Sol Stern looks for radicals under his bed

Sol Stern's "take" on the radical math conference was published in the right-wing NY Post on May 12. Rush over to Norm's Notes if you want to read it.

Sol's hunt for leftist radicals in the NYC school is pretty comical as he joins his friends in the UFT's Unity Caucus in Red-baiting. I have been pretty much in touch with the leftist scene in the UFT for over 35 years and the number of teachers on the left is minuscule. There are many more people proselytizing their religious beliefs than leftist views. (One of the teachers in my school had a cross on his classroom door and gave spelling tests with quotes from the bible.)

And what a pitiful attempt at muckraking. Like trying to brand Bloomberg and Klein as supporters of leftist causes. Only in the NY Post. And from the pen of Sol Stern.

Sol attended the math conference (see my post of May 11 on this blog). He attended Erica Litke's workshop which lasted an hour and a half. He asked questions. Where is evidence in his Post op-ed of his attendance? Apparently Erica didn't give him the smoking gun he was looking for. Ah, there is fair and balanced for you. Sol and the Post think that just using the word "radical" will get a buzz going.

I briefly attended a symposium at the conference where a high school teacher from Oakland humorously went into some detail that the word "radical" in the math world has more connotations than the way it is commonly used and is especially relevant to math teachers. Sol was in the audience but must have missed it. Soon Sol will be writing that the expression "free radicals" used in nutrition is a leftist plot to get political prisoners out of detention.

All Sol could report on after a full day of attendance was what he could glean from the conference brochure. And a few words from college professor Marilyn Frankenstein that food should be as free as air. Like free food would be a bad thing. Under Sol's and Rupert Murdoch's supposed free market economy (where anyone with money can buy the government) the air wouldn't be free either.

Amazing new technology will put computers to shame

http://www.boreme.com/boreme/funny-2007/introducing-the-book-p1.php

Taking a shot at Bloomberg's presidential balloon

On the Bloomberg presidential balloon:
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/us/politics/10mayor.html?ref=nyregion>
Times description : Visitors "will find celebratory images of the mayor holding children and smiling amid a receptive public."

Noel, a parent of a pre-k child, writes on the nyceducationnews listserve:

It's too bad that those "celebratory images" couldn't be put side by side with some decidedly less celebratory images of parents and teachers rallying together yesterday. For one short moment there was a coalition that could have made a large public statement against Bloomberg's "reforms", a statement that would have been impossible to ignore. That coalition was broken in exchange for a handful of supposed concessions that have already turned out to be empty, and the net result was a loss in morale, a loss of collective energy, and the loss of an opportunity to stop this juggernaut which is rolling through New York City and on to
Washington, furthering the reach of this disastrous "accountability" that is sucking the last life out of our democratic public education system.

I know this is just stating the obvious, but next time there's an opportunity to work together on such broad terms, if there is such an opportunity, I hope the parties involved will be a little less short-sighted and a little less easily placated.

Sol Stern and Social Justice

"Admit it! You and Joel Klein are on the same side." Thus spat Sol Stern at me when we ran into each other at the radical math conference a few weeks ago. Sol is the Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow and contributing editor to the right leaning City Journal who writes on education, solidifying his reputation with critics of unions and advocates of vouchers - the idea of offering competition to the public schools. Breaking Free: Public School Lessons and the Imperative of School Choice.

In an interview with National Review Online in 2003, Stern said, "I started writing about education in 1994 when my kids were in the New York City public schools and I realized that the teachers' union contract was a big impediment to school improvement." His experience with his kids and the fact that the union contract allowed an incompetent math teacher to transfer into the top-level Stuyvesant from the low-performing Seward Park HS seemed to be enough for Sol to make a general assessment that the contract and it's allowance of a few hundred teachers each year to take seniority transfers was a major cause of the ills of the NYC school system. (Sol has accused me of making some of this up but I've heard him tell this story numerous times.)

One would expect a natural enmity towards Sol from the teachers unions and the UFT in particular. And in the early years of Randi Weingarten's tenure she did attack Sol at various UFT functions as our enemy. And there was some sniping from some of her minions at me for writing favorably about some of Sol's ideas, though I can't seem to remember any of them offhand at this time.

I got to know Sol years ago through Education Notes when asked to be added to my mailing list and we have had a number of battles (friendly) over the years arguing education policy. He is very sharp (and funny) makes one really defend their position and my understanding of my own point of view (that it is more correct that I thought) has benefited from these discussions. I also benefited from the invitation to Sol's book release at the Harvard Club where I got a yummy meal (why wasn't I surprised to find a UFT staffer like Joe Colletti there too?). I did get to ask him a question as to why he wasn't happy that the poor kids at Seward Park HS got to benefit when that math teacher went to Stuyvesant.

I know, I know. Everyone wants to get rid of bad teachers though I don't hear the same enormous outcry about bad doctors or cops, who can actually kill you instead of causing a slight disruption in your knowledge of calculus. And the argument that bad teachers cannot be gotten rid of is part of the principals propaganda machine where they claim that - poor babies - they actually have to document why they want to remove a tenured teacher instead of being able to fire them instantly for reasons like they don't like the color of their tie. Or because they don't bow and scrape before them.

