Is Atlanta cheating story about race: Why aren't Michelle Rhee - and Joel Klein in handcuffs?

So let’s see how the justice system dealt with these two cases. When mostly African-American educators at poor schools in Atlanta cheat on tests, they get the book thrown at them .....

"The darkly amusing part of all this is that the harsh sentence in the Atlanta case is seen as a necessary counter to the temptation to cheat caused by the testing regime. So prosecutors devote huge amounts of resources (the district attorney called it the most complex case of his career) and judges dole out long sentences, all to keep teachers in line. No similar deterrent has been created for the industry that sells Americans the most important financial product of their entire lives. We send messages to teachers; we send bailouts to bankers.... from the ravitch blog, Did Atlanta Educators Get Equal Justice Before the Law?

Some pictures tell 5000 words

Mike Klonsky posted this photo on his blog: Taking the fall for Duncan's testing madness 

Mike posted my favorite scene from The Wire where the ex-cop turned teacher finally gets that testing is similar to police crime reporting -- juking the stats "where burglary is turned into petty theft" (https://youtu.be/_ogxZxu6cjM).

Mike references a John Merrow tweet:

Post-Atlanta convictions, you might want to recall Michelle Rhee's Reign of Error in DC, where cheating paid: http://takingnote.learningmatters.tv/?p=6232 

John had hit a stone wall in trying to make Rhee accountable. If an equivalent investigation instead of a coverup was done in Washington, I would bet a more extensive cheating scandal there just by the nature of the Rhee abusive personality.

Does anyone thing there WASN'T a whole lot of cheat' going on under KleinCott?

I got it pretty early in my career - in 1969 - the results in my 1970 4th grade class were so good I made a chart showing the equivalent of VAM -- how much they all had improved -- and went job hunting with that chart -- no one gave a shit.

But, yes, tests were high stakes for kids -- used to keep them back or put them in homogeneous classes. In some cases an decent student blew the test -- you could make the case for them but some admins didn't listen to teachers.

I'm one of those people who have no problem with cheating on high stakes tests when it's done in the interests of children.

Holding educators accountable for student test results makes sense if the tests are reasonable reflections of teacher performance. But if they are not, and if educators are being held accountable for meeting standards that are impossible to achieve, then the only way to meet fanciful goals imposed from above—according to federal law, that all children will make adequate yearly progress towards full proficiency in 2014—is to cheat, using illegal or barely legal devices. It is not surprising that educators do just that... Richard Rothstein as quoted by Ravitch

I remember a specialized pull-out teacher who one year was outraged at my principal's rigid holdover policy that refused to take teachers into account. She worked with special ed students with severe speech problems and when she found out many of them were being left back she asked me what to do. I told her I knew exactly how many answers the kids needed to pass the threshold set by the principal and that it was too late this year but in the future she should come by before I turned the papers in and if the child was within 1-3 questions of the threshold change those answers for them -- it might mean a difference of a 4.8 vs a 5.0 for the 6th grade -- 5.0 and you passed. I so trusted her judgement better than my principal. (Before she took over our old admin always consulted us and let us pretty much make the final decisions.) I hope the statute of limitations has run out.

Beverly Hall, by the way, was once Supt of District 27 (Rockaway, Howard Beach and Ozone Park) in the early 90s --- not a very happy ending for our district. (See Howie Schwach Remembers Beverly Hall, Former CSD 27).

In an important post, which I am including in full below the break,
Diane Ravitch asks: Did Atlanta Educators Get Equal Justice Before the Law?

Message from MORE: Michael Mulgrew can continue to hurl epithets at the Governor, but he and his supporters share in the blame

First thing's first: we hope you're enjoying a well-deserved Spring Break! We're thankful for union-protected holidays, and we're thankful for all of you, and your hard work over these past few months.

Undoubtedly, MORE-members' participation in fighting Governor Cuomo's initial budget proposal is something to be proud of.  It only takes a quick glance at the media to see MORE members building strong coalitions and speaking out with their communities.  But, with or without UFT leadership, we can't stop now!

The new NYState budget still contains many provisions that will hurt our profession, our schools, our students, and each other. It's time to join with parent-partners in the #OptOut movement against standardized testing, continue to build stronger chapters, and take back our UFT!

Michael Mulgrew can continue to hurl epithets at the Governor. But he and his supporters share in the blame. MORE’s vision of unionism is an organization that can inspire members with confidence, encourage more of them to become active, and organize the kind of broad fightback that can reverse the attacks on teacher unionism and public education. The Unity/UFT model of unionism features militant-sounding leaders who talk tough, but rely on their ability to make backroom deals with local and state legislators. That model just failed again. Lets join together and take back our union, before it is too late.

To read our complete statement on the budget, click here.
And, of course, we hope to see you at our next general meeting, or an upcoming local gathering.  Stay tuned, and stay in touch!

Teachers Sent to Jail in Atlanta Cheating Scandal, NYC Covers up - Do Nuhrenberg "following orders" rules apply

Remember those guys from WWII claiming they were just following orders? The Nurenberg trials punctured holes in that excuse.

So what are teachers who are given immoral or illegal orders by their supervisors to do? I always tell my whistle blowing teacher friends that they will end up coming for you or your colleagues and not the principal. In some Gulag schools, principals order teachers to cheat - and if they follow orders they come under the chopping block.

We know stories of blatant cheating here that have been covered up. In one small school in a very disadvantaged neighborhood, a school lauded by some quasi deformers, the principal ordered people to put up posters with the answers. When the school scores in a math subject were higher than one of the best high schools in the city, instead of warning bells going off, there was praise for the "miracle."

Some whistle blowers blew this all up and an investigation was supposedly begun -- but the often untenured teachers who followed orders became a target, which made one whistle blower feeling that tables had turned the wrong way. Luckily for Tweed, the principal committed a fairly minor indiscretion and Tweed used it as an excuse for removal -- though for all we know that principal is still operating somewhere in the system.

No word ever emerged publicly on the outcomes.

Here is the story on Atlanta from George in Chicago.

Eleven Atlanta teachers and administrators have been found guilty in the major test cheating scandal... Former 'Superintendent of the Year' Beverly Hall died before the trial of her subordinates began....

George N. Schmidt - April 02, 2015
Eleven of twelve Atlanta educators were convicted of racketeering after a lengthy trial following a state investigation that exposed massive cheating in Atlanta Public Schools under the administration of Beverly Hall. One of the defendants was acquitted. Twenty-one others who were indicted made plea bargains. 

http://www.substancenews.net/articles.php?section=Article&page=5552#comments

William Cala to (pathetic) NY State Legislators (Who voted for Cuomo ed disaster)

The letter that Bill Cala sent to all of the legislators who voted for the budget.

