U-Rating Hearing Notes from Lafayette HS

Ed Note:
Our correspondent received a UFT transfer into Lafayette in the summer of 2005, one of the last UFT transfers before the onerous contract eliminated them. She came to the school during the summer to meet the principal (who she assumed was the old one) only to find Rohloff. Her first question was, "Don't you think I should pick my own people?" - a typical response from a principal to a UFT transferee, who are all assumed to be questionable no matter what their abilities. By the 2nd week of Sept. the teacher was under attack as Rohloff clearly had made up her mind to not have a UFT transferee in her building and the teacher underwent a year of hell. The teacher had previously had 3 years of successful teaching in special ed in very difficult schools but that counts for nothing in the world of Rohloffdom and BloomKleindom.

AP [X] had been placed in the rubber room for some connection to a teacher changing a score by a point in order to allow a student to graduate. Since then, AP [X] has been demoted to a teacher as an ATR.

AP [X] was noted for following Rohloff's orders and there are reports he gave 4 U ratings last year. In the end, AP [X] got burned on the cross he helped create. But he still has a job. When chapter leader Maria Colon of JFK HS found her bosses changing piles of regent scores it was she who was sent to the rubber room for a year and a half and had her job gone after. (She is clear now and back teaching as an ATR.) Her bosses got off scot free.


Thought I'd give you the details of my hearing. Essentially, the hearing was held to fight the "U" rating I received. The true issue basically is about class management, not my knowledge of content, or my credentials as a teacher.

Hearing was to commence at 9 a.m. 6 people were present, my UFT rep, me, a DOE Chairperson, a Superintendent representative from Region 7, a rep from the Chancellor's office and an impartial (?) observer. I question the impartiality of the observer, simply because she appeared to be on very familiar terms with the representative from the Region 7 office, and exchanged a number of pleasantries that would indicate a friendship with the Superintendent's rep.

Also present (by phone connection) were: Jolanta Rohloff, Principal, Ms. Makintosh (LIS, Region 7), AP [X] ( A.P. Social Studies)

We were to commence the hearing at 9 a.m. This was not so, because there were problems in calling Lafayette ( no one picked up the phone there). The rep. from District 7 offered as a reason that this was so , because today is the first date back from Regents grading, and a new semester, so having a hearing on this particular date ( today) was very poor timing.....As for AP [X], when the question came up about where he was, so that he could be cross examined, again, all concerned ( with the exception of my UFT rep and me) had to scramble to get information on where AP [X] was located, his now exact position, how he could be reached.

We finally connected with Rohloff- when asked by my rep where AP [X] was, Rohloff told my rep that "he ( meaning AP [X]) was no longer at the school". Rohloff went on to say that she had the authority to speak for him. My rep shot that down, another long search went on to connect with AP [X]. When questioned as to his whereabouts, Rohloff continually stated that "he was not at the school." My rep refused to carry on the hearing until AP[X] was located, correctly stating that AP [X] was the one that gave me the ratings, not Rohloff, who was not in the classroom with us at the time the ratings were given. When the panel found out where AP [X] was located, the rep from the Chancellor's office inadvertently blurted out: "He's in the "rubber room"!" The impartial observer and rep from the Region both made comments that the remark was inappropriate. My UFT rep and I said nothing. Finally, a private cell phone number was obtained for AP [X], the connection was made.

The UFT rep then cross examined AP [X], Rohloff, and the LIS on the Log of Assistance, did they model lessons for me, other questions along that line of reasoning. Rohloff blatantly lied about the assistance she offered me, AP [X] did not have the appropriate documents at his disposal, the LIS admitted that she knew that Rohloff had intended to "U" rate me for the year, prior to observing me. My rep brought up the point that if the LIS knew that I was to be "U" rated, would that affect her decision? The LIS said that it did not.

My observations during the hearing- The UFT rep was very much on point - kept all participants on point through his cross examinations. When it was time for Rohloff and the LIS to question me, apparently they asked questions that drew the agreement from the other reps that their questions were not germane to the hearing. One such question from the LIS: "Describe differential learning". I was not required to answer that question, as it relates more to philosophy than the issue at hand, which apparently, was more classroom management. Another question: What outside professional development seminars did I attend, which I answered. The LIS summarized that " since I did not seek professional development on my own, it's an indication of my lack of professionalism and planning". Rohloff concurred. As you know, we attended a number of PD's on a voluntary basis that were assigned to us.

As for my summary, I deferred to the UFT rep. All other present stated:" On the record".

That was it. After the hearing, the UFT rep and I spoke. I'm of the opinion that the hearing went towards my favor, however, the UFT Rep feels that even if we "won" on points, the DOE will still doggedly stand by their initial decision.

So, what was the point? Could there be a "miracle"? Is the DOE capable of retracting a decision that clearly smacks of an injustice? As for AP [X], I'm sure that the DOE Chairman knew of his situation, as well as the Regional rep., yet, this was not brought up, either by them, or the UFT rep. I was biting my tongue to bring up the situation, but the UFT rep feels that no matter how wrong the administration is, the DOE reps at the hearing would not be swayed by bringing such a situation to light.

Bloomberg Builds Stadiums, Not Schools

from Leonie Haimson listserve

We have plenty of resources to do the job in NYC. We are not living in Afghanistan but in the richest city in the world.

We would have solved this problem long ago if the business elite sent their kids to public schools rather than sitting in box seats in Yankee stadium.

While saying there’s no room, the city is still selling off a perfectly good school building that could house 1,000 high school students for $1 in Harlem. Numerous buildings on Governor’s island that could house thousands more are sitting empty. Shea stadium is being rebuilt in its parking lot with the help of millions of dollars of city subsidies; a high school could have easily gone into that lot years ago in one of the most overcrowded areas of the city if anyone with power had pushed for this.

Few parochial schools have been leased by DOE. Meanwhile the city has a $4-5 billion surplus, like last year, and only a small percentage of these funds could leverage double the no. of schools and new seats to be created over the next four years.

See this chart: how many seats created over the last four years:

See this: twice as many seats to be created in sports stadiums than in schools over next four years:

See also from the OMB financial plan at http://www.nyc.gov/html/omb/pdf/sum1_07.pdf

p. 57.

The chart shows city spending on capital needs for schools is now and projected to be a much smaller level for the next four years than we spent during the last year of Giuliani administration, despite a higher reimbursement rate from the state (now over 50% compared to only 30% then) and a $4 billion city surplus.

Also since the year 2000, a much smaller overall percentage of the city’s capital spending overall has gone into schools – even though in 1998, the city comptroller said that this was the neediest and most underinvested portion of the city’s infrastructure.