Joel Klein has made many of the same arguments on seniority as Sol. Sadly, UFT president Randi Weingarten seems to agree as she joined Klein in gutting the entire seniority structure that has protected senior teachers.

Ah! Sol, Randi and Joel on the same page. A perfect alignment of the stars. But here it gets complicated. In a perfect ideological world one would expect it to be Joel and Sol vs. Randi. But it turns out to be Randi & Sol vs. Joel. On paper at least. As you know by now, Randi plays every side against the middle and I urge you to follow my golden rule -- watch what she does, not what she says.

It seems that Joel's move to use what Sol calls the progressive curriculum have made Sol and his allies like Diane Ravitch and columnist Andy Wolfe of the right leaning NY Sun big-time critics of Joel. There are other issues, of course, but the attacks on Joel by Sol have driven Randi and Sol into the same camp. Sol even got some nice space in the NY Teacher recently. Nice. Anyone but actual teachers like people in ICE and TJC who represent 20% of the working teachers should be able to get space in our paper.

Thus we come to Sol and the radical math conference. Sol has been writing about social justice in education as it relates to teachers' beliefs and to what extent they might be imposing them on their students. The recent controversy over the Beacon School student trip to Cuba has generated much press in the NY Post and the NY Sun. When a group of NYC teachers decided to hold a math conference (www.RadicalMath.org)
they got a tremendous response from all over the nation and over 400 people registered.

Sol Stern was one of them, obviously looking to upgrade his skills so he could do his own taxes. Knowing full well they were not exactly going to get a fair and balanced viewpoint, the organizers handled Sol with aplomb.

I went to the conference as a volunteer, not a participant. I was a left-leaning teacher and I was open about presenting what I thought on issues to my classes because I felt kids want to know where you stand as a teacher. (I did try to avoid issues of religion though because the kids were involved with churches and I was an atheist, though that didn't stop me from having great holiday decorations going on in my classroom). I also tried to give them both sides but in today's world how does a teacher who is vehemently anti-war give the kids a fair presentation of that idiot - er - I mean - President Bush point of view? I and other volunteers were there to show these teachers some support for their activities.

Sol attended the Powers to the People: Unit Projects for Algebra 2 and Pre-calculus workshop with Erica Litke, a teacher at Lower East Side prep.

In this interactive session, participants will explore mathematics projects from Algebra 2 and Pre-calculus that integrate the curricular objectives of upper level mathematics with real-life social justice themes. With a focus on mathematical modeling, projects will include topics such as linear inequalities, exponential functions and logarithms, and regression analysis of a set of data. Participants will work through the mathematics of the projects, examine student work and brainstorm projects for other topics in the Algebra 2 /Precalculus curriculum.

I spoke to Erica after her workshop and she said Sol asked a few questions. Probably about the logarithms. Or maybe regression analysis. And those linear inequalities - here is a clear case of a teacher using math to influence students, always raising the issue of inequalities.

I ran into Sol after Erica's workshop. That is where he accused me of being aligned with Klein. "Joel Klein has created more schools with social justice themes than any chancellor in history," Sol said. Finally, Joel has done something right. If only he hadn't ripped the school system apart by shoving all these schools into larger ones. Well, one out of two on this one.

Well, people are waiting to see what Sol writes about his experience. Will Erica be condemned for unduly trying to influence her students? Or will Sol decide that he would rather have Erica teaching his children than that teacher who transferred into Stuyvesant?

The right wing attacks on teachers who use social justice themes in their teaching to engage their kids will continue. Instead of being defensive, they are striking back. Sally Lee of Teacher's Unite starts with her letter to the NY Sun followed by a reprint of an article in City Limits about the conference. You can read some of them at my other blog, Norm's Notes.

The top 10 reasons to hold a rally to oppose the DOE reorganization

The latest ICE leaflet handed out at the Delegate Assembly on May 9th in support of the Manhattan high school chapter leaders resolution calling for a rally. The attempt failed but garnered enough votes to make the union leadership take notice. A more complete report of the DA, which saw a Deputy Mayor and all kinds of Tweedle Dees and Dums making presentations will be posted later. Email if you want to be sent a pdf of the leaflet to share with your colleagues.

Number Ten: Privatization –
The reorganization moves us towards the privatization of public education by allowing outside companies to increasingly manage and provide resources to our schools.

Number Nine: Schools continue to be measured by high stakes tests instead of a wide range of criteria and there will be more testing than ever –
Interim assessments (more tests) every 6-8 weeks will take away teachers’ ability to assess their students’ needs, instead allowing private companies to decide what each student should be working on. Design Your Own (DYO) schools will not receive additional funding giving little incentive for schools to design their own assessments. Testing every 6 weeks that will take up even more instructional time and cost enormous sums while teachers will be bogged down in accumulating data that will be 95% useless in terms of really assisting children.