Dear Members of the Assembly who Voted for the Budget:

I am a life-long New York State educator. I have taught and have been the superintendent of school districts in urban, rural and suburban settings. I am currently in the Fairport Central Schools. Your vote for this budget language is the death of anything resembling a comprehensive, just and fair educational system in this state. I have read the language for teacher evaluation (Given the Message of Necessity, it is highly unlikely that you read the bill given its girth). It is myopic and will not ever come close to measuring the quality of a teacher. It is abusive, vindictive and serves no educational purpose. The American Statistical Association, the American Education and Research Association and two major studies (Rothstein, 2012, 2013) have demonstrated beyond any doubt that the system that New York uses and the one you have just approved are fatally flawed, do not and cannot work.

As you may have gathered by the responses you are receiving via phone calls, social media and e-mails, no one thinks this is a good idea except those of you who voted for it on the floor. This legislation is demoralizing and punitive to the people who care for and love our children every single day. Not only will the evaluation system fail miserably, but it is having a chilling effect on the entire profession. In conversations with two local colleges that certify teachers, it has been made clear that new candidates for the profession are dwindling. The University of Rochester currently has NO new candidates. Nazareth College has nine (9). This legislation puts the current fiasco of an evaluation system on steroids, subsequently further destroying any future teaching prospects.
Yesterday's column in the Albany Times-Union by LeBrun very succinctly defines the damage you have done. The use of "he" refers to the governor. You all endorsed this plan, so replace "he" with "you:"

"If it can be considered an accomplishment, he has succeeded in beating up even more on teachers, his perennial punching bag. No matter what he claims, he is encouraging more standardized testing, the juice that will be driving his newest iteration of teacher evaluations once the State Education Department and Regents get around to codifying the terms.
Too much testing is already driving students, parents and educators crazy. Odds are that there will be increased pushback from school districts, the teachers' union, parents and, at some point, legislators whose jobs will be on the line. School boards will be caught between rebelling parents and teachers and the threat of greatly diminished state aid, not to mention a tax cap that limits how much revenue can be raised locally.
In all, it is a bleak formula for creating a nurturing environment for education, with no relief in sight.
What is especially problematic is the effect Cuomo's cockamamie newest teacher evaluation plan will have on good teachers in so-called failing schools. What teacher in his or her right mind will now gamble a career on the outcome of tests given to chronically low performing students? Or on the observations of an outside evaluator who may know nothing of the challenges in that particular classroom? Equating student accomplishment with teaching ability is universally absurd because many factors contribute to how a student performs, with few of them under the teacher's control.
But that one-to-one, cause-and-effect formula the governor says exists falls apart in schools where poverty reigns, where the definition of a good teacher is probably quite different from that in a high-performing suburban school. Bottom line: troubled schools are least reliably served by standardized tests measuring student accomplishment and teaching ability.
Yet they are the very schools critics like Cuomo and his billionaire charter school buddies insist will be best served by his brand of tough love on teachers. All the while the governor has underfunded these schools more than those that perform adequately or better.
Now, there's the stuff of a Cuomo education legacy. He's become our No. 1 governor for shortchanging so-called failing schools in financial aid even with a court order hanging over the state's head to fork it over.
Cuomo's high-flying legislative ethics package, no doubt designed to impress federal prosecutor Preet Bharara, falls so far short of anything significant that it's hardly worth discussing.
The dumbest lawyer in the Legislature can see the loopholes. Let's just wait until the next legislator is indicted and then we can pick up the thread of what promises to be an eternal quest.
There's lots of legislative session left, and I suspect we have not heard the last of the governor's recently enacted education reforms. I'm told that many legislators did not have the details of what they passed, relying on talking points they were given by the leadership that proved less than accurate. Once again, rank and file legislators were largely excluded from any meaningful role in the process and had only a few hours to look at a stack of bills in that bleary closing session last Tuesday and early Wednesday morning. Once again the governor abused a message of necessity to get around a three-day aging of bills, denying proper scrutiny."
We all hoped that the Assembly would have had a backbone and stood tall against the governor's tyranny. Instead you collapsed and approved tax breaks for yachts and planes. Instead you approved $400,000 for Dean Skellos' pet projects. Instead, you chose money over common sense. Our children will suffer as a result of this legislation. No doubt our teachers and the entire public institution of education will be crushed, but our children will be collateral damage. The purposes of public education are to make good people, to make good citizens and to find and nurture the unique talents and skills of the individual learner. This legislation violates these three principles by ignoring them completely.
We are voters and we will remember each November.
William C. Cala Ed.D.
Superintendent, Fairport Central Schools

Success Academy features white & Asian kids in their ads - racism is alive & well in NY charters

And they hold outreach meetings in high priced buildings.
Eva's scam was to use black kids for as long as she needed them.

A MORE Member's Call to Arms: Let's Evaluate the UFT Leadership on a Growth Score

The UFT leadership says teachers should be okay with being evaluated by test scores as the "growth" of our students IS our job. Well providing for the members IS the job of the UFT leadership, so they should not mind being evaluated on that! 

Let's bring a resolution to the DA... All elected UFT leadership, must be evaluated by a growth score! How much did they get for the members? There would be a rubric/formula. And of course there would also be an outside "evaluator" to observe their interaction with the members and whether the members got what they needed. There could be an "analysis" of the number of requests for support and whether the UFT leaders provided the support. ... Lisa, MORE

I love this idea - VAM for the leadership. And let's include the outcome for what New Action has accomplished over the past decade as the loyal opposition.

This was sparked by Unity's Peter Goodman's la-di-da "you win some, you lose some" blog -- hey Peter - show us what was won in the past 15 years.

"Yes, the passage of many of the Cuomo initiatives was frustrating. You win some and lose some. The fight goes on. The more you are involved the more influence you have, the more familiar your face the more impact."

This is exactly the problem with Unity.....they really don't care...it does not really effect them.....they are "above it all"... "That influence" that the UFT has,  certainly "worked" for us!  Then he actually ends with an "Occupy song". 

 

Eva's shamefull admission of incompetence and inexperience -- Almost 800 students in Moskowitz Creamed Schools suspended - How many are expelled?

We’ve had third-graders offer to perform sexual acts on their teachers and fellow students using language that you’d be shocked to hear on HBO.... Eva Moskowitz in WSJ

What are they teaching kids over at Eva's schools?  
 

Recess at Success Academy Charters

 There must be a serious discipline problem in Success Academy schools.