To reduce class size in all grades, we need at least 120,000 new seats to do the job while creating only about 63,000 – with 3,000 seats actually cut from the new capital plan.

Don’t tell me it’s impossible – all it takes is cash and commitment. LA is planning to create 180,000 new seats and has only 2/3 of our enrollment and no billion dollar budget surpluses.

See also the same OMB document, p. 9 for the amount of Wall St. bonuses in the past year alone -- $25 billion.

A simple calculation on the Bloomberg mortgage calculator shows that to fund another $4 billion to double the number of seats created over the next four years – which would be sufficient to reduce class sizes in all grades, we would need to add only $288 million in annual city spending -- less than 1/3 the amount that Bloomberg now wants to cut taxes by for next year.

The sad fact is that our kids are getting shortchanged because we are stuck with an administration that doesn’t give a damn – and too many others are letting them off the hook by wrongly assuming that the situation as somehow unchangeable and outside of anyone’s ability to challenge.

Given that the state now reimburses more than 50% of everything we spend on new school construction, in order to create about 120,000 new seats over the next four years, enough to eliminate overcrowding and reduce class size in every part of the city, this would only cost about $144 million in additional city funds – only about 1/7 the amount that Bloomberg proposes to cuts taxes by next year.

If anyone still thinks we don’t have the resources to do this, explain why.

Leonie Haimson

Class Size Matters

leonie@att.net

www.classsizematters.org

To subscribe to our newletter, send an email to classsizematters-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Rigorous Class Size Debate

A debate in the comment section over whether class size should have been a priority contract demand by the UFT in the last 2 contracts appears on NYC Educator's blog based on a piece titled "Who Killed the CFE Lawsuit?" At least Science Sam represents Unity's viewpoint with arguments (wrong, of course) as opposed to name-calling. As usual, NYC Educator and his allies battle the forces of evil with vigor.

Woudn't it be wonderful if the UFT leadership allowed this to happen at the Delegate Assembly or the Executive Board? Maybe when certain parties are off to DC.

Did Washington go to Vegas before he crossed the Delaware while his troops were freezing at Valley Forge?

Randi Weingarten was at the AFT convention in Vegas for a week with her top aide Maureen Salter who is not an AFT delegate. Before she left, she declared to staffers, "We are at war with Bloomberg." But as one wag said, "We have no troops or ammunition or machinery or war plan or rations. But, man, can we write press releases."

We are at war and the general is in Vegas plotting her move out of New York. Did washington go to Vegas before he crossed the Delaware while his troops were freezing at Valley Forge?

Of course the "war"is one of those phony wars for the consumption by the members in this election period. Can't you just envision the phone call:

RW: Hello, Mike. I just wanted to let you know we are at war until the end of March when the elections are over.

MB: Ha, Ha. That should be fun. Coming with me to opening day at Yankee Stadium this year to sit in my box? The election will be over and we can be seen in public again. And by the way, we'll miss you when you go to Washington. But I might end up there myself. Then we can reform the AFT like we did the UFT.

A question was asked in a recent email:

Is Christine Quinn a deputy mayor or Council Speaker? She is smiling with the billionaire mayor because he was gracious enough to give the Council $64 million (for 51 districts) in a $55 BILLION budget. He's got that smirk on his face. "ok- now go away little girl." Where is the whistleblower bill she promised Randi last year?

In Praise of Elementary School Teachers

When I was in college in the early 60's we used to look down on the future elementary school teachers who were education majors and got stuck in all those boring ed courses. So when I found myself teaching in an elementary school in 1967, I was expecting the worst. Instead, I found a group of women who could do amazing stuff with kids that were often difficult to teach and manage. I was in awe of their ability to control the same kids that often swung from the fluorescent lights on my classroom. While these women ranged widely in age, a significant number of them were recent college grads like myself who really seemed to know their craft. Apparently, some of those ed courses had an impact. I on the other hand, came out of 6 weeks of summer training that catered to men avoiding the Vietnam War. Luckily, I had the opportunity to do a lot of team teaching with many of these women and it is from them that I began to learn these kills I needed to survive as a teacher.

I hear an awful lot of high school teachers express certain, ahem, negative attitudes towards teachers of pre-teens, especially when it relates to the lack of union activity. The self-contained classroom can be so all-enveloping, so that is not surprising. But they also tend to blame elementary school teachers for the lack of skills kids go to high school with. But in elementary schools you sometimes see 5th grade teachers blaming 4th grade teachers and so on down the line. Until you get to kindergarten and then the blame goes straight to the parents.

Here is an interesting post by Cloyd Hastings (hastingsc@cfbisd.edu). I cannot agree with his critique of high school teachers, but then again, I have never taught in a high school. But he is sure on target with much of his praise of elementary school teachers.

Originally I was a secondary teacher with a subject area master's degree (not an MS in Education either). I attended college in the late sixties and early seventies and did indeed feel that those of us trained as secondary teachers were intellectually superior to elementary education majors. Of course, this was feed by the professors from my major area of subject.

However, fourteen years as an elementary principal taught me a great deal of respect for not only the various skills we ask elementary teachers to possess, but to also to appreciate and to recognize that most of them are easily as intelligent as I once thought myself to be. In my opinion, and in the opinion of many educators, elementary teachers as a whole are vastly superior teachers compared to the average secondary teacher and hugely better than nearly every college professor. I have received extensive training in classroom observation techniques to include rater reliability. I have formally appraised both elementary and high school teachers. My opinion does have direct observable experience to support it.

The classic problem is that too many people, both outside and inside education, believe that more subject knowledge makes one a better teacher. While there is certainly some correlate between subject knowledge and good teaching, it is in no way a linear correlation in which more subject knowledge predicts better teaching.

It is my experience that many high school teachers hide much insecurity in their teaching ability behind the mask of subject knowledge. This masking of their insecurity too often causes them to reject staff development opportunities designed to improve the art of teaching. At their core they know that they are neither effective nor efficient in communicating their knowledge with the array of students that enter their classroom. Too many of them are social Darwinists believing it is their task to only "teach" to the brightest and best--defined as those students who can demonstrate increased knowledge of the subject matter when presented in the fashion the teacher delivers instruction, generally through lecture.

Most elementary teachers recognize that teaching/learning is an exchange process in which every student in their classroom is expected to have a general level of mastery of the knowledge and concepts discussed. Most elementary teachers know that this process is more of an individualized experience than a mass application. Therefore, it is the teacher's responsibility to address the various needs of her students and to adopt and adapt various instructional techniques in order to meet the diverse learning styles of the students in their care. Elementary teachers, as a whole, operate with a no child left behind attitude well before NCLB was ever conceived.

