The UFT is an Urban Myth; Coogee Beach Will be One Soon

We've been invaded by aliens - visitors for the next month from Western Australia. Is now safe for people in the Fremantle/Perth area to come out of their homes.

Dan (native of the Williamsburg houses in Brooklyn) and Robyn (Fremantle native) Scherr have descended on the New York area. They are these activists back home fighting to save their local and beloved Coogee beach from the actions of developers. While here, they should hang out with the gang from "Develop, Don't Destroy" who are fighting Bruce Ratner and his Atlantic Yards. It is funny how developers destroying neighborhoods in Brooklyn or Coogie use the same tactics against even small groups of critics: branding them anti-development, professional protesters, outside agitators, a vocal minority, etc, etc. They monitor every word of criticism, no matter how mild, very closely and use their PR machines to respond instantly.

It all sounds so familiar for those of us who are active in the UFT opposition movement. The Unity Caucus machine spends an amazing amount of time and energy to monitor the opposition. Witness our blog posting here on excessing and how a high UFT official felt the need to respond within hours of it's posting. (Hey! It was a Saturday in the summer. Shouldn't he be planning how to sell off more of the contract?) Why do people who have overwhelming power, money, and resources need to go on the attack? My guess is their response is a clear sign they are so insecure because they are doing something wrong.

The UFT attempt to minimize the impact of their willingness to destroy the protections many teachers have fought for so hard by selling the Open Market System and minimizing the ATR issue where more senior teachers (which will soon be anyone with over 8 years and dropping) are under attack requires marginalizing critics.

As NYC Educator recently posted:
"But on the official union blog, they say problems with the "open market" plan are an urban myth, and virulently refuse to answer any questions on, or even acknowledge, the situation of ATR teachers. Since there are more transfers, it's better. Period. There will be no discussion of ATR teachers, and don't look at that man behind the curtain."

Increasingly, it is the UFT that is an urban myth.


For those visiting Western Australia, stop by Coogee Beach while it's still there. For those visiting UFT HQ at 52 Broadway, stop by and check out the 6-figure salaries and double pensions.

Ex-general is Baltimore schools chief of staff

Another ex-general and Broad Superintendents Academy fellow has just been appointed to a leadership position in a large urban school district.

"In a move to fix the city school system's managerial problems, Andres Alonso, the system's chief executive officer, has chosen a retired Army officer with a strong background in logistics to act as his second in command."


http://susanohanian.org/show_atrocities.php?id=7356
Alonso trained at the feet of Joel Klein, so he must be making good decisions. And these generals have done so well in Iraq, why not let them run school systems? Note in the article how the Broad Academy has few people who actually taught. I wonder exactly what kind of teaching Alonso himself did during his 10 year teaching career. He must have been deprogrammed to purge all identification with teachers, who clearly are not to be trusted with running things on their own.

Excessing

The following was sent by a correspondent:

Let's open up the subject of Excessing, the latest thunderbolt in the contemptible attacks on the teaching profession by Joel Klein and his corporate handlers.

Our present contract establishes an excessing procedure in Art. 17 B, Rules 4-6 and 11. These rules state that the DOE will place us into new jobs. Please note that the DOE is the active "Placer" and the teacher is the passive "Placee." (The fact that we can, and most likely will, end up as ATRs is a secondary issue I'll address later.) So, we have:

Rule 4. Teachers in excess ... must be placed in vacancies to the fullest degree possible .....

Rule 5. ....... If there are no openings or vacancies in the district/superintendency, the teacher shall be excessed from the district to a vacancy in the region.

Rule 6. The central board has the responsibility for placing teachers who ... cannot be accommodated by their own district/superintendency, if vacancies exist, within the region ........

Rule 11. Unless a principal denies the placement, an excessed teacher will be placed by the Board into a vacancy within his/her district/superintendency; or if such a vacancy is not available, then in a vacancy within his/her region. The Board will place the excessed teacher who is not so placed in an ATR position in the school from which he/she is excessed, or in another school in the same district or superintendency.