In my 18 years of teaching self-contained grades 4-6 and a decade of cluster teaching computers (with 200 kids a year) in one of the most poverty stricken neighborhoods (East Williamsburg) I never had a child suspended and if my principal had tried I would have fought her.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Teachers Unite Slams Eva Moskowitz on Restorative ...":

Student A was suspended for four days for calling his teacher a fucking bitch. When he returned from his suspension, he called another teacher a fucking bitch. Suspensions work like a charm Eva. Expulsions work better. You should know Eva.

You think that maybe, just maybe, all those inexperienced teacher replacement parts may, just may, not have a handle on how to discipline WITHOUT suspending kids?

Last year at Success Academy Charter Schools, which I founded in New York City in 2006, we suspended 11% of the 7,000 students in our 22 schools, a rate higher than the 4% average for the city’s district schools. Yet strict discipline has not dissuaded parents. This year there were more than 20,000 student applications for 2,688 spots.  

Oh, my, Eva. Why don't you just show is that list of 20,000 people dying to get onto your plantation. 11% of your creamed kids behave poorly enough in your plantation-like institutions to require suspension? That's about 800 kids suspended in 22 schools - that's an astounding 30+ kids per school.

That reflects poor administration and inexperienced teachers.

Teachers Unite Slams Eva Moskowitz on Restorative Justice Op ed in WSJ

The teachers room at some charter schools

I imagine some ed notes readers may just side with Evil on this one. Not me. She gets to cream and still has some of the highest suspension rates in the city?

Did you see Eva Moskowitz’s ridiculous editorial saying 

restorative justice practices turn schools into “Fight Clubs”? 

Join Dignity in Schools-NY for a Twitter Action 

TODAY (Friday, April 3) at 3pm

Take a stand against this racist attack on public school students, parents,

and educators who are fighting to end the school-to-prison pipeline.

Here are some potential tweets, and feel free to create your own!

• 1000's of black stu working to end schooltoprison, 1 white woman working to make it stronger @MoskowitzEva #SuspendEva
• .@MoskowitzEva defense of suspending blk stu's in @WSJ sounds a lot like bloomberg defense of stopnfrisk #suspendEva
• .@MoskowitzEva using the fear of the black child in @WSJ op-ed to justify schooltoprison #suspendeva
• When @MoskowitzEva says #blacklivesmatter she really means not all blacklives just the ones we decide #suspendeva
• .@MoskowitzEva working hard in @WSJ op-ed to remind everyone we should fear black children #suspendeva
• .@MoskwoitzEva @WJS op-ed accidently left out thugs and animals when describing black children #suspendeva
• .@MoskowitzEva pulling out Willie Horton tactics to justify schooltoprison in @WSJ #suspendeva
• Schools not pushing out black stu's fast enough for @MoskowitzEva @WSJ #suspendeva
• .@MoskowitzEva really hates restorative justice, really likes suspending students and co-opting #blacklivesmatter #SuspendEva
• Does @MoskowitzEva know if stu A punches stu B and both stu A and B are black they don't get suspended they go to jail? #SuspendEva
•  

Turning Schools Into Fight Clubs

If student A’s fist ‘impacts’ student B, they don’t need ‘to dialogue.’ Student A needs to be disciplined.

By 

EVA S. MOSKOWITZ

April 1, 2015 7:22 p.m. ET

Eighth-graders in a Queens, N.Y., public elementary school recently organized a “fight club” for first-graders, beating up those who wouldn’t participate. This disgraceful episode comes at a time when many across the country are engaging in a misguided campaign to diminish the school discipline needed to ensure a nurturing and productive learning environment.

Leading the pack is New York City, where Mayor Bill de Blasio has proposed a disciplinary code due to take effect this month in the city’s district schools. The code is full of edu-babble. For example, the code promotes “restorative circles.” What is that? It’s a “community process for supporting those in conflict [that] brings together the three parties to a conflict—those who have acted, those directly impacted and the wider community—within an intentional systemic context, to dialogue as equals.”

This is nonsense. If student A “impacts” student B with a fist, they shouldn’t “dialogue as equals.” Student A should be disciplined.

“Collaborative problem solving” is another strategy. Teachers “articulate the adults’ concerns about the behavior and engage the student in a collaborative process,” the code explains, to “decide upon a plan of action” that is “mutually acceptable to both.”

You read that correctly. Teachers’ views on proper conduct are mere “concerns” that must be explained, and students get to decide what resolution is “acceptable” to them.

The new disciplinary code also undermines principals. Under the old code, they could give out-of-school suspensions of up to five days; only a superintendent could impose longer suspensions. Under the new code, a principal can only impose a pretend suspension in which the student receives “alternative instruction” at school. Previously such instruction would be provided at an alternative location, which is preferable.

Suspensions convey the critical message to students and parents that certain behavior is inconsistent with being a member of the school community. Pretend suspensions, in which a student is allowed to remain in the school community, do not convey that message. Many students actually feed off the attention they get for misbehaving. Keeping these students in school encourages that misbehavior.

Proponents of lax discipline claim it would benefit minority students, who are suspended at higher rates than their white peers. But minority students are also the most likely to suffer the adverse consequences of lax discipline—that is, their education is disrupted by a chaotic school environment or by violence.

This is a real concern. According to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, 4% of New York City high-school students carry a weapon to school; 2% carry a gun. Thus, in a high school of 3,000 students, 60 may carry weapons, posing an enormous risk to their classmates.

Last year at Success Academy Charter Schools, which I founded in New York City in 2006, we suspended 11% of the 7,000 students in our 22 schools, a rate higher than the 4% average for the city’s district schools. Yet strict discipline has not dissuaded parents. This year there were more than 20,000 student applications for 2,688 spots. Most of the students’ families are from disadvantaged communities where district schools are often chaotic and children do not learn.

Some critics of discipline associate it with a regimented and joyless school. But at Success Academy schools we have found that when rules are clearly established and are fairly and consistently enforced, the learning environment is purposeful and joyful. That is very important to parents—far more so than the possibility that their own child may miss a few days of school for misbehaving.

Some people find the idea of suspending young children particularly problematic. But armchair critics often have very naive ideas about some of the behavior of young children. We’ve had third-graders offer to perform sexual acts on their teachers and fellow students using language that you’d be shocked to hear on HBO. Try explaining to the churchgoing mother of a young girl why the child who propositioned her daughter in graphic language is back at school the very next day.

Discipline also helps prepare students for the real world. In that world, when you assault your co-worker or curse out your boss, you don’t get a “restorative circle,” you get fired.