While it is true that student load size counts (a high school English teacher may have a 150 or more students throughout the day, while an elementary teacher tends to have the same 22 students all day), it is not impossible for secondary teachers to learn more about the individual students in their classrooms and then adapt their instruction based upon this knowledge. When most of us look back upon our own education, we remember best and with greater fondness the teachers who knew and motivated us at the individual level. Personally, my three most influential teachers were one middle school reading teacher, one high school English teacher and one college history professor. Each of these teachers was highly knowledgeable in their given discipline, but what made them influential was their personal intervention in my life. Yes, I learned more content from them than other teachers, but I did so because of their encouragement and personal belief in me.

The smartest person I have ever known was a friend in college who was a math major. His genius has made him a wealthy man because he has started and owns highly successful businesses based upon his conceptual knowledge of math that he has uniquely applied to meet real world needs. However, when he came to me to assist him in passing English and history, he told me that he thought I was the bright one. My point is that how we define intelligence and then label others as intelligent is far more subjective and relative than some want to believe. For my money, elementary teachers who have the emotional intelligence to reach out and change students’ life and learning every day are among this nation's very brightest and best.

"Instruction does much, but encouragement does everything."

-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Cloyd Hastings, Ed.D.

Director of Assessment & Accountability
Carrollton-Farmers Branch ISD

THE UNKINDEST CUT OF ALL

by Gary Babad, reprinted from nyceducationnews list

January 31, 2007 (AP): Flush with their success in saving $12,000,000 by cutting out numerous school bus routes in New York City, the corporate "turnaround" firm of Alvarez and Marsal has now aimed their sights at a new cost saving target: school lunches. Starting March 1, the traditional "lunch period" will be eliminated from all New York City schools, to be replaced by an as yet undisclosed academic activity period. In announcing the change, Schools Chancellor Joel Klein lauded the new plan, stating that not only would this move eliminate a cost-ineffective program that had never turned a profit, but would add time to the academic day and thus improve test scores.

Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, as well as numerous parent advocates immediately criticized the planned elimination of the lunch period. In response, Mayor Bloomberg, when reached for comment, held that "Schools are for learning, not for eating". He added that the elimination of lunch would also obviate the necessity of students carrying cell phones to school. "We all know that the only reason parents want their kids to have cell phones is to call and ask what they want for dinner. With no lunch period, they'll be so hungry they won't care what's for dinner."

In a related story, The White House announced today that in a last ditch effort to save Iraq, the Halliburton reconstruction contract would be taken over by Alvarez and Marsal. According to spokesman Tony Snow, "If we can't beat [the insurgents] militarily, we'll cut their transportation and starve them out."

Rumsfeld Named NYC School Bus Chief

February 1, 2007 (GBN News): Stung by criticism of cuts in school bus service, New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein announced today that former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will be the new head of the DOE's embattled Office of Pupil Transportation. Klein cited Rumsfeld's experience in parrying press and public allegations of insufficient planning and resources. The former Defense Secretary's legendary PR abilities were immediately tested. In a press conference, the new transportation chief was asked how he felt about children being denied bus service due to the recent cuts. In a remark eerily reminiscent of a statement he once made about Iraq, Rumsfeld responded, "You go to school with the buses you have, not the buses you'd like to have."

In a related story, Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings announced today that the Education Department will be looking into charges that the recent school bus cuts may be in violation of the No Child Left Behind act. She said in a statement that the Department was responding to reports that hundreds, if not thousands of children were "left behind" in the first two days of the new bus schedules.

Who is Killing Tenure, Klein or Weingarten?

While Joel Klein has used sturm und drang in his attack on tenure, Randi Weingaten has actually gone out and done something about it by bargaining away tenure rights guaranteed by state law. Contracts supersede the law.

Here is how tenure has been weakened

1. 3020A hearings are now heard before a single arbitrator as opposed to a three person panel that is in state law. It is more difficult to get a three person panel and there is more hope of convincing two out of three arbitrators that a teacher is right as opposed to a single arbitrator.

2. We can be suspended for up to three months and even longer without pay before a 3020A hearing based on an allegation. This provision began in the 2002 contract and was expanded in 2005.

3. For time and attendance problems, there is an expedited process where they can give us any penalty short of termination without having to go through the 3020A process. Whatever is decided can be used against us in future 3020A cases. Teachers are being pressured to sign away their tenure rights in these time and attendance hearings. This was a 2005 provision.

Once upon a time in the West ---
Until UFT crack negotiators manage to overrule courts

Spitzer's Speech - Pataki Wannabe?

The UFT has leaped to embrace Spitzer's speech with a self-congratulatory pat on the back — "Look, mommy, we endorsed him. He's our boy, etc." (Of course, they endorsed Pataki too.) I ran into a Unity Caucus chapter leader today who was spouting the line. He was so happy to say how brilliant Randi Weingarten is in her political strategy. Ooooh! Patak- er - Spitzer is calling for supervisors to be held accountable. Wow! I hated to bust his bubble to point out the rather obvious fact that they will just blame teachers and nothing will change.

Take a look at what Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters has to say.

Preview: Aside from the mention of preK, and the promise that more funds would be provided, the speech could have been given by Pataki, his predecessor.

Sorry to bring you more bad news, but Gov. Spitzer’s education speech is posted here: http://www.ny.gov/governor/keydocs/0129071_speech.html

Rather than requiring schools to provide smaller classes, this would only be one possibility in an extended menu of options that could be considered, along with a longer school day, a longer school year, after school programs, and various changes to teacher compensation, including more pay for teachers at schools whose test scores improve enough.

This is because, he said, “No single investment works for every school district, and the state should not be in the practice of dictating to every district how to run their schools.”

Interesting how smaller classes seem to “work” for all public schools in the suburbs, as well as every NYC private school -- including the one Spitzer sends his own kids to – but I guess we shouldn't assume that smaller classes would also benefit the children who attend our public schools.

In contrast, he did say that Pre-K programs will be mandated for every child within the next four years – but that the most important role for the State in grades K-12 was “to maintain and increase standards for every grade and graduation. “

He also said that he would recommend that the cap on charter schools be increased from 100 to 250.

He mentioned that districts would have to “involve parents and other stakeholders” in their school improvement plans, though he didn’t specify how.

Here is the sole grudging mention of class size in the speech:

“For example, the impact of smaller class sizes is clear to every parent and teacher, and we know that, especially in the earlier grades, fewer children in a room can make a difference. In schools where classes have grown to unmanageable proportions, where teachers have lost the ability to keep contact with children, smaller classes even in later years may also be warranted. Class size reductions should be an element of the reform program that every district should consider.”

This doesn’t sound anything like his ads – which highlighted the need for smaller classes as one of three central goals of his administration, along w/ preK and safer schools.