Number Eight: Continues one-way accountability –
No accountability at the top for massive errors at Tweed as everyone is assessed but themselves. Grading system of accountability dumps the buck on principals. The accountability will likely force many principals to make decisions based on not getting a D or F rather than what is best for children’s education. Principals’ jobs will be based on test scores (85%) and only a little on graduation rates (and fake ones at that). This will give even more incentive to principals to punish teachers who they feel are not testing to the max and suspend, discharge, transfer, and get rid of low-performing students any way they can to bring up their grades and save their jobs (and get a nice bonus too boot.) None of those outcomes – and none of the missing students – will be measured anywhere on the school report cards.

Number Seven: Reorganization without evaluating effects of previous reorganizations –
The 3rd reorganization since Bloomberg/Klein took over the schools with no assessment of previous reforms will lead to another round of disruption. Instead of lowering class size and instituting programs that will improve conditions in the classroom, money will continue to be diverted into the hands of privateers lining up to feed at the public trough. From districts to regions and back to districts – U-turns – but this time with the twist that each school is an island that will be judged (harshly) based on a narrow range of data accumulated in a heartless and inhumane way by an $80 million boondoggle contract given to IBM for the Aramis system that even computer experts denigrate. As parent leader Tim Johnson and historian Diane Ravitch have said recently, when you make constant U-turns you end up going around in circles.

Number Six: Small schools push at expense of large schools –
Small schools will still not be equipped to handle the most at-risk students – causing overcrowding in the large schools and their subsequent closings. While creating small schools is not a bad thing, no matter how many small schools are opened there can never be enough to make a dent on the massive numbers of students in NYC. Solutions to problems in large schools must be found, which involves making an investment in hiring enough teachers, guidance counselors, social workers, etc to create a small school atmosphere in the context of a large school.

Number Five: Special education needs continue to be ignored –
Who will be responsible for making sure students are provided with services? Where do parents go to get assistance?

Number Four: The reorganization actually expands the bureaucracy –
Does anyone believe bureaucracy is being cut to put money into classrooms? Check the number of superintendents and deputies and other bureaucrats under this reorganization and it is clear that when added to the enormous cost of their multiple experiments and unproven schemes, these claims are no more than outright lies. As are the claims that schools will not be micromanaged.

Number Three: Parent/teacher surveys distributed without mention of class size, high stakes testing, and other crucial issues – and will be minimally taken into account.

Number Two: Funding formula even as modified harms higher salaried teachers –
There is no advantage for schools to hire teachers other than those at the low end of the salary scale. Full impact of Fair Funding Plan is only postponed. Even the modification of the fair student funding formula is a big loss for teachers with mid-high salaries as well as teachers at the top salary levels. A 6th year teacher contacted us with the following question: He doesn't want to leave his school just yet, but might one day. He has all his credits and is making around 60K. Beginning to understand the implications of the revisions in the budget and the UFT basic agreement to accept the Tweed plan (the school keeps the money if a senior teacher leaves but the principal can hire a new teacher and can use the difference to buy a 50 inch plasma TV for his office) he realizes that as his salary goes much higher, he is in danger of being stuck at his school for eternity. Or until a new administration comes in and decides to harass high salaried teachers no matter how good they are. Or if his school closes. With the UFT-touted Open Market System and all its flaws, the teacher is in a quandary. "Do you think I should make my move now even though I don't want to?" he asks. “What worries me is when I am in the salary range where they can get 2 new teachers to replace me.” Answer: He should be worried. Very worried.

And the Number ONE reason to hold a rally to oppose the DOE reorganization -–

MAYORAL CONTROL MUST BE FOUGHT AND HOLDING A RALLY AT THIS TIME WILL SEND A POWERFUL MESSAGE TO THE 3 P’S – PUBLIC, PRESS, AND POLITICIANS.

What do we gain from holding a rally?
The Mayor got what he wanted: to kill the momentum building toward the May 9th rally – a rally that would have exposed the Bloomberg/Klein “reforms” as a sham to the entire nation with little support among parents and teachers just as Bloomberg is gearing up to run for president on the backs of the educational community. For the first time we could have wrung real concessions and killed or severely maimed most of the schemes to turn the public schools into a playground for privateers. The Mayor put some crumbs on the table and unfortunately, they were snapped up.

Educators, Parents, Community Activists, and Concerned Friends of Public Education will have a chance to demonstrate the deep-seated opposition to the Bloomberg/Klein destructive overhaul of the system. It will build momentum towards an end of mayoral control. An opportunity was lost when May 9th was cancelled. Can we still reverse the reorganization? We have nothing to lose.

Reorganization + Co-optation does not equal Education

Pippin in her first starring role

A few years ago, Mark Rosenhaft, my video partner in crime [NorMark Productions] and I decided to create a short video in an afternoon using whatever was at hand. Unfortunately for her, Pippin walked by. Before long we had dragged out every tchotchke my wife had. It wasn't easy arranging that storm, but when you know the right people....