Mayor de Blasio’s proposed disciplinary code is a step in the wrong direction. Lax discipline won’t strike a blow for civil rights. Instead it will perpetuate the real civil-rights violation—the woeful failure to educate the vast majority of the city’s minority children and prepare them for life’s challenges. In New York City, 143,000 children, 96% of them minorities, are trapped in failing schools where less than one in 10 students passes state exams. Anyone who wants students to succeed in life should focus on better education, not on more lax discipline.

Ms. Moskowitz is the founder and CEO of Success Academy Charter Schools.

MORE Slams Mulgrew on Budget Deal

Someone said to me that the Mulgrew crew knew all along what the outcome would be but put on a performance over the past few weeks for the benefit of the public and the membership. And as many predicted they are putting lipstick on the pig and spinning this as a victory.

MORE's Mike Schirtzer put most of this together and for those of you who do not know Mike you should. He

emerged as an activist in about his 6th year of teaching about 3 years ago and has become a force to reckon with on the UFT political scene. Mike and I see pretty much eye to eye on things especially, how we aggressively go after the UFT leadership, in ways that some of our friends are not always comfortable with - especially with my Vichy comparisons. We put as much blame on the UFT leadership as on Cuomo - if not more - and the history of UFT waffling on so many ed deform issues.

This was approved by MORE Steering, a good sign.

Posted at the MORE Caucus site where you'll notice some of the usual Unity trolls commenting.

Cuomo and Mulgrew - 
“The hedge-fund billionaires and Governor Cuomo haven’t gotten their way,” declared UFT President Michael Mulgrew in his official response to Cuomo’s budget deal on March 30. Unfortunately he is wrong. Tests will play a greater role in our evaluation, outside evaluators will be brought in, and it will now take a new teacher four years instead of three to reach tenure. It seems to us that they definitely “got their way”!

UFT members mobilized impressively to fight Governor Cuomo over this budget. This was a welcome development after the UFT leadership failed to rally against Bloomberg’s failed policies, charter schools, or for a good contract. Should we be thankful and praise our UFT leaders for leading a series of protests over the past few weeks, or do we shout from the mountain-top that the reason our union has suffered another defeat is that the Unity/UFT leadership has been unwilling and unable to launch the kind of sustained fight that could have prevented this latest setback? It is time to do the latter.


For years opposition caucuses have tried to pressure the union to change course and rally our members to defend our rights. From 2009-2014 we insisted that the UFT had to mobilize for a good contract. The Unity/UFT leadership’s strategy, however, was to wait for Michael Bloomberg to leave office. The result was a contract with wages that failed to keep up with inflation and belated back pay – yet to be delivered – without interest. When MORE raised resolutions calling for the UFT to stand against the use of standardized student tests for teacher evaluation, Mulgrew replied that tying our careers to such tests was a step forward for us. He even went on to tell us how we needed to be held accountable: “the days of walking into a school, getting your keys to the bathroom and being left alone are over” When MORE proposed that the union demand developmentally appropriate standards and curriculum, as an alternative to Common Core, and when we called for an end to high stakes testing, we were labeled as extremists. Not only has the union leadership conceded over and again to our enemies, but it has refused to involve rank and file members in any significant policy decisions. Now is the time to change that.

After years of not fighting back, after years of waiting out Bloomberg, after years of letting charters expand, in March 2015 the union leadership  finally turned to UFT members and asked them to mobilize. Many chapters responded with great demonstrations of solidarity, sign making, hands around schools, videos, meetings with local politicians, and support from the community. There are many more voices to be heard, however, and the UFT has yet to mobilize them. Many of our members continue to face principals who harass them on a regular basis. They have had their pedagogy reduced to checkbox rubrics, and have been forced  to become test prep machines. Their energy, enthusiasm, and confidence in their union are sapped. Many are fixated on the daily struggle for survival on the job and can’t think about the state or national context. It is hardly surprising that members in such schools were not quick to heed the UFT’s rallying cry. The actions, therefore, proved too weak and came too late. Albany legislators understood that UFT leaders had neither the desire nor the capacity to summon a wave of social protest strong enough to disrupt routine politics and pressure lawmakers to rebuff the Governor.

While grassroots parent groups are leading the opt-out movement, UFT leaders have done nothing to support them. Recent endorsements of the opt-out strategy from New York State United Teachers President Karen Magee and American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten are welcome. And we hope Michael Mulgrew will soon get on board. But we need more than endorsements. Our union should commit its vast resources to help build this movement of civil disobedience to starve the testing beast that is meant to destroy us.

This week Governor Cuomo won a substantial victory. As he did after negotiating the 2014 contract, our union President dressed up a defeat as a victory. We need a union leadership that is honest with the membership and can admit that we have suffered a setback. We need a union that can engage its members in strategic discussion to develop the kind of response that can raise the political heat on politicians and stop the attacks on us. Anyone who reads the national news can see the dark clouds on the horizon. Midwestern governors, such as Wisconsin’s Scott Walker, have pushed legislation designed to wipe out our bargaining rights. Governor Cuomo is slowly following in their footsteps. Next year, he will undoubtedly propose more “reforms.” The only way to fight this is to revitalize our union. It’s time to make our union democratic, allow for all voices to have representation, time to get our members involved in local actions, and support the growing opt-out campaign. We also need our union to stop embracing measures like common core and the accompanying testing madness that is degrading our profession and killing whatever joy is left in our classrooms.

The union-initiated forums we had over the last several weeks and the local action committees that were formed need to continue and grow. A brief injection of mobilization wasn’t enough to stop Cuomo this time, but if we use it as a starting point to infuse life back into our union we stand a better chance of preventing the next round of attacks. Let’s organize and campaign for real reform, such as smaller classes, wrap around services, and diverse assessments designed by teachers and used to diagnose students, not to intimidate teachers.

Last spring UFT leaders showed up to chapters to sell us a contract. They must do the same when administrators are ruining our schools and when chapter leaders are not doing their jobs. We need organizers to help members stand together and defend themselves, and to support those members who want to bring a union back to a demoralized faculty. When members in one school are under attack from an abusive principal the UFT needs to reach out to members in surrounding schools and involve them in the effort to defend their colleagues. Such actions can put meaning back into the ages old union motto, “An injury to one is an injury to all.”

Michael Mulgrew can continue to hurl epithets at the Governor. But he and his supporters share in the blame. MORE’s vision of unionism is an organization that can inspire members with confidence, encourage more of them to become active, and organize the kind of broad fightback that can reverse the attacks on teacher unionism and public education. The Unity/UFT model of unionism features militant-sounding leaders who talk tough, but rely on their ability to make backroom deals with local and state legislators. That model just failed again. Lets join together and take back our union, before it is too late.

Scare Tactics: Will schools lose federal funds if kids don’t take mandated tests? Fact vs. threat

The lies they tell to stop opt out --- and the UFT could be using its machinery to provide accurate info so the teacher above wouldn't have to come to Ed Notes and Leonie for answers.