It also doesn’t accord with his promise that from Day One, everything changes.

Aside from the mention of preK, and the promise that more funds would be provided, the speech could have been given by Pataki, his predecessor.

My press statement follows. If you’d like to send him an email; go to http://161.11.121.121/govemail

The education proposals the Governor put forward today are an affront to all those parents who hoped he meant it that from Day One, everything changes.

While his campaign ads highlighted smaller classes as one of only three educational goals of his administration, rather than require any school to actually provide smaller classes, this would only be one of a long menu of options districts could consider.

His proposals are also contrary to the decision of NY State’s highest court -- that class sizes in our schools were too large to provide our students with their constitutional right to an adequate education.

The Court of Appeals didn’t say that our school year or school day was too short; the Court didn’t say that we needed more charter schools.

The Court said that the class sizes in NYC schools were excessive, and that there was “a meaningful correlation between the large classes in City schools and the outputs…of poor academic achievement and high dropout rates.”

There is no research showing that extended day or a longer school year will provide our children with the attention they need to succeed – just more hours spent in overcrowded classrooms.

There are also no studies indicating that increasing access to preK, without also providing acceptable class sizes and better classroom conditions in subsequent grades, will lead to higher student achievement, less teacher attrition, improved school discipline or better graduation rates.

And though the Governor said that districts should involve parents and other stakeholders in the development of their improvement plans, he didn’t specify how. Right now, the Mayor and Chancellor have no intention to allow parents to have any voice as regards the plans for these funds – even though it is our children who will continue to suffer.

If the Governor really believed that inequality in educational opportunity is “morally indefensible”, as he said today, I don’t know how he can justify the huge disparities in class size that NYC children continue to experience every day compared to students in the rest of the state.

Leonie Haimson

Class Size Matters
www.classsizematters.org

Bus Routes: Just Another Bump in the Road for Klein

The bus route fiasco showed the effectiveness of the $15 million that went to the A&M consulting firm to save money on the backs of the kids. To the DOE the inconvenience is a temporary bump in the road. But to parents and kids waiting on cold streets, that is a mountain. Bloomberg said today the city had a limited amount of money. He said this just days after giving back 1 billion in taxes. He could have taken the measly $10 million out of that.

Major New Contract Gain for UFT

The DOE and the UFT have renegotiated Article Two (“Fair Practices”). All teachers who meet the following criteria will be covered under this addendum:

Teachers who have been a lawyer AND are being groomed for the position of UFT President.

Such teachers will be able to pick the school at which they choose to work and such school shall be mandated to be no more than 10 minutes travel from where they reside.

The Chapter Leader of said school will completely insulate the teacher from reality. Said chapter leader shall be rewarded with a full-time union job upon the ascendancy to UFT President by said teacher.

This Addendum will assure that all teachers transitioning from a legal career to the Presidency of the UFT, in order to ensure that said teachers can demonstrate at least some teaching time to the membership, will teach two classes a day, one of which shall be a law class for the best students in the school. Other classes will be the best said school has to offer. All special ed and ELA students will be banned from said classes.

A compensatory time position will be available to the new teacher immediately, in lieu of further teaching, and said teacher will be given comp time for such activities as coaching the debate team.

Every six months of teaching will be counted as six years for the purpose of public relations with the members and may be used to accumulate pension credit. The UFT will continue to reimburse the DOE for the full salary of said teacher so said teacher can accrue city pension time in addition to the double pension from the UFT.

Furthermore, all teachers transitioning from a legal career to the Presidency of the UFT will be given special consideration towards accumulating the credits necessary to meet the criteria for maintaining a teaching certificate, including private special classes so said teacher does not have to face sitting through endless hours of boring ed courses elbow to elbow with said teacher's peers who are forced to attend grad school at exorbitant expense after a full day of working and might have a certain level of anger at their condition that may lead to detrimental contact with said teacher transitioning from a legal career to the Presidency of the UFT.

The UFT will form a functional chapter for all teachers meeting the criteria.
Modified from a post from the Unified Teachers Party

School Scope Column, The Wave - Jan. 26, 2007

This column is a revision of a previous post on the Klein press conference of Jan. 19 with some analysis. It will be available at www.rockawave.com 2 weeks after publication. What this all shows is that given total control of the system Klein can't effect change without calling in outside provae troups who will also fail. Call it a surge.

The Surreal World of Tweedledom and BloomKlein
by Norman Scott
Jan. 26, 2007 (revised Jan. 28 from print version)

I dragged my way over to cover what was billed as Joel Klein's round table meeting with reporters on January 19th at 3:30 pm, just a short time after Mayor Bloomberg announced yet another restructuring of the school system. (The press conference was actually held on a rectangular table, but if Klein says it’s round, all the Tweedledee apparatchiks will tell you it’s round.)

This is one weird scene with reporters sitting at the table and a gaggle of TV cameras set up. Most interesting is that the entire perimeter of the room is packed with Tweedledums who are dragged out of their offices to serve no purpose other than to be there for Joel while he faces the press. For what these people are being paid, one would at least expect them to be doing some real work. (Throughout the press conference, one could hear the buzzing of a hundred Blackberries.)

There will now be four regions that will provide support services, each headed by a veteran of the old school system: Laura Rodriguez (Region 2, Bronx), Marsha Lyles (Region 8, Brooklyn), Judy Chin (Region 3, Queens), and our own Kathy Cashin (Region 5). Note the perfect ethnic balance — Hispanic, African-American, Asian and Caucasian. (But no men.) It is not clear how the city will be divided geographically, if at all. Reports are that these super-regions will each cover the entire city.

The guts of the dis-er- reorganization is that all schools will be free — sort of — to make one of three choices. They could enter the Twilight – er -– Empowerment Zone, which frees them from all regional control and places them under the aegis of Eric Nadelstern, CEO of the Empowerment Schools Initiative (ESI). (Instead of CEO’ing, Nadelstern was forced to sit with his hands politely folded at the perimeter of the press conference.)

The ESI is Klein’s baby and he glowed with reports from principals who praised the system to the sky, just loving the supposed relief of paperwork. They also told Klein how much they loved his set of new clothes. This is clearly one direction Klein wants schools to go. Around 350 schools made that choice this past year. An interesting sidelight is that the recent NY Times article on Kathy Cashin stressed how few schools in Region 5 had joined the ESI, a tribute to her leadership.

A second choice schools have fits BloomKlein’s other strand — privatize everything that moves. External Partnership Support Organizations (PSO’s) will be bidding to support the schools and principals can make a choice of one of these private groups.