{No animal was harmed in making this video, but we lost a few tchotchke's}

Chapter leaders call on UFT to hold rally to fight reorgnization

Actions will take place at Delegate Assembly on Wed. May 9th.

There will be an informal picket line before the UFT delegate assembly this Wednesday, May 9th by teachers who will make the point that the DOE reorganization needs a stronger fight than the UFT has been willing to put up. Following that, a group of Manhattan high school chapter leaders who voted 18-1 to call for a rally in the next few weeks to fight the reorganization will attempt to get the delegates to approve a rally. TJC and ICE members and supporters will be present to provide support to the effort. If the delegates turn down or deflect the motion, or if Randi Weingarten filibusters to such an extent that the motion doesn't get to the floor – one of the above is expected considering the operation of the Unity machine– there is a possibility the group might call a rally on its own.

Below is an article published in The Chief on the actions of the chapter leaders.

Still Angry With Mayor: UFT H.S. Group Seeks Protest
By MEREDITH KOLODNER

The Chief
May 11, 2007

The United Federation of Teachers Manhattan high school chapter chairs will try to convince this week's delegates assembly to hold a rally against Mayor Bloomberg's school reorganization in place of the May 9 protest it voted to cancel.

An April 24 emergency delegates meeting voted overwhelmingly to cancel the long-planned rally in the face of an agreement that pushed back some of the provisions of Mr. Bloomberg's restructuring plan that UFT officials found most onerous.

'Delegates Out of Touch'
But the following day, the chapter chairs voted 18 to 1 to bring a resolution to the May 9 delegates assembly to call for a new protest against aspects they still find objectionable, including measures they believe will punish senior Teachers and those that would privatize some school functions.

"Our view is that the delegates' vote doesn't reflect what Teachers in our schools feel," said Skip Delano, the chapter chair at Brandeis High School. "A lot of us based in the schools have seen a lot of anger about the reorganization and the attitude towards Teachers, and we think people should be given the opportunity to show that anger to the powers that be and to the public."

The chapter leaders were not convinced that the agreement between the Mayor, the UFT and a coalition of community and parents' groups addressed one of their key concerns: a disincentive to employ higher-paid Teachers.

Currently, when schools hire Teachers, their overall school budget is not affected by whether she or he is making the starting salary or the maximum.

Unchanged for 2 Years
The Mayor's original plan would have forced Principals to take into account a Teacher's salary when drawing up their budgets. In that case, if a Teacher making $90,000 applied for an open position, UFT leaders believed there would have been a disincentive to hire him or her over a Teacher making $45,000.

The new agreement assures that for the next two years, if a Teacher leaves a school, the school will not lose any of that Teacher's salary.

The chapter chairs point out, however, that a Teacher's salary is still part of the hiring decision, because even though the school may not lose a $90,000 salary, a Principal is allowed to hire a new Teacher at $50,000 and spend the extra money on something else, such as another Teacher or classroom supplies.

Conversely, if a $90,000 Teacher applies for a position vacated by a $50,000 Teacher, the Principal will have to supplement the higher salary using other school funds.

Tenure Worries
The chapter chairs also thought the tenure deal, which holds off changes for at least one year, was not secure enough. And many objected to private nonprofit groups playing a role in advising schools on instruction, professional development and other aspects of school administration.

"Not everybody agrees that the agreement is so hot," said Ellen Schweitzer, the chapter chair at Stuyvesant High School, "and if you look at the resolution [canceling the rally] that the delegate assembly did pass, it said we needed to continue to fight for changes in the reorganization plan that is flawed."

Ms. Schweitzer is part of the opposition caucus Teachers for a Just Contract. Three of the 18 chapter chairs who voted to push for a new rally are TJC members.

The Manhattan high school chapter leaders had been planning a protest against the re-organization before the May 9 rally was announced. After the protest was made public, they switched their efforts over to turning people out for that rally.

When they met on April 25, the group discussed the possibility of once again calling their own rally, but decided it would be better to seek the participation of the entire union. They are reaching out to other chapter leaders around the city in an effort to gather support for their resolution.

Parent Objections
They are also planning to bring other Teachers who support their resolution to lobby delegates entering the May 9 meeting.

A couple of groups representing parents and those opposed to high-stakes testing, who were part of the Put the Public Back in Public Education coalition but did not sign on to the agreement, are holding a press conference on that day at City Hall to express their ongoing opposition to the reorganization. Most of the major players in the coalition were included in the overall deal and will not be participating in the press conference. [NOTE: This has been cancelled since the publication of this article].

Many of the Manhattan high school chapter chairs were frustrated with what they saw as too little time devoted to discussing the May 9 rally cancellation at the delegates assembly meeting. They complained about an hour-and-15-minute-speech by President Randi Weingarten, with about 20 minutes allotted for delegates to discuss before they voted.

Mr. Delano emphasized that the resolution was not designed to attack the union leadership, but instead was part of the process of relating what members in their schools were saying. "We are a small voice," he said, "but since we have a contrary view, we felt we needed to bring it back to the union and let our colleagues know what we're hearing."