Yesterday my principal went to her CSA meeting and was told that if your school is title one and you fall bellow 95% of students taking the test you will lose your title one funds? Sounds ridiculous to me, but do you or anyone know anything about this?... comment on CTS outs principal Frank Giordano on opt out, Farina turns tail and runs, Tisch tries to buy off affluent parents

Leonie Haimson responds
Not true. Even Ken Wagner (from State Ed Dept) says it’s not true. Eventually schools may eventually lose flexibility w/ Title I funds and have to provide more tutoring with them(which might be a good thing given the total elimination of small group instruction in the contract) but it has never happened yet.

Ask yourself - why wouldn't the UFT jump in with both feet to support opt out which is so clearly scaring the shit out of ed deformers? My response is the Vichy analogy (and don't take the ref literally - it is a figurative ref to what is in essence a collaborative puppet government.)

The UFT/AFT leadership ARE ed deformers when you dig beneath the surface and cannot abandon that ideology until things get to a point where they have to give it up -- piecemeal -- in essence they fight a rearguard action FOR the deformers. Why? Because as I've maintained over the years, Al Shanker was an original deformer and implanted that idea throughout the fabric of the union -- and I would bet Randi was chosen because she was totally in tune with that concept. (Ask me for proof -- read the Kahlenberg Shanker bio which is loaded with ed deform -- or read our review of the book - Albert Shanker: Ruthless Neo-Con.)

And Valerie Strauss at the Answer Sheet has the facts. The UFT should distribute this to every school in the city - print up copies and give them to delegates at the next DA -- you hear me Unity hack ed notes readers? Stop sitting silent while the DOE perpetuates lies. Oh, I forgot -- you support testing, common core, and using test scores to evaluate teachers.

Will schools lose federal funds if kids don’t take mandated tests? Fact vs. threat

 I’ve recently published a number of posts on the growth and impact of the standardized testing opt-out movement. As more parents choose against allowing their children to sit down for new mandated tests, the pushback from administrators is increasing in many places, with some of them threatening consequences to students who refuse to take the assessments.

Here’s a look at what is true and not true about the consequences attached to opting out from standardized testings. It was written by Monty Neill, executive director of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, known as  FairTest, a nonprofit organization that works to end the misuses of standardized testing and to ensure that evaluation of students, educators and schools is fair, open, valid and educationally sound.  of a... Valerie Strauss


By Monty Neill

Across the nation, tens of thousands of parents opted their children out of standardized tests in 2014, and this year, many more have or will do so. The testing resistance and reform movement is shaking up supporters of the test-and-punish status quo, who are fighting back.

Defenders of excessive and high-stakes testing rely on two major arguments: frequent testing is good for children and schools, and too many refusals will lead to a loss of federal funds for the students’ district.

The first claim is increasingly ineffective. Growing numbers of parents recognize that standardized exam overkill does not improve educational quality or equity. On the contrary, it pushes schools into incessant test prep mode and emotionally damages many children. Each week, more and more parents choose to protect their children and schools by refusing the tests. They don’t buy the argument that a small reduction in testing volume will solve the problem. Instead, they demand a fundamental overhaul of federal, state and district policies.

With the testing-is-good-for-you argument failing, authorities are turning to threats and bullying, often using the claim that schools will lose federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Title I funds. That threat is not based on any legal language in NCLB or in waivers states have received to avoid sanctions under the federal law. To understand why, consider the following.

The original text of NCLB, under its section on state plans, says that to make “adequate yearly progress” (AYP) a school must test 95 percent of its students. In the improvement section, the law establishes sanctions for not making AYP. The penalties apply only to schools receiving Title I funds. Nothing in the law authorizes withholding of federal aid, though up to 20 percent may be required to be diverted to other uses, including tutoring or transporting students to different schools.

However, AYP requirements are now irrelevant. More than 40 states have  been given waivers by the Obama administration from the most onerous NCLB sanctions. While AYP reporting requirements remain, waivers remove NCLB punishments from all but the lowest-scoring (“priority”) schools in a state. Thus, schools in waiver states no longer must transport or tutor. As a result, the only federal funding penalties specified in the original NCLB law have been suspended.

In states that do not have waivers, few if any schools report 100 percent of students scoring “proficient,” NCLB’s current requirement for making AYP. Since that means almost all schools face sanctions, it hardly matters if fewer than 95 percent of the students take the state exam.

FairTest is not aware of a single school that lost federal Title I funds due to low test-taking rates, including many in New York that had large numbers of opt outs last year. However, officials in a number of states still aggressively attack the opt out movement claiming that refusing to take the test puts federal aid at risk. Recently, the U.S. Department of Education  joined the battle by suggesting there is a danger of funding loss and threatening states, districts and schools.

The Department of Education’s statements appear deliberately misleading. They confound the law’s requirement that states administer a testing system that covers all children with the non-existent requirement that all children take the test. They imply that a state that allows opting out is at risk of violating NCLB, even though seven states (Utah, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington and California) already have such provisions and none has lost a penny in federal funding due to these provisions.

Assistant Education Secretary Deborah Delisle recently indicated she expected state superintendents to pressure parents to comply. She added that the Education Department could consider other federal education requirements to use against schools that do not receive Title I. But she also acknowledged the U.S. government does not intend to take funding away from programs that serve children!

Clearly, some government officials are trying to bully parents into submission (see, for example,  Illinois, New Jersey and New York). By muddying the water with inaccurate statements about the intricacies of federal law and waivers, these officials seek to reduce opt-out numbers and buy time for discredited test-and-punish schemes. Overall, however, this tactic is failing as opt-out numbers increase and more parents and students get involved in the resistance movement.

Legislation allowing parents the right to opt their children out of state and district tests is moving ahead in at least 10 states, though none are likely to pass in time to affect this spring’s testing season. Activists must continue to educate parents, the media, and officials about false federal funding cut-off claims. As public school stakeholders become more aware of disinformation campaigns, they are likely to grow angrier and more willing to fight the tests.

PS: Local advocates need to check the details of their state’s NCLB waiver, if only to combat misinformation. Parents and students must consider potentially real sanctions in those states and districts that require students to pass a test to be promoted to the next grade or graduate. In addition, schools labeled “priority” under waiver provisions do have to meet the 95 percent test participation requirement to escape that category.

FYI:

▪ The NCLB law is at http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html; specific points include:

95% requirement is at Sec. 1111(a)(2)(I)(2)(ii);*
exempt from the sanctions under NCLB is at Sec. 1116(b)(2)(A)(ii).
escalating sanctions are specified at Sec. 1116 for schools (b) and districts (c).
▪ For a FairTest fact sheet, see http://www.fairtest.org/why-you-can-boycott-testing-without-fear.