Third (and least), the four "winning" regional superintendents will be the internal Learning Support Organization (LSO’s) with each designing their own unique offerings that schools can choose from. Will they be region-based or will they all have to compete with each other and with the other options? People in the know say the latter. Schools can have up to six choices or more when you add in the laundry list of PSO’s. Oy! “Mess” is not a messy enough word to describe it all. Try: muddle, disarray, chaos, confusion, bedlam, turmoil, pandemonium.

Clearly, Klein wants schools to choose from Column A or B, but is offering Column C as a last remnant of the school system he destroyed. If I were Rodriguez, Cashin, Lyles and Chin, I wouldn’t spend too much time decorating an office.

In a photo I took at the press conference, it appears as if Christopher Cerf, one of Klein’s newest appointees, might have been napping, or as the caption says on my blog, “Christopher Cerf dreams of ways to turn the NYC school system into a subsidiary of Edison.” Cerf was the CEO of Edison Schools, a fading for-profit corporation that looks to milk money out of public schools. Hey! The stock tanked and Cerf needed a job. Where else but in BloomKleindom?

Edison was once in the forefront of the ideological struggles as the right wing attempt to dismantle public education. Under Cerf’s leadership, Edison once made a run at NYC schools but was beaten back by the UFT and parent groups. Now they have the chief Edison wolf in the henhouse. So, it was not surprising to read in the Daily News a day after the press conference:

The world's largest for-profit school operator yesterday expressed interest in being a part of the massive school reforms laid out this week. While Chancellor Joel Klein pitched his sweeping school overhaul to business leaders and educators yesterday, he said that he expected mainly universities and nonprofits to apply for the private contracts available under the reforms. He acknowledged, though, that legally he can't exclude for-profits, adding that, "I don't expect the for-profits will apply, but that's up to them. But Edison Schools - the controversial for-profit group that attempted to take over five failing city schools in 2001 - would "certainly be interested" in reviewing opportunities and seeing "whether it would be a good fit," company spokeswoman Laura Eshbaugh said yesterday.

Sure, after hiring Cerf, Klein never, ever thought of Edison applying for the PSO’s. Don’t we need to get Edison’s value up to prove the validation of the private model by having them feed at the public trough? You could actually see Klein’s nose grow as he spoke.

One of the key supposed changes in the reorganization, that is not really a change, is a mandate to scrutinize new teachers before giving them tenure. One would think that was going on all along. Most onerous was Klein’s statement that they will be judged on the way their students perform. A gym teacher commented on a blog that this would get pretty interesting for him. “Can’t get 70% of your kids to run the 100-yard dash in 10 seconds? You’re fired!”

I got to ask Klein questions about whether class size would be taken into account in all these equations. Klein preferred to put the cart before the horse and said that teacher quality came first. Hmmm, isn't it possible that a teacher who might struggle with 32 in a class could do much better with 22? Klein always talks about a data-driven system to evaluate students and teachers but always excludes the most important data of all.

A question was asked about how the reorganization will affect school budgets, which under the new system looks to be based on the real salaries of teachers in the schools rather than the current system of charging schools based on the average teacher salary. Klein danced around on this one but I take it as another attack on higher-salaried teachers.

What this is really about is to make it unappetizing for schools to keep senior teachers on the payroll. Klein claims there will be more equitability, since senior teachers tend to congregate in the better schools. Klein has always wanted to be able to move teachers around like chess pieces, early on claiming the teacher contract prevented him from putting the "better" senior teachers in the schools where they were most needed, but at the same time, his minions went on a witch-hunt to drive senior teachers out of the system. Klein often says it is better to have teacher turnover than keep senior teachers who supposedly are tired and unmotivated (and, by the way, insist on adhering to the union contract.)

This is not about teacher quality, but about saving money by driving out senior, tenured teachers (anyone with over 4 years in the system). With the UFT crumbling in the face of the onslaught (what ever happened to those age discrimination suits?) there will be no need for those buyouts they gave in the 90's. Just put enormous pressures on senior teachers 'till they retire. Add closing schools that will turn many senior teachers into subs who might have to go from school to school and become so miserable they will run from the system and Klein has a slam-dunk. (Coming soon, the DOE will pay millions for software to determine the following: Are you an ATR? Live in Staten Island? What is the furthest point in the city we can send you to sub as an incentive to take whatever flimsy buyout we offer – one of the lovely new provisions of the 2006 contract.)

The circle is complete. With this reorganization, the attack on senior and junior teachers is out in the open. While it is impossible to change the tenure law, BloomKlein aims to eliminate tenure simply by eliminating tenured teachers.

To many reporters, the entire exercise left them scratching their heads, as no one seemed to know where high schools belonged - back to the old centralization before BloomKlein or just floating out there in space. District Superintendents will be back for grades K-8, just like in the days of yore. I jokingly predicted this in a post on my blog the night before BloomKlein’s announcement. But nothing is funny in Tweedledeeland.

On my way into the press conference, I had to go through a gauntlet where my pitiful press pass from The Wave gets more scrutiny than Al Quada. I was told to wait off to the side until I could be escorted down to the pressroom. I had the honor of being attended to by a nice gentleman who turned out to be Klein's press spokesperson, David Cantor, who was interested to know what exactly it is I do. (Did my wife ask him to ask that question?) I wish I knew myself. He said he was told I have a blog and that I speak at PEP meetings - not the behavior of most reporters (thank goodness). Are they tailing me?

I informed him I was the education editor of The Wave (thanks Howie for the promotion) and cover these events for them either as a reporter (fair and balanced) or as a columnist (ranting and raving.) I asked him if there was a problem. He said he had none. "Write whatever you want," he said. And so I did.




Sweet Dreams, Chris

The REAL story behind the "Open" Market Transfer List

by a NYC teacher

Last May, I was desperate to leave my school.

I had responded to six schools that were on the "Open" Market Transfer list did not hear back from any of them.

Through friends, I heard of four possible openings at schools. When I looked, NONE of them were on the "Open" Market Transfer list.



I have been active in the system and have friends in many schools through curriculum projects that I have worked on and some email lists. This is how I found out about the openings (two via the mailing lists, one from a friend and one from an AP who is now a principal).

I talked to one principal on the phone (I had worked in a school with him when he was an AP) and he said that he would get back to me. He said I should check the "Open" Market Transfer List and that if I saw my job posted it, that it was for me and I should apply.

I talked to another principal (unfortunately at a school which involved a long commute). He said if I wanted a job, to call him and he would try to post a job for me on the OMTL.

I interviewed at the two jobs I found out about on the mailing list. One said that they were considering it. It was a very small school and I wasn't sure if the job would last.

The other school interviewed me twice. Then the principal offered me the job. He said that when I accepted he would post it.

