later.)
The committee even came up with some kind of resolution (lost to history) calling for reform of the way he UFT supports candidates. Good show, old girl.

Now, Gene, a grandfather, is off on some cruise with his wife Loretta, another ICE co-founder, and may not even be aware of the Fossella fiasco. When he comes home I'm sure he will be relieved. The very idea of a love child emerging out of the evils of Washington would scare even the most pristine candidates. Maybe it's the Potomac waters.

Thank you, Randi for saving Gene from temptation. It's been worth having an anti-labor, support-Bush-on-anything member of Congress like Fossella.
If Fossella runs again and if Gene were to oppose him in 2008, guess what? Unity would do like it did in 2000.

The Unity motto: Better lice than ICE.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Coalition Against Privatization Protests GHI/HIP Privatization

Posted by CAP

On May 9th, a group of determined protesters gathered in front of the office of State Superintendent of the Insurance Eric Dinallo at 25 Beaver Street in Downtown NYC to oppose the proposed conversion of GHI & HIP to a new for-profit company. The march sent a clear message in opposition to the proposal and recommended that Superintendent Dinallo refuse to sign off on it.

Despite heavy rain and winds, demonstrators made their way from 25 Beaver to offices of HIP at 55 Water Street. Along the way, they chanted "Eric Dinallo - JUST SAY NO!" "They Say Privatize - We Say Organize!" and finished the march with a lively chant of "We'll Be Back!" Upon arrival at the HIP offices, demonstrators were able to fraternize with workers from HIP who face the prospect of termination if the conversion is approved.

One participant used a hand-held digital camera to capture the second-half of the march:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxwcEZCW2ds

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdD7udfrdl0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V5JEx3Xgo0

Protesters highlighted the negative aspects of the unregulated private health insurance system in the United States. Payments for medical care now eat up the highest percentage of household disposable income and premiums have increased by 80% from 2001-2006. The conversion (privatization) of GHI & HIP will fully expose 4 million people in NY State to the worst effects of this system. A number of speakers at the demo spoke not only against the privatization but in favor of an all-inclusive single-payer national health insurance plan.

The demonstration was the first public act of the Coalition Against Privatization and speakers at the event included representatives from the Independent Community of Educators (UFT), rank-and-file members of the Transit Workers Union Local 100, rank-and-file members of D.C. 37, the Metro New York Health Care for All Campaign, the Socialist Party USA (NYC) and Socialist Action.

The Coalition Against Privatization is planning two follow up actions. On Monday May 12th we are encouraging a phone-in/email-in to the offices of Eric Dinallo. On Friday May 23rd we are planning a march on the offices of GHI. We are also planning a joint action with the health care rights group Healthcare NOW! as part of a national initiative on June 19th.

The next meeting of the Coalition Against Privatization will held on Friday May 16th at 6:30pm at the A. J. Muste Institute, 339 Lafayette St., Buzzer #11.

For more information email noprivatization@yahoo.com or (718) 869-2279

Friday, May 9, 2008

Tag! I'm It

NYC Educator tagged me for a meme.

Okay, so I'm a little late. Retirement keeps people busy.

1. The rules of the game get posted at the beginning.
2. Each player answers the questions about themselves.
3. At the end of the post, the player then tags 5-6 people and posts their names, then goes to their blogs and leaves them a comment, letting them know they've been tagged and asking them to read your blog.
4. Let the person who tagged you know when you've posted your answer.

1) What were you doing 10 years ago?
I was finishing up my 2nd sabbatical which was a dream because I didn't have to go to school. I offered my services to the district as a computer support person for before that job existed. Six months into my sabbatical, the BOE decided to inundate the middle schools with computers and hired 2 teachers to work with them. I was urged to abandon my sabbatical and take one of the jobs, but I was having too much fun so they hired 2 other guys, one of whom I knew from the time he was a sub at my school. I did some work with them that spring but intended to go back to my school and finish out my last 2 years teaching in a self-contained class, which I hadn't done since 1985. But that June I was told a 3rd position would be created and was offered it. When my new boss told my principal, she said her car was stolen that day but the news I was leaving was worth it.

Oh yeah, and I also was getting Education Notes monthly handouts for Delegate Assemblies going.

2) 5 Things on My To Do List:
I have a massive amount of gardening and yard work to do so-
1. Curtail this blogging crap.
2. Curtail this blogging crap.
3. Curtail this blogging crap.
4. Curtail this blogging crap.
5. Curtail this blogging crap.

3) Snacks I enjoy-
Are you kidding? If it's not moving, I enjoy it. And even that's subject to negotiation.

4) Things I would do if I were a billionaire
Adopt a little red-haired orphan girl who can sing. And boy, can that kid in this peformance sing. (One weekend left to see it, so come on down.) Jeez, seeing "Annie" at the Rockaway Theater Company for the 2nd time in 2 days has me thinking I'm Daddy Warbucks.

5) Three of my bad habits
1. Sitting here doing this.
2. Breaking away from this ed stuff.
3. Eating every meal like I'm on death row.

6) 5 places I've lived:
4 places in Brooklyn for 34 years and 1 in Rockaway for 29 years. How boring.

7) 5 jobs I've had:
Teaching in various formats. That's all folks.

8)6 people I want to know more about:

I tag:
Nahhh! I'm skipping this one this time. Everyone I would tag has already done it.