 

Why Did the AFT End Its Coca-Cola Boycott? Randi, expanding the range of collaboration...

NYU Professor Marion Nestle, author of the upcoming Soda Politics: Taking on Big Soda (and Winning) (Oxford University Press, October 2015), said Coca-Cola’s partnership with AFT “is an example of Coke’s typical strategy: partner and buy the silence of the partners on issues of labor rights and health.”....corporate crime reporter

We reported this the other day (AFT Partnering with Coca-Cola).

the use of illegal child labor in the dangerous fields of sugar cane harvesting, and Coke’s well-documented complicity in violence against union leaders in Colombia and Guatemala and the outsourcing of thousands of jobs to low-wage subcontractors

The AFT for sale. We need a union crime reporter.

In October, 2014, the American Federation of Teachers passed a resolution to boycott all Coca-Cola products.
The resolution — “Stop Coca-Cola’s Abuse of Children and Violation of Human Rights” —  called for a boycott of Coca-Cola products based upon a litany of violations of workers’ rights and child labor laws on the part of the company.

Now, just four months after that resolution was passed, the AFT executive committee, has reversed course and passed a resolution ending the boycott.
AFT officials said that the passage of the boycott resolution last year “drew an immediate reaction from the Coca-Cola Company, whose national leadership sought an opportunity to provide the American Federation of Teachers with information on actions taken in recent years to address these concerns.”
As a result of these meetings, the AFT “will collaborate with the Coca-Cola
Continue reading:
http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/news/200/aft-ends-four-month-old-coca-cola-boycott/

 Counterpunch

April 01, 2015

Collaborating With a Corporation That Preys on Children

Why Did the AFT End Its Coca-Cola Boycott?

by RUSSELL MOKHIBER

In October, 2014, the American Federation of Teachers passed a resolution to boycott all Coca-Cola products.
The resolution — “Stop Coca-Cola’s Abuse of Children and Violation of Human Rights” —  called for a boycott of Coca-Cola products based upon a litany of violations of workers’ rights and child labor laws on the part of the company.
Now, just four months after that resolution was passed, the AFT executive committee, has reversed course and passed a resolution ending the boycott.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/04/01/why-did-the-aft-end-its-coca-cola-boycott/

EIA:
AFT’s Coke Boycott Ends With a Search for Stakeholders

The first two paragraphs of the agreement are a defense of Coca Cola. The third paragraph declares that AFT has a vast network of stakeholders. Then comes the agreed-upon actions:

* Collaborate to identify local stakeholders in specific countries with expertise in education and/or addressing child labor to facilitate the child labor due diligence studies.
* Facilitate participation of AFT global affiliates Education International and Public Services International in local multi-stakeholder convenings, as needed.
* Collaborate on approaches to the remediation of child labor (when it is identified) and the advancement of school attendance, including engaging with a broader group of stakeholders, as needed.

Or, to be more concise: Find stakeholders, hold meetings (as needed), find more stakeholders (as needed).
AFT and Coke will review progress once a year, probably over the phone.
In AFT’s defense, this is about as well as this entire exercise could have ended for the union. The only other alternative was to watch the boycott peter out… assuming more than a handful of AFT members were aware of its existence in the first place.

Brilliant: Bye, Bye Public Ed (to American Pie)

I love this. Just don't have the link -- if you find it leave a comment.

[I DID NOT WRITE THIS - WISH I HAD].

Bye, Bye Public Ed 

A long, long time ago
I can still remember how teaching used to make me smile
And I knew if I had my turn
That I could make those people learn
And maybe they'd be smarter for a while

But it was March and Cuomo's cronies
Pulled the strings of New York's phonies
Bad news out on Facebook
I dared to take one more look

Who'd have blamed me if I cried
When I read about the Governor's lie
Convinced the phonies to vote AYE
The Day Public Ed Died

So bye bye Miss American Pie
Education as we know it has been hung out to dry
And them good ole boys drank in all Andy's lies
Public Ed has now truly died,
Public Ed has now truly died.

Can you read a book at all?
If you can then it's a teacher's fault
But just don't tell Cuomo...
Now do you believe in Testing Prep
Can testing be the savior yet
Or is it just another silly bet?

Well I know that you love what you do
Cause I saw you teaching in your room
You challenged all your kids
But that Test Prep looms so big

I was a hopeful teacher way back when
But that was before Andrew moved on in
And I knew I'd be out of luck
The day Public Ed died.

I started singin' bye-bye Miss American Pie
Education as we know it has been hung out to dry
Them good ole boys drank in all Andy's lies
Singin' Public Ed has now truly died
Public Ed has now truly died.

Now for so long we've been on our own
But then Andy done called in the loan
"This is not how it's going to be"
When Meryl Tisch drank the Kool-Aid punch
Believing in Andy's so-called hunch
Then the voices, well they came from you and me

Oh, and while the unions fought back hard
His Highness played his royal card
"No monies come your way,
'less you do as I say"

And while Andy read the riot act
The phonies formed a royal pact
Now we sing dirges in the dark
The Day Public Ed Died.

We are singin' bye bye Miss American Pie
Education as we know it has been hung out to dry
And them good ole boys were drank in all Andy's lies
Public Ed has now truly died.
Public Ed has now truly died.

Cuomo, NY State Legislature "Another Brick in the Wall"

One of my favorites of all time. I wanted to have my kids perform this at graduation but never got the chance.

Roger Waters wrote Another Brick In The Wall as a rebellion against errant governments, against people who have power over you, people who are wrong. As a student he felt his school was more interested in keeping the kids quiet than teaching them. "You couldn't find anybody in the world more pro-education than me. But the education I went through in boys' grammar school in the '50s was very controlling and demanded rebellion."