By now, I had applied to over 12 schools on the "Open" Market transfer list and gotten no replies. And talked to four schools with openings BUT nothing posted on the OMTL.

When I accepted the offer, it was posted. I am now very happy at a new school.

Nothing done by the principals who didn't post first violates the rules of the OMTL. There is no necessity to interview anybody for the people who posted on the OMTL. The other jobs that I inquired about through the OMTL never contacted me to submit my resume.

So, do you need a new job? Call friends and contacts, send out your resume and then maybe you will get contacted!

IN FACT: I do know a few people who got jobs that they applied for on the OMTL — but most of the people who changed jobs got them they way I did.

First they applied, then they were accepted, then they accepted the job and THEN it was posted. Makes it easier for the principal — but means there is no longer system wide seniority which has led us into the ATR situation.

The OMTL reflects the death of a basic principle of unionism: the ability to transfer within a system based on seniority rather than cronyism or nepotism.

Schools in Danger of Riot Over ICE Literature

Just one of many schools in chaos after ICE literature is pulled from mail boxes for claiming Randi Weingarten doesn't look at her best when dressed in brown.

The Unity faithful were given carte blanche at a recent Unity Caucus meeting to pull opposition literature that they consider likely to incite insurrections. Included in that would be any information about Randi Weingarten that they deem a lie. For instance, if the question is raised as to exactly how long she taught full-time at Clara Barton HS -- 6 months or the 6 years she claimed recently on NY 1 (5 periods a day for 6 years) --- that would constitute material likely to incite a riot and the Unity faithful are urged to go to the principal and complain.

Speaking of riots, the New Action leaflet being circulated is inciting riotous laughter at the idea that a group claiming to be an opposition is running in the UFT elections and opposing nothing that Unity stands for -- oh, yes, they don't agree on democracy. But Randi has promised them to set up a committee. Sort of like the way the scarecrow got his brain. Or, maybe not.

Have a Sip Joel

Joel Klein test the Cool-aid before passing it on to the Tweed staff.


Most of the content originall in this post has been updated and moved to "The Surreal World of Tweedledom and BloomKlein" post of Jan. 28.

BloomKlein Inaction - Wed. Jan. 17, 2007

A preview of today's activities reported the night before they happen:

1pm at City Hall: Bloomberg announces sweeping changes in the very system he created without once saying there were any mistakes made that would require them to reorganize again. This time it will be boroughs. And when that fails -- hmmm. How about trying local districts?

Your erstwhile Wave reporter will be at this one (maybe):
3:30pm at Tweed: Klein holds press roundtable at a rectangular table, (but why quibble) as he explains the fantastic success of his reorganization of the schools has spawned a new reorganization, this time into even larger entities that will be guaranteed to deliver even less services than the old system. He will announce that he paid A&M consultants 200 million dollars to save a buck fifty. Having only 5 borough regions superintendents will save even more money, but of course their much larger staffs will balance that out. Every school will be forced into empowerment zones which will be monitored by DOE officials who will spend the day driving enormous distances from school to school. He will announce that A&M recommends the DOE hire chauffeur-driven cars for every LIS since that will save money. And since all schools will be empowerment schools, there will be no schools left in the boroughs for the new regions to manage. A&M recommended that with nothing else to do the boroughs invade parochial schools and try to mismanage them. Christopher Cerf will spearhead the movement to identify every school in an area of gentrification that can be sold off and turned into condos. A push will be made to get kids to stay home and be taught by private tutors. Klein will point to this plan from A&M as a brilliant way to reduce class size, which he will point out has no impact on learning, but at least this will shut Leonie Haimson up once and for all.

Now that we know what will happen, do I really need to cover this event?

Alliance of Concerned Teachers Endorses ICE-TJC

http://www.actuft.org/

More on Tilden from Lawhead and Schmidt

After I sent out the Wave piece (see below) I wrote on Tilden,
John Lawhead sent me this follow-up.

Thanks Norm. In all fairness Randi stayed in the building all morning meeting with teachers and the principal. Tilden people went to an info session for parents on the new schools in Gowanus last Thursday. Charlie Turner (UFT B'klyn HS Dist Rep) was there and made a good statement from the floor on the shortcomings of the decision-making process and high turnover of the small schools. Their support is belated but welcome given the long odds of reversing the phase-out. We're building for a public forum on Feb. 6.

Hands Off Tilden!

Town Hall Meeting

7:00 p.m. ~ February 6, 2007

Tilden High School Auditorium, Brooklyn

Check out the site
www.allout4tilden.com

Let me say a few words about John Lawhead. He was one of the people I met when he saw a copy of Education Notes in his mailbox at Bushwick HS in the fall of 2002 and wrote some wonderful articles for the paper. We both had major resesrvations about the high stakes testing craze, No Child Left Behind, mayoral control and many other issues. He got me involved in a national group called ACTNow headed by the wonderful Susan Ohanian, amongst others. John and I went down to Birmingham, Al to attend their conference at the World of Opportunity (The WOO) headed by the equally amazing Steve Orel (currently undergoing the battle of his life against cancer). I'll write more about this experience some other time.

In Sept. 2003, John and Sean Ahern, another teacher we met through Ed. Notes, went out for an evening of merriment and over quite a few beers, the idea of a group like ICE emerged. John has been a stalwart of the group from the very beginning (he is our webmaster) and his ideas and knowledge of the impact of national educational policies have often served as a guidepost for many of us in ICE.

John and I do not always agree on the role the UFT plays in these kinds of situations but at this point I will agree that we should give Randi Weingarten the benefit of the doubt on Tilden and see if there is real support for fighting to keep Tilen open or whether these are just public relations moves. Having John there on the spot to monitor the situation will be invaluable for all of us waiting to see exactly how the UFT plays this.

One of the people working with ACTNow is George Schmidt from Chicago who has been putting out Substance, an alternative newspaper in the teacher union for almost 30 years (Yikes! I remember seeing it back in the late 70's). Substance was the model for the expanded newsprint edition of Ed. Notes after we had a visit from George in the summer of '02. George has been our guru on mayoral control (amongst many other issues), which hit Chicago in 1995 and the very day Randi announced her support of the idea in May 2001, I put a copy of an analyis George had written in front of everyone on the UFT Exec. Bd.
George wrote this in response to my column.

George Schmidt from Chicago writes:

One of the things that confused people here until we began tracking it was that the policy of closing schools was able to be based on any "policy" they cocked up on the spot. As John points out, Tilden is in the middle of "failing" schools, so why target it? Here, they added declining enrollment and safety and security issues. They can manipulate any of the Big Three excuses -- low test scores are almost a given in the hard core inner city general high schools; you produce low enrollment by sabotaging incoming 9th graders; sabotage a school's security by cutting security or simply not providing backup. If the union doesn't call them out on it, they have a field day and every high school except the elite ones becomes a potential target. School closings haven't solved anything in Chicago.