After the original excessing letter, we received other emails and packages from the DOE that have broken with the contract entirely and shifted the onus of finding a new job right onto the excessed teacher him/herself. They did it through lies and obfuscation. Take this one: "As you may know, the current UFT contract has changed the way in which excessed teachers and staff seek and receive new positions." The current UFT contract has most certainly NOT changed the way teachers and staff seek and receive new positions. Article 17.B says numerous times that excessed teachers will be placed. And in the DOE's recent emails and written materials, there's a consistent and not-so-subtle shift in language from the passive voice (i.e., teachers "will be placed") to very active orders indeed. By way of example, here are their instructions in an email of a week or two ago:

1) Register for the Open Market Hiring System

2) Attend the July 10th job fair . . . bring a copy of your excess letter.

3) Visit our website www.InternalHiringSupportCenter.org.

4) Download the 2007 Placement Guide . . . . This guide contains all the information you will need to conduct your job search . . . Use it as a reference throughout your search.

In no way can these "orders" be interpreted as "options." We are told to Register, Attend, Visit, and Download, no ands, ifs, buts about it. And just this week they've sent us a 23-page booklet that has to be seen to be believed! It's as outrageous and demeaning as I've come across, a real wolf in sheep's clothing. Not only does it fly in the face of the contract with these tidbits:

"Although it is ultimately your responsibility to secure a new position within NYC" (p.4, para 1)

"In the coming weeks it is your responsibility to secure a new position" (p.5, para 1)

"Human Resources may continue to change your ATR school until you find a permanent position." (p.5, para 2)

it goes on to TEACH us how to construct a resume step by step (they even provide an example). After that lesson, they instruct us how to write a cover letter, dress for an interview, speak to a principal, do a follow-up, etc., along the same lines. The pièce de resistance is the Appendix: a full-page list of "Action Verbs" to help in our job search! To whom does the DOE think it is talking to in this booklet? Some of us have spent most of our careers teaching kids how to write well. Some of us have endured 30 credits above a Masters to make sure we are equipped to do that very job. Some of us, for heaven's sake, have second jobs as writers, editors, counselors, and tutors.

So when I say that this chancellor and this group of educrats has the most profound hatred of teachers, I'm not exaggerating. They virtually flaunt their disregard for the contract and hope no one's looking. They swamp us with instructional material to infantilize us, and they do it under the guise of being helpful.

It's clear they want us VOICELESS. It's clear they want the most senior of us OUT OF THE SYSTEM ENTIRELY.

I am told the union is working on this. Not fast enough though, because by the time they act, the job vacancies on the Open Market system will most likely be taken. Which brings me to that ATR thing mentioned in Rule 11.

We all know by now that Klein recently changed how teacher salaries are going to get paid. In a short time, the principals will have to budget for the higher salaries if they want to retain the most experienced (senior) and most heavily credited (MA plus 30) teachers. I'm afraid this is the death knell of the profession as we once knew it. Even though there's a year's grace on who foots the salary bill, administrators have been heard saying things like "You get two for the price of one" and "Hey, I don't want to interview anyone with over 15 years." Let's say that you, as an excessed teacher, never even get an interview in the new Open Market system because of your years-in or high salary. You may end up subbing for a long time, and you may be subbing in the most difficult schools or getting bounced from one school to another. (UFT bosses, stay alert: the nifty wording in Rule 11 implies possible placement in a second school, but I'm sure the DOE has every intention of keeping its options open to bounce you around to as many schools as it wants.) Few of us would choose to remain in the profession if we had to sub under those conditions for any length of time, but bingo! From the DOE's point of view so much the better, high salaries and high future pensions being such a worry for them. They'd much prefer it if all the senior teachers just quit.

And not just the higher paid teachers. There are so many other gosh-darn reasons for not taking in an excessed teacher: inadequate skills, no charisma, lukewarm recommendations, a history of union activism or whistleblowing, the way the person dresses, that...um...race thing. I knew a principal who wouldn't hire a teacher because she didn't have her nails done. All these people can be ATRs as well until they can't stand it anymore.