STCaucus made the following video mashup combining Water's message and the NYS Assembly's vote on Education Reform.

https://youtu.be/kDEc1ijppgI

Future of NYS Education

We Are More Than A Test Score

Retired School Superintendent Bill Cala on the NYState Budget Disaster

"They stick a knife in 9 inches then pull it out 6 inches and call it progress" Malcom X. It appears that those who voted yes on the NYS budget subscribe to this axiom. The rationale we are getting for supporting the budget is unnerving. "We put it in the hands of SED, (teacher evaluation and tenure) where it belongs, rather than the governor. The bill sets up a firing squad, determines who is going to get shot, how many times and when it will happen. Then they tell SED, "It's your job to pull the trigger.".. Bill Cala, retired Supt of Fairport and acting Supt of Rochester

I have been pushing for Bill to be NY State Education Commissioner since I met him a dozen years ago at NCLB/Test resistance conference set up by Susan Ohanian and others in Alabama. Check out this video of Bill

https://youtu.be/UWlSEDENTQ0



And support Bill and his wife Joanne's project in Africa.
www.joiningheartsandhands.org

CTS outs principal Frank Giordano on opt out, Farina turns tail and runs, Tisch tries to buy off affluent parents

Frank Giordano, principal of New Voices School of Academic and Creative Arts, a Brooklyn middle school, decided to take a hard line against opting out....Principal Giordano’s insistence that students can’t opt out – when he cannot, in fact, force a student to take a test – and his threatening students with sit-and-stare are unfortunately typical of the many reports we are receiving at Change the Stakes... Change the Stakes press release

Giordano is a skunk to his teachers too - bordering on being a real swine.

Before I begin let me ask all you teachers: where the hell are you on this issue? Has anyone gone to the Change the Stakes web site and shared the important info there with parents in your schools? You have just been slaughtered by the governor and your union's ineptness. Are you sitting back and waiting for a small group like CTS to do it all without you lifting a finger? Opt out is the only chance for teachers over the long run to counter what just happened. Don't just be the frog in the boiling water as they turn up the flame. Get your PTA to contact CTS. The UFT won't do any heavy lifting -- it is up to you.

FARINA DISCOURAGES PARENTS FROM OPTING

OUT—Capital’s Eliza Shapiro: “In a letter sent to city principals Wednesday, city schools chancellor Carmen Fariña asked school leaders to discourage parents from opting out of state standardized exams later this month. ‘As educators, it is our obligation to make sure we hold all students to high standards and equip them with the skills necessary to succeed in the face of all types of challenges in life, including taking tests. With this in mind, and as you lead your communities and administer this year’s state tests, I want to reiterate the value they provide to students, families, school staff and the city as a whole,’ Fariña wrote in her weekly ‘Principals' Notes’ letter. Fariña has been a stalwart supporter of the Common Core, and of the accompanying exams, throughout her tenure as chancellor. But her most recent comments on the push by some parent and teacher groups to have children refuse to take the tests were particularly direct. Last year, when asked for her opinion on opting out, Fariña stressed the importance of a parent's individual decision, then hinted that she believed parents and students should be ready to meet ‘challenges.’” [PRO] http://bit.ly/1Cx9Fku

Yes, Farina speaks out of both sides of her mouth. And to my principal readers -- you are also being screwed and backing opt out over the long run also protects you.

Merryl Tisch enters panic mode with this idea to exempt the people most likely to opt out.

Tisch: Exempt high performing schools from new evaluations

Opt out is such a major threat to ed deform, there is some backroom talk of passing a state law that might punish parents who do so -- not sure how that would work but think of vaccine laws. Don't take test = measles.

How can they justify giving charters public money but exempt them from the same rules for teacher evaluation? 

Change the Stakes took action with this press release yesterday.

Principals Continue to Spread Misinformation about Opting Out of State Tests Despite DOE Directive to Respect Parents’ Decision

New York City – Parents across the city are refusing to let their children take the annual state English Language Arts (ELA) and math tests administered to third through eighth graders, but some principals are standing in their way. Warning that opting out of the tests is either not allowed or will result in negative consequences – for the student, teachers or school – principals have left parents frustrated, fearful and confused about their rights. Although a parent guide released by the Department of Education (DOE) states, “If, after consulting with the principal, the parents still want to opt their child out of the exams, the principal should respect the parents’ decision and let them know that the school will work to the best of their ability to provide the child with an alternate educational activity (e.g., reading) during testing times,” some principals are either unaware of the policy or have decided to ignore it.

In emails and Facebook posts, at community forums and on parent list servs, countless parents across all five boroughs report that principals have told them that if their children don’t take the tests, the students will not be promoted, will have to attend summer school or will have to take an alternative exam. Parents report being warned that teachers’ evaluations will suffer if kids do not take the tests. Numerous superintendents, principals and teachers have told parents that schools will be harmed or will lose funding if too many students opt out.

None of these threats or warnings are sanctioned by the DOE and many are, in fact, contradicted by written DOE policy. Further, there is not a shred of evidence that teacher evaluations are adversely affected by opt outs. As for schools, there have been no negative repercussions for any New York schools with high test refusal rates, including those that receive Title I funds. Even state education officials acknowledge that it would take several years of large numbers of students opting out before a school could face corrective action and even then, no school would lose funding.

Frank Giordano, principal of New Voices School of Academic and Creative Arts, a Brooklyn middle school, decided to take a hard line against opting out. In a March 3rd email to parents, Principal Giordano wrote, “There is no opting out of any State Exams. These exams are required to be administered by the State Department of Education. While some schools in the city have allowed this to occur, opting out of these exams has not been sanctioned by the NYC DOE nor the Chancellor.”
When Anna Van Lenten, a parent of a 6th grader at the school, shared language from the DOE parent guide with Principal Giordano, he responded, “I am aware of the guide” and made it clear he had no intention of accommodating non-testing students. Ms. Van Lenten found his position confusing. “Frank is a devoted educator, and candid about not agreeing with the current substance and mode of administering state tests. So it is all the more surprising that he refuses to abide by the recommendation of DOE guidelines to allow opt out students to read during the tests. Instead he says they must sit in the same room as the test takers and do nothing for the duration of the two weeks of testing! Opt out students should be allowed to read or be sent to lower grades to assist in understaffed classrooms.”

Dr. Rosalina Diaz, another parent at New Voices and former co-president of the District 15 Community Education Council was outraged at the prospect of her daughter being forced to sit with nothing to do during long hours of testing. “My daughter is a child with amazing talent, intellect and holistic gifts that cannot be measured by any standardized exam, but she is also a child with special needs. She has Central Auditory Processing Disorder, a condition that often makes it difficult for her to process data and filter sensory input. Because the principal has decided that he is unwilling to provide alternative accommodations for my daughter while the other students are testing, she will have to sit and stare for 6 to 9 hours of testing over six days. This action can be understood as nothing less than abuse.”

Principal Giordano’s insistence that students can’t opt out – when he cannot, in fact, force a student to take a test – and his threatening students with sit-and-stare are unfortunately typical of the many reports we are receiving at Change the Stakes. Parents notifying principals of their decision to refuse the tests are confronting intimidation and widespread misinformation, yet most feel they have nowhere to turn. Although the DOE’s parent guide can help parents who have access to do it, principals are not required to distribute it and the document is difficult to locate online. Even when parents have the information, some still confront recalcitrant administrators. The DOE has offered no remedy to parents other than to contact their superintendents, some of whom are spreading the same misinformation as the principals they oversee. Most parents have never met their district superintendent and don’t even know who the superintendent is.