The schools that were closed and converted to "small schools" are still in the same boat (Chicago's Bowen, Orr and South Shore high schools).

The schools that were closed and turned into elite schools are "better" because they got rid of all the kids and replaced them with college prep kids (Chicago's King High School).

And the schools that were "reconstituted" (1997) and then subject to "intervention" (2000) are now being turned over to charter operators while the charter schools that are actually serving the same populations in Chicago are facing even bigger problems than the public schools. Chicago has now reached such a large number of charters -- more than 60 --that it's critical mass time. Filling the charters with FNG teachers -- all of them in their 20s with nobody who knows anything about reality -- has become a prescription for disaster, starting with the breakdown of classroom management and then leading to massive hallway disruptions and finally gang predators both outside and inside the buildings. This is the big cover up in Chicago's charter "community" right now. (Of course, their test scores also tank when the school goes up for grabs, but they have more control over manipulating those data and do so...).

I'm going to try and stay on top of the variations on these scams that they use in New York. Thanks for reporting them.

Give my best to John and everyone. Hope to see you all soon.

Second, the story that Jeff Kaufman forwarded from Oakland also spells of a Chicago script. KIPP is a real piece of work, and seems to have major ruling class backing, including, of course, those Ivy League pundits who practice New York Times Magazine style "journalism." (Tough's recent puff piece for KIPP; 60 Minutes).

In Chicago, KIPP never wanted to really manage a public school, even under the privileged conditions of the "small schools" nonsense. KIPP originally began in Chicago doing one of four "small schools" inside a school they closed here (one of the first closed under "Renaissance"). As soon as KIPP could, they pulled out, saying their "model" (read "Business Model") was for charters. I'm doing a short piece on it calling it a bait and switch. All of these assholes are now working with long-term (five to ten year) business plans and models, since they are confident that mayoral dictatorships will continue to subsidize their stuff.

Third, are other people willing to call out Deb Meier on the entire "small schools" scam, there, here and elsewhere? I like her, but this shit has now become second only to charters as a plan to bust unions and screw veteran teachers. In one Chicago high school (DuSable) they have "small schools" which are still officially "public" and a charter in the same building!

If she were to widely denounce it (and Klonsky along the way), it might actually help. Anyone there know her well enough to demand that she do that? Otherwise, she's really aiding and abetting the attack on public schools and unions.

Hell of a Happy New Year, huh?

George Schmidt
Editor, Substance

Tilden, Lafayette and South Shore: Don’t Close Schools, Fix Them

The announced closings of 3 large Brooklyn schools in south Brooklyn has sent more shock waves through a system hit with Tsunami like effect from the changes wrought by BloomKlein. That the impact they have had is being mirrored all across the nation in urban school systems is part of the attack on public education is enough to make educators think twice about what education will look like. Or just plain get you nauseous.

BloomKlein like to portray themselves as leaders but they are actually following models set up in Chicago and San Diego. Professionally trained educators are degraded and anything public is looked at as bad and all things private are good. When a privatization disaster, like the attempt to privatize NYC custodial services, giving all kinds of people access to young children, was abandoned after years of trying to force it down people's throats, that reversal was barely noticed. The disaster perpetrated on the St. Louis school system by A&M consulting is just coming out now. Of course, Klein gave them 15 million to find savings on the backs of teachers and students in NYC. But why quibble about money when we have 35 or more in some classes. BloomKlein refuse to recognize class size as being a factor in anything related to education.

Here is The Wave column that appeared on Jan. 12 on closing schools.

Tilden, Lafayette and South Shore: Don’t Close Schools, Fix Them
by Norman Scott

Fear and loathing among teachers and parent groups continues to grow as details emerge over the DOE’s decision to close more large high schools, three of them in south Brooklyn. While initial attention was focused on Lafayette HS because of the controversial principal Jolanta Rohloff, recently Tilden HS has come up for more scrutiny. South Shore is also on the list and can Canarsie HS, the school slated to get many of the students from these schools that no one wants, be far behind?

A stir was caused when it was revealed that a Quality Review by another high-priced consultant group Klein has hired (from Britain) to make 3-day visits to most schools had given Tilden fairly high marks. Why would you expect the DOE’s right hand to know what its left hand is doing when both hands are busy picking your pockets?

John Lawhead, an ESL teacher at Tilden who had gone through the trials of the closing of his previous school, Bushwick HS, has a unique perspective on school closings and has been an outspoken critic of the decision of the DOE and its often partner in crime, the UFT. Tilden’s principal found out the school was being closed from the school’s chapter leader who was informed by the union hierarchy. "No way," was her response. Sorry, “Way.”

Principal Diane Varano, a graduate of Joel Klein’s horrendous Leadership Academy, has developed a good reputation with the entire Tilden educational community as someone who is willing to listen to people’s input, a “No-No” in the lexicon of Jack Welchian trained graduates.

Lawhead likes teaching at Tilden and has written a wonderful analysis of how the DOE can manipulate a school’s closing. (I can’t say enough about John’s guts and smarts and leadership on this issue, considering the dogs of war at the DOE and the fact that eventually, he will most likely be thrown into the cauldron of the Open Market System trying to find a job.) I’ll include some excerpts here. You can read John's full piece on my blog, http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2007/01/tilden-teacher-john-lawhead.html

“There were rumors and some ominous signs at the start of the school year, but the announcement of our closing still came as a big surprise. It's now clear at least to me that Tilden was selected as a “target” school for phase-out months before the actual announcement. There was a sudden drop in enrollment and that led to a budget reduction of several hundred thousand dollars. There were many cuts, including most of the after-school programs and the school is bracing for deep excessing of teachers in February.

“A major factor in the decline in enrollment was the loss of new 9th graders. List notice transfers from the feeder schools fell by half. The principal explained to the UFT consultation committee in mid-October that she believed ninth graders had been steered away from the school. She said she had heard reports of students applying to Tilden as their first choice and being assigned elsewhere. I later confirmed this for myself by asking my students if they knew of anything similar. For instance, a girl in one of my classes mentioned to me that a cousin of hers had put Tilden as first choice but was sent to John Dewey. They both live on East 32nd Street in East Flatbush.

“It also seemed apparent to the principal that the high school enrollment office was deliberately sending kids who were long-term absent or could not be tracked down. In October there were nearly 400 out of the building not accounted for. To make matters worse, in September all the families of Tilden's students were sent a letter declaring the school to be ‘persistently dangerous’ and giving them the opportunity to transfer their children. Of the responses sent back about 140 were granted. Families that were not happy with their transfer were told they had to wait until February to return to Tilden.