There is no check on any of this because the UFT doesn't have a proactive bone in its collective body and has not in recent contracts paid much attention to anything but salary. They're just watching it all play out, and one can't be but baffled at their indifference. Much of what the DOE has sent out to excessed teachers in the past month contradicts the very paragraphs on the subject that the UFT has posted on its own website (see "Know Your Rights"). The union was obviously not at the table when the DOE schemed up this Open Market thing. Hold on, maybe it was at the table. Some people think the union has been complicit for years.

Epilogue.

You can't turn a person into an activist. You have to recognize your own anger and convert it into a political voice -- against a fundamentally rotten education department installed and supported by a privileged, power-obsessed mayor, and against a marginalized and semi-comatose union.

Sol Stern on mayoral control

Revised

I posted Sol Stern's recent article in the City Journal "Grading Mayoral Control" at Norms Notes. It is a good summary/history of the issues that have arisen since Bloomberg took control of the schools.

Stern was a supporter of mayoral control in the beginning. He was also a severe critic of the UFT, blaming many of the ills in the school system on the teacher contract, something Joel Klein has also consistently done. But politics makes strange bedfellows and Randi Weingarten has embraced Stern, even giving him space in the NY Teacher.

Stern focused his original criticisms of Klein over the adoption of what he called a progressive curriculum, instituted by Diana Lam and enforced by her successor Carmen Farina. I won't get into the details here. But teachers reacted as much to the dictatorial nature of the forced implementation as to the ideas of how to teach.

Stern says:
“Dictate” is exactly what Klein did for the next three years. The city’s principals were deemed so deficient in pedagogical understanding that Klein and his lieutenants would tell them how to arrange the chairs, the desks, the rugs, and even the bulletin boards in their classrooms. But Klein’s directions on more important matters did not inspire confidence: for example, he imposed a reading program that progressive educators favor called Balanced Literacy (a euphemism for the “whole language” instructional approach), despite the lack of evidence that it works for disadvantaged children.

I know teachers that believe in balanced literacy, which they say is very different from the whole language approach, which has been discredited in many places for the lack of phonics and structured language teaching. One of Stern's points has been that phonics should be taught, an approach that seems as rigid as Klein's. I was a big fan of phonics teaching, but as a teacher I made the choice as to what extent it was necessary. I eschew any system where teacher choice is minimized.

Ironically, Stern supports "Success for All," one of the most dictatorial, rigid, non-teacher input (and expensive) programs out there. He writes:

To his credit, Klein approved the inclusion of several providers with substantive academic programs. One of these was the Success for All Foundation, which features the scientifically tested reading program that Klein unwisely dumped from dozens of schools in his first year in office. But it soon became clear that the program didn’t have much of a chance to sell its goods in Klein’s new supermarket. When I visited the hall in which SFA staffers were making their presentation, it was practically empty. Nervous principals, shell-shocked by this latest reorganization, decided to play it safe and go with one of the providers that knew its way around the DOE headquarters, rather than with an out-of-town organization like Success for All. Several sources also confirmed that providers had offered jobs to some of the supervisors departing the school system—on condition that they sign up as customers the principals whom they used to supervise.

It's class size, stupid!
I have heard teachers refer to Success for All as a "Nazi" program. Well, maybe that's going a bit too far. I mentored Teaching Fellows for a few years; one of the schools was using the program. All activities in the school would stop for an hour and a half and all personnel, including out of classroom people and cluster teachers would be part of the program. Thus, the sizes of the reading groups were drastically reduced.

Duh! There's the scientific basis Stern refers to. Small groups work, not necessarily the program itself. Scientific studies would cite a control group where, say balanced literacy were used with the same student/teacher ratio as SFA. Bet we would see similar results.

The morning would start with some kind of music piped throughout the school and kids would be marched to their classrooms. Teachers complained that they often worked with students that were not in their class but for just the SFA period. After about an hour and a half the music would start and everyone would be marched back. I often thought they could sell a CD called "Best Marching Songs Success for All."

Stern attributes the lack of interest in SFA from Nervous principals, shell-shocked by this latest reorganization. But even principals who knew the program from the days when former Chancellor Rudy Crew forced it into every school in the former Chancellor's district, also rejected it as too