Parents have been left in an untenable situation by an education department that professes to support them but has been cowed by bruising battles with Governor Cuomo. Chancellor Fariña has sent mixed messages to educators, stating that testing should not dictate what happens in the classroom while supporting the use of test scores for up to 35 percent of teacher evaluations. Although her department has acknowledged that parents have the right to refuse the tests, it has done nothing to ensure that parents have access to this information. Nor has the chancellor publicly affirmed that the decision of families to refuse the state tests should be respected.

Reflecting on Principal Giordano’s insistence that non-testing children sit and do nothing, potentially distracting children who are taking the tests, Dr. Diaz, the New Voices parent, said that his approach should be “understood as a punitive action against those who would stand against him and assert their rights as parents to decide what is best for the well-being of their own children.” 

Many other parents expressed similar sentiments to Change the Stakes but did not want to risk being named or to name their school for fear of subjecting their child to retaliation.

Despite fear, confusion and uncertainty, NYC parents are fighting back. Hundreds, and perhaps even thousands, will refuse to let their children take the state tests as an estimated 60,000 parents statewide did a year ago. As long as politicians continue to put private interests before those of public school children, prioritize corporate profits over the judgment of professional educators, and use teachers as scapegoats to distract from their failure to address growing poverty and widespread inequality, parents will continue to use the primary leverage we have – we will refuse the state tests.

###

 Change the Stakes (changethestakes.org), a group of New York City parents and educators, promotes alternatives to high stakes-testing.

Change the Stakes to Press on Opt Out Numbers: Do Your Job

We are a volunteer-driven group focused on helping to inform parents of their rights and advancing conversations between parents, educators, policy makers, and the general public about high stakes testing. It is not our responsibility to count/hand over numbers. Have them ask DOE for a count of how many children (by grade, by district) did not take the exams, and make that info public. ‎ Have the DOE report on how many letters have been handed in (as if!). Have the DOE report how many schools have gone below 95 Percent or whatever. ... CTS steering committee member

There are many reasons why I love this group.
CTS has been getting press requests for NYC opt out numbers.

What we know is that the numbers are rising, that more and more families in more neighborhoods are getting involved, and that the policy changes to lower the stakes have not gone far enough/have not translated into a reduced emphasis on testing. We do not ask every parent we speak with or who somehow comes across our information or the DOEs FAQ to contact us for purposes of counting. It's just a fundamentally flawed request.

 

Eva's Chopping Block: Boy expelled from Harlem Success Academy charter after 'ambush' kangaroo court

Throw them back to public school

So two weeks before this year’s state reading and math exams — Megginson was frantically trying to find a public school to accept her son.

Make the scores count against Eva.

Boy, 9, expelled from Harlem charter school after an 'ambush' disciplinary hearing, mother claims

Juan Gonzalez, Daily News

Third-grader Storm McCraw was expelled from Harlem Success Academy 2 on Friday, after a disciplinary hearing that resembled a kangaroo court.
Prior to the boy’s ouster, administrators from the Success Charter Network had suspended the boy an astonishing 15 times this school year. Among the allegations against him: throwing chairs and books, kicking a principal in the leg, and biting an assistant principal. On Feb. 27, the school even called 911 and had an ambulance take him to Mount Sinai Hospital’s emergency room.
“An ambush” is how the 9-year-old’s mother, Tynetta Megginson, describes the hearing.
Success officials, she claims, have been violating her son’s rights since he failed state reading and math tests last April, prompting them to retain him in third grade for another year.
“It’s sink or swim at Success Academy,” Megginson said. “If you don’t get the lessons, you get ostracized.” She kept resisting pressure to transfer her son out, she said.
The Success network of 32 charter schools, often touted for its high test scores, produces far higher student suspension rates than regular public schools.
Network chief Eva Moskowitz has denied allegations her zero-tolerance policy pushes out low-achieving or special needs pupils.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/gonzalez-boy-expelled-harlem-charter-ambush-article-1.2169154?cid=bitly

Mercedes Schneider: Is NYSUT/AFT Support for NY Opt Out Just the 2013 AFT “Moratorium” Warmed Over?

What strikes me is Magee’s care in choosing temporal language regarding opting out: Her position on urging parents to opt out is “for now.”...AFT president Randi Weingarten is also careful to include language limiting her commitment to “this year” for opting out of New York’s Pearson tests .... Mercedes Schneider

I was thinking the other day that just maybe, with the disaster hitting at the belly of the UFT/NYSUT/AFT beast, that supporting opt out might be a way out. And we did hear some noises from NYSUT's Karen Magee and AFT's Randi Weingarten (Randi Endorses Opt Out - Will Mulgrew be next? Will UFT/AFT put skin in the game?), with lesser noises from Mulgrew.

Last night Mulgrew was on NY1 and made it clear the UFT would not really do anything to encourage opt outers but that if teachers were asked they should inform parents of their rights -- Don't ask, but do tell if they should happen to ask - Mulgrew will not lift a UFT finger to assist opt out.

Some email came in this morning indicating that there was a split between NYSUT (Karen Magee) and Mulgrew. Don't believe that for a second. She may have been pissed over being shut out but what could she expect when she accepted being a Randi/Mulgrew puppet. Remember that punch you in the face video I shot of the Mulgrew at the AFT convention? Magee spoke after him to oppose the Chicago resos. and support common core. It's a good time to look at the video again from last July - Magee speaks at the 8 minute mark.



Ken Derstine in Philly just sent me this piece from Mercedes Schneider who blogs from Louisiana  but always keeps her eyes on the tricky rhetoric coming from Randi and her minions.

Mercedes nails both Randi and Magee.

Is NYSUT/AFT Support for NY Opt Out Just the 2013 AFT “Moratorium” Warmed Over?

March 31, 2015

I have read New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) president Karen Magee’s words regarding opting out of the Pearson tests that New York students currently take in lieu of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) tests. New York is still listed as a PARCC state; however; it has contracted for other Pearson tests than the ones bearing the 2015 Pearson-PARCC label.

Magee is still a dedicated supporter of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), the conduit for this unprecedented amount of testing in grades 3 through 8 in the first place. In the March 30, 2015, Times-Union, Magee notes that she is “concerned about the botched roll out of the Common Core.” So, if the Common Core had already met Magee’s determination of adequate “roll out,” and given that unprecedented hours of testing were meant to be part of the Common Core package before there even was a “Common Core”, then what is Magee really advocating?

Her full piece is here.