“One doesn't have to dig very far to see that the decision to close Tilden is not well grounded in publicly available data. Results from New York State's 2001 cohort analysis showed Tilden to be in the middle of a pack of other schools with regard to graduation and dropout rates [by the time they were due to graduate in 2005.] Almost everything said by the DOE and Region 6 administrators about Tilden could also be said about a dozen or so and in some aspects several dozen city high schools. The closings create drama but what escapes notice by the major media is the stark similarity of a vast number of schools with similar demographic profiles.

“The explanations from Region 6 were very vague. According to Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard in a letter to parents of December 12 the major problem was that Tilden was “not on track” to meet the city's goal of “raising the city-wide 4-year graduation rate to 70% and the 6-year graduation rate to 80%.” As you know, the claim that New York City is actual anywhere near these levels for graduation is far fetched. The city's graduation figures have been heavily padded (by counting GEDs and not counting an enormous contingent of mysterious transfers) and are way off from what the state's statistics show.

“During the faculty meeting of December 11 where the closing was announced I was amazed at the detachment they expressed. Jean-Claude Brizard declared that he wouldn't want to have his daughter attending Tilden. We were supposed to think he would favor a school only because of its data and ignore that it was 96 percent black and 20 minutes from any subway line. I asked Brizard to name a school in NYC with a demographic similar to Tilden that was doing significantly better. He named Transit Tech as a positive comparison. I asked if he could name a school more similar to us than that one and he declined.

“According to the schools' report cards (showing figures for 2004-05), at Transit Tech 15.5 percent of incoming 9th and 10th graders were over aged. For Tilden it was 50.5 percent. Three percent of Transit Tech's students were classified as recent immigrants compared with 22.9 for Tilden. In other words, the demographic similarities are rather elusive, aside from the bare fact that most of the students are minority. (And one should add it's not likely that Superintendent Brizard's daughter will be going to Transit Tech either.)

“The detachment from our reality is no surprise. The attitude from the top administrators is one of blanket condemnation. Mayor Bloomberg has suggested large schools are inherently unmanageable. There's such an indifference toward the specific challenges that schools face and it amounts to disownership. Yet, this stands in sharp contrast to the close scrutiny, the walkthroughs and reviews which schools must devote extensive time to preparing for. The Quality School Review which required three days of visits created the illusion that the evaluation would mean something.

“I think it's significant that the data was ignored but I wouldn't suggest that schools with worse evaluations should be closed instead of Tilden. Nothing good and a whole lot of damage have come from this targeting and condemnation of high schools. After the publicity of Tilden's positive rating on the School Quality Review, the UFT leadership appears to be coming around to a position that Tilden looks better on paper than they thought. If they decide to defend us that's fine but I'm afraid they will continue to take a 'devil take the hindmost' perspective without questioning why the wholesale closings are taking place and what the impact is.”

Way to go John.

Next: Randi visits Tilden – for a 15 minute photo op.
Or, how the UFT gets crotch rot from trying to straddle the fence.

Oh, Those UFT Commercials

It is always nice to see our money being shovelled into the hands of high priced consultants (Howard Wolfson's Grover Park, Hillary Clinton's people) who design commercials that have zero impact on the public for the benefit of teachers.

"Oh, please, please, please give teachers a voice. They (boo, hoo) work so hard. And by the way, reduce class size." That oughta do it. Convinced me. So why are we spending millions that could be used for things like, say, a dues rebate?

You just don't get it. This is not about the teachers. It is about the future of our maximum leader, also known on some blogs as Le Gran Fromage. That this commercial just appeared (along with the $750) during a UFT election period is not surprising. But with Le Gran assured of winning by big numbers we hear from Unity insiders that she considers anything less than 90% a defeat ("90% or Bust"). What a relief to ICE-TJC to know that all they need is 11% of the vote to win. Most leaders seem to be happy with numbers over 60% but even the 6 (out of 89) ICE-TJC members of the Ex Bd must be stamped out by the Unity rubber stamp, New Action.

I personally don't mind seeing all those millions being spent to promote the career of Le Gran Fromage. She has sacrificed so much for us all. Remember how BloomKlein supposedly sent people to look through her garbage? And all those supposed personal attacks by the likes of ---wait, that's me.

The New York stage is no longer big enough to contain her and besides, she is sick of having to deal with the Kaufmans and Eternos of this world. Imagine, one minute consulting with Hillary and an hour later dealing with Kaufman. Ugh!

We are paying teams of consultants to mull things over: run for office (first task-- learn Spanish -- bet we are paying for that too) or work for a future Democratic administration in Washington (even the Cabinet-- Labor Secty or Ed secty).

But the betting is that the next move is to AFT President in the summer of '08 at the usual Unity junket where 800 of our favorite people get to eat, drink and be merry. The only problem is that AFT Pres. is a ceremonial position with no real power, which resides on the locals, the biggest enchilada of which is Local 2, ye ole UFT. Can LGF control the UFT while AFT Pres. as Shanker did? Why not just keep both positions and leave Michael Mendel to clean up the mess? There really is no obvious successor to LGF (Feldman hand-picked and groomed LGF many years before she left to take her place) who can so consistently pull the wool over the eyes of the members so slickly as LGF. That there is no clear successor is an important sign. A strong successor would in itself be a threat. (Bring back Alan Lubin from exhile upsate in NYSUT --- Alan, who had a good rep even with the opposition, was thought by many to be a potential threat to Feldman's plans.)

And as LGF did to the old Shanker-Feldman machine, a strong successor might do unto LGF and undermine the UFT power base in the AFT. So it is not such a simple move to the AFT Presidency, which really requires a lot of schlepping around all over the country. Oh, the problems!

Let's think bigger for our LGF. How about targeting Pres. of the AFL-CIO after John Sweeney leaves? Now that idea makes the AFT Pres. as a way station an attractive idea. Sweeney might want to look into hiring a food taster.

Just don't count on LGF immediately disappearing from the NY UFT stage, too big a platform to just walk away from. Look to the Shanker model of control where the precedent of remaining Pres of both organizations will be used. Hey! Maybe we can pay for surveys of members to see how that will fly? Or better, let's pay to run commercials nationally so the entire country can get to know LGF.

I've given lots of reason to vote ICE-TJC. Keeping Kaufman-Eterno, to be joined by Bryant HS CL Sam Lazarus, a former cab driver and organizer in the taxi union, on the Exec. Bd. will cause complications for LGF who would have to explain why she cannot get 100% control of the Ex. Bd. Right now she has to miss all too many meetings and all that good food because of these louts. And think of the repercussions if LGF should get less total votes than three years ago. Oh, da pain!