The national backlash on Bloomberg’s candidacy for presidency has begun

.....from the conservative magazine, The Weekly Standard. Read the article and a few points Leonie Haimson added at Norm's Notes.

Klein explains the funding formula to principals

Someone explain exactly how the deal Weingarten made on school funding helps teachers in any way. Hey! She's a "responsible" union leader. Responsible to BloomKlein. No wonder Rod Paige has such affection for her.

Principals’ Weekly
April 24, 2007
Chancellor’s Memo [excerpt]

Empowering Principals to Drive Student Achievement

Under the new system, to a significantly greater degree than in the past, you will control your budget, and your choices about hiring will affect your school’s purchasing power. Fair Student Funding will no longer fund schools based on the salaries of teachers newly hired into those schools. This is already the rule when it comes to teachers hired with categorical funds or teachers not covered in the “base teacher” allocation. We’re just extending the principle on a gradual basis.

Here’s an example. Right now, if you are choosing between a $60,000 teacher and an $80,000 teacher for a base position, your decision changes your school budget. Absent other salary changes or attrition, your budget goes $20,000 higher if you choose the $80,000 teacher; you are effectively held harmless for the increased salary costs. Under Fair Student Funding, that won’t be true anymore. Your funding next year will not depend on the hiring decisions you make this year. Whatever your school’s funding level, you will need to spend your dollars as best you can to drive achievement for your students. If you choose to hire more costly teachers and their costs do not fit into your new budget, you’ll be responsible for those costs.

To take another example, if a teacher with a $75,000 salary resigns at the end of the current school year, then other things being equal, you will be able to hire a replacement teacher earning roughly $75,000 without driving up your school’s real costs next year. If you hire a teacher earning significantly less, then next year, you will have additional funds to spend on other student needs. If you hire a teacher earning significantly more, you will not be held harmless for the additional costs next year. Whatever the salary of your hire, you will also be accountable for funding any raises that teacher receives in future years.
In order to help you make better judgments about the costs of your hires, applications you receive through the Open Market system will contain information about the forecasted 2008 salary of the applicant. Applications through the Recruitment Management System will contain applicants’ answers to questions about their teaching history and education experience.

Some principals have expressed concern that the new system will shift the focus to money, not learning, and discourage the hiring of successful senior teachers. I disagree. In our new accountability system, principals are accountable for student achievement. You can never pocket financial “savings”; you can only spend resources on other supports that you believe will better serve your students. High-quality experienced teachers can contribute enormously to student achievement and mentoring younger teachers.

Teacher Certification

There's a good debate going on at NYC Educator's blog about teacher certification. The issue of alternative certification programs like the Teaching Fellows and Teach for America has come up. I won't repeat the arguments made. Go on over and check it out. Many teachers coming out of traditional programs also say they were not prepared for the reality of teaching in NYC. I have generally disparaged traditional programs because I have felt on the job training was more important than coursework. But when the guinea pigs are kids....

Someone commented that you wouldn't want a pilot who wasn't certified. But pilot certification is not all about studying flying in classrooms but mostly about spending many hours in the air with an experienced pilot. I would apply the same to teaching. Pay people a decent salary to assist in classrooms and really teach, not observe for at least a year and ask them to perform before getting certified to go solo instead of that stupid video tape system that you send in after many years of teaching.

Practically, the only way to fill classrooms is with non-traditional programs given the realities of the system. In a rational system, teachers would spend a year or two as interns or assistant teachers. That is what goes in in may of the private schools in NYC.

I came into teaching through a non-traditional route -- The Intensive Teacher Training Program (ITTP) an early version of the Teaching Fellows in the mid-late 60's. I wish I had a little more of a traditional background but I'm not sure how much difference it would have made. I was part of a group of about 15 new teachers in my elementary school, PS 16 in Williamsburg. That was after the 1967 contract which increased preps and reduced class size. I learned on the job. There was a full-time teacher trainer in my school named Elaine Troll who was an immense help and I learned a lot from her. Most of my colleagues resented the hell out of her (I saw the pettiness of teachers very early) but I saw her as a lifeline to a drowning man.

Ironically, because we had extra teachers I lucked out in that I was an ATR in my school for a year and a half by subbing in a different class every day. It was hell. But I also saw how all the teachers organized their classes and began to develop techniques for control. I also had days where they assigned me to assist other teachers and I got to see them at work. Coming to teaching with little respect for "ed" majors - which elementary school training required - I developed tremendous respect for their skills. Whether these skills were due to their training or practical experience, I couldn't tell but my instinct even as a new teacher was that it was due to the latter.

Grad school draft deferments were still not being honored so I had to teach a 2nd year and I was still a sub - the administration had no confidence in me and I don't blame them. But in the middle of that 2nd year a teacher left and I asked to take over because I was bored subbing and wanted more of a challenge. A new principal (a political appointee who proved to be incompetent) had come in a month before so I sort of had a new start (one of his first incompetent acts) even though the AP - Dr. Norman Jehrenberg- did not care for me and was against my getting the class.

After the first week Dr. Jehrenberg stopped me in the hall suggested I go back to subbing. I asked for another week. If I had accepted his offer I would have probably left teaching after that year. But something clicked with the kids that 2nd week and I became a real teacher. Elaine Troll was often in my class assisting and giving positive criticism, not writing me up. Jehrenberg became a big supporter. I remember once telling him I was having trouble getting a math concept across. He showed up shortly after and did the lesson for me. When I needed a child removed he was there within 10 minutes. It got to the point that I just had to take out the paper to write the note and the kid giving me trouble behaved. That was support.

Gaining the respect of this tough, hard-bitten (much despised by some teachers, but also incredibly supportive - to teachers he respected) guy was one of the greatest achievements of my professional life. Unfortunately he transferred after the school year because he rightly felt he should have been made the principal. (I hear he went on to become a principal in Queens somewhere and I bet there are teachers out there who either loved or hated him.) Not having him around (Troll left soon after too) was instrumental in my decision to transfer at the end of my 3rd year and that turned out to be a wise choice. Following the subsequent history of the school right up to today, I can say that since the political decision around Jan. 1969 not to make Jehrenberg principal, PS 16 has still not recovered.

I learned more between Feb. and June 1969 than in any course. But there are few Norman Jehrenbergs and Elaine Trolls around today, if any.

Who Are the Real Criminals?

I vote for people like Giuliani, Mort Zuckerman, Christie Todd Whitman and their allies who tried to suppress Daily News reporter Juan Gonzalez' reports that it was unhealthy, especially for children, to go back to lower Manhattan so soon after 9/11, even labeling Gonzalez' reports a "sick Halloween joke." These are people who should be paraded in front of TV cameras with their coats over their heads. Get the gory details at Norm's Notes.

Bloomberg vision: a childless New York

Mayor Blomberg, the education mayor, has found a solution to all educational problems that have bedeviled urban areas for decades: a city without children. As posted by Leonie Haimson on her listserve, it is clear that if you build it without schools, they will come. Well, at least the childless will come. What to do when children arrive and there are no neighborhood schools to send them to? Easy. Find a private school or move to the suburbs.

Selections of Leonie Haimson post on nyceducationnews listerve. Read the full post at Norm's Notes.

Even though the Mayor assembled a task force on sustainability to come up w/ suggestions for how to serve a population that is expected to grow by a million by 2030, to deal w/ the increased pressure on housing, energy, sewage, transportation, parks, playgrounds, and other municipal services, the task force was explicitly instructed to leave out schools from their considerations – even though most of our schools are already overcrowded and are likely to become even more so in the future.

See the report of plaNYC 2030 at http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/home/home.shtml

A 6th Year Teacher.....

....I was speaking to at the radical math conference this past weekend has the following problem:

He doesn't want to leave his school yet but might one day. He has all his credits and is going to be making around 60 thousand soon.

As he began to understand the implications of the revisions in the budget and the UFT basic agreement to accept the Tweed plan (which means the school keeps the money if a senior teacher leaves but the principal doesn't have to use it to hire a teacher of the same salary and can use it instead to buy a 50 inch plasma for his office) he realizes that as his salary goes much higher, he is in danger of being stuck at his school for eternity. Of course with the UFT-touted Open Market System (go over to the UFT blog Edwize to see NYC Educator and Jonathan rake the Leo Casey tout sheet over the coals) the teacher is in a quandary.

"Do you think I should make my move now even though I don't want to," he asked?

He is in his late 20's and politically active but hasn't been active in the union. He attended the surreal Delegate Assembly in April and couldn't believe the Randi zoo. He asked questions about the UFT. As events hit home an inconsequential union enters the consciousness.

There were over 400 people at the radical math conference from around the nation but many from NYC. If even a portion of them get active in the UFT.....

Tim Johnson on Mayoral Control and More

Leonie Haimson Blasts Mayor/Tweed on Parent Survey

Yesterday, those of who participated in the focus groups asked other parents to return the new parent survey, due to be distributed this week, with its questions crossed out and a suggested statement on the top saying “We want real parent input – as well as smaller classes, less testing, and new priorities at Tweed to deal with the real problems in our schools.” (You should of course feel free to substitute whatever sentence you like about what our schools really need to improve.)

In response, the Mayor said at his news conference yesterday that those of those of us who are calling for real parent input into our schools only want to “subvert the system and sit around and complain and not make it any better.”

I want to make it perfectly clear that none of us who participated in the focus groups were ever out to “subvert the system.” We volunteered in good faith and spent many hours over two days, to provide realistic and relevant suggestions so that this $25 million survey could be meaningful and useful. We were explicitly told that our suggestions would determine the questions asked. Instead, most of the issues we cared about were censored, for no apparent reason.

Moreover, those who signed our letter include members of CECs, President’s councils and other active, engaged parents who work hard every day, for no pay and little recognition to try to make this system work better for our kids. Not one of them can be called a slacker or a complainer. We were all extremely disappointed that our input was ignored – and that specific questions were omitted about class size, overcrowding, the amount of testing and test prep in our schools, the curriculum, the principal’s attitude towards parent input and involvement, and/or whether there is a functional School Leadership Team in the school.

Read Leonie's full report with links at:
http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/

The Phonics Police Are Out in Force

In today's NY Sun Andy Wolf echoes Sol Stern and makes the phonics argument again while heaping praise on Region 5's Kathy Cashin, one of the 4 Regional Superintendents to survive the DOE reorganization. They must each peddle their wares to get schools to sign up and the rumor is that Cashin is not doing as well as the others.

Wolf wrote: "This Bush Education Reform Really Works, by Sol Stern, appeared in the Winter, 2007 issue of City Journal." Sol should ask the NY Teacher, the mouthpiece of the UFT leadership, to reprint his praise for Bush since they so generously gave him space in this week's issue.

I always believed in teaching phonics and did so with the materials at hand - a workbook and some chalk and a few charts. I did not need Reading First to do it.

When I had the top 6th grade class where all kids could read there was no point and the administration left that to me to decide. Kids that can read at a certain level do not need phonics. Those who can't decipher words do. Teachers have always made those basic decisions. Just as Klein took the decision out of the hands of teachers, aren't Wolf and Stern doing the same thing?

When my school changed principals in 1979 she made us use the kind of traditional materials Wolf is talking about and it did not make all that much of a difference. One of the ironies is that she brought in a book salesperson to talk to us about some of these materials back in the early 80's at a scintillating monthly faculty conference. The saleswoman's name? Kathy Cashin.

The Manhattan Institute will be hosting a praisefest - er - luncheon for the Reading First success story, with Ed. Sect'y Margaret Spellings in New York on May 22. Now that would be a good place for a rally against idiocy. I haven't received my invitation yet. All I can say is, "phuque"!

You can find the complete article
Applying the LaGuardia Principle to our Schools
BY ANDREW WOLF
April 30, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/53492

Why is the UFT promoting BloomKlein's survey....

... while parent groups are urging a boycott...

Was a question asked by a middle school Chapter Leader who received this from the UFT hierarchy:

Dear Colleagues:

Today at a press conference the mayor and chancellor announced that School Learning Environment Surveys will be distributed this week to all teachers, to all parents and all secondary schools students.
According to the Department of Education, the surveys “are designed to reflect the experiences, attitudes and perceptions of members of our school communities and to provide information each school can use to improve its learning environment. Survey results will be reported to schools this summer and factored into the new school progress report in the fall.” The survey is anonymous and voluntary.

UFT President Randi Weingarten said these surveys “are an important first step in engaging parents, educators and students in the most important conversation we can have:
How to improve our children’s education. There was a good process for drafting the survey and we had a lot of good input., particularly in the area of protecting confidentiality.
“The information that will be gathered is extremely important – but it must be valued and addressed. Listening is good; we have to make sure our voices are heard.”

Therefore, we urge you to tell the teachers in your school that it is very important to take the time to complete the survey.

Michael Mendel
Director of Staff

A high school Chapter Leader just called upset that the survey is going to be used to gather negative information about schools to be used against them.

Remember Weingarten's own words about the Tweedledees:
"They are assholes not to be trusted." So why trust them and support them on this? Especially when parent groups have said that important questions like those related to class size were deliberately left off the survey. I have always questioned whether Weingarten's commitment to class size was true or just part of a PR blitz to be used for political advantage. Why? Because she ignored the issue when we raised it in Ed. Notes and at the DA until fairly recently. True commitment to class size would mean when it is left off the survey, you do not tell people to cooperate.

New BloomKlein speak...

One of the arguments Joel Klein made as part of the new organization when the issue of parent and teacher input was raised was that parents wouldeb surveyed to get a true picture of a school instead of measuring them just by test scores. More bullshit as usual, as witnessed by the following chain of events:

"When one parent speaks, the DOE refuses to listen; when many parents speak, we ask our expensive consultants to mount an empty PR offensive."

Thanks to Leonie Haimson for the reworking of the Tweed propaganda to reflect what it really is all about and the following post:

Today, the DoE will send home a survey for parents to fill out about their schools. Last week, parents who participated in the focus groups supposed to help design the survey sent a letter of protest to Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, pointing out how their concerns were censored from the survey. (see below letter dated April 26 - reprinted at Norm's Notes.) Now, we call on parents to boycott the survey, cross out the questions listed, and before sending it back., write “We want real parent input – as well as smaller classes, less testing, and new priorities at Tweed to deal with the real problems in our schools.”

Class size, testing and test prep, the principal’s attitude towards parents, and the functioning of school leadership teams were all key issues for our groups and the other focus groups whose results we were shown. Despite this fact, none of these issues will have individual questions dedicated to them in survey.

Read all the details at norm's notes.

UFT Committee on District Reps Meets Under Cone of Silence

Why would we expect anything different from the UFT. Look at the make-up of the committee - mostly UFT employees. The lone voices of the opposition are ICE's James Eterno (who has supported the election of DR's by chapter leaders) and ACT's Joe Mudgett (who supports the election of DR's by the members in the districts, which is where I stand). But their voices have been muzzled. There will probably be some compromise floated that will try to get them to sign on and then Unity can say how democracy is in force. Since it all is taking place behind closed doors, they will not be able to float proposals for public comment and we won't know or have any input into the process. Is this a way to conduct business? Should the opposition be part of this for fear of being accused by Unity of not taking part in the "democratic" process?

Some democratic process. I have been in a distinct minority in ICE in my position that we should not waste our time on these bogus UFT committees. Better to use the time to organize people. Want to force change in the way district reps are elected? Organize a mass petition campaign. If people in the schools don't give a shit then don't waste your time on committees. If they do give a shit, then Unity will be forced to take notice. But by any means do not get involved in the process under a cone of silence.

I say, "who cares what they say?" No one is listening out there as proven by the almost 80% of the people who did not vote in the election. I view Unity the way Weingarten views the people at Tweed: assholes who can't be trusted. Does the opposition play the same game as Weingarten who wants a seat at Tweed's table so desperately by hungering for the same thing- a seat at Unity's table?

The time for engaging in the "democratic process" of the UFT is coming to an end from my point of view. 8 members of the Ex Bd are from New Action with 9% of the vote of working teachers and 0 members of the Ex Bd come from ICE/TJC with 20% of the vote. What better illustrates the point? Read my account of the last DA. Weingarten has so subverted the process at the DA where even the "New Motion" period, the lone opportunity to take an action, has been played around with so as to make it practically unusable. In all the years of Shanker and Feldman this was one thing they never touched. But then again they weren't' afraid that something might come up they couldn't deal with. Unlike Weingarten who must control every aspect. Look how she came apart when Nick Licari (see my account in the April 26 post) started heckling her at the last DA? What Nick did should be more of a model for action. Let them vilify the opposition. No one is listening. And if they were, I bet a lot of rank and file teachers would be very happy to see some action being taken other than the same old thing.

Posted on the UTP blog:

Say It Ain't So, Joe!

The following has been lifted from Top Secret UFT files and memos, as well as the ACT site.

District Representative Selection Process Committee Convenes

The Committee to investigate the selection process for District Representatives, established by resolution of the Delegate Assembly on November 8, 2006, met for the first time on March 26, 2007. Considering that it took four months to convene the initial meeting, I don't expect any quick resolution to this important issue. Nonetheless, I will attempt the Herculean task of convincing my fellow committee members that a completely transparent democratic process, where members directly elect their representatives, is in the best interests of the union.

Why Herculean? Consider the makeup of the committee: chaired by President Weingarten (who has been appointing district reps since 2003), members include Secretary/Chief of Staff, Mike Mendel, Senior Assistant to the President, Jeff Zahler, a half dozen district reps, at least one borough representative, one or two other UFT officials, a gentleman from New Action, James Eterno from ICE, and myself, representing the Alliance of Concerned Teachers and the viewpoint of the Unified Teachers Party.

Much as I would like to share the details of the deliberations with my readers, I cannot, since all committee members were asked to keep the proceedings in strictest confidence. But rest assured I will publish a complete report once the committee has completed its mission and the cone of silence is lifted.


2 Comments -

Anonymous said...

Gee, sounds like you and James are a bit outnumbered. Want to bet the results have already been decided?
4/25/2007 7:13 PM

NYC Educator said...

How is it working under that cone of silence? I've heard talk it's defective.

Ricky....

.... was in my 6th grade class in the late 70's. He was one of only 6 boys in the class - there were 18 girls - it made discipline issues so easy and I had a wonderful year. Ricky was enormously popular with the girls - good looking, charming beyond his years, liked by teachers even though he was not an angel, somewhat rambunctious. I had a great relationship with his mom. I haven't thought of Ricky in years but was reminded of him when today's NY Times had an article about a boy who died after some horseplay in the playground that led to his being in the head by another boy, one of his friends.

The summer after Ricky graduated, he was playing with his best friend, another student at my school. They were fixing up their bikes. One of them had a flat. They were using a knife to cut a patch. They started horsing around with the knife. Ricky started tossing it from hand to hand like they did in movies - remember West Side Story - saying something like "come on Chickie." His friend came at him, tripped over the bike and fell into the knife and died.

I heard this version from Ricky himself when he came back to school to visit the next year. It was considered an accident and Ricky as far as I know never had to face the criminal justice system. His family was a supportive one (thank goodness) and the other boy's family from what I heard did not call for Ricky's head and may have even forgiven him. Maybe it was Ricky's charm. Or maybe times were just different then.

The last time I saw Ricky he was in his late 20's and doing well in life. Still charming, the same old little boy smile. No obvious scars left from a few moments of foolish folly when he was 11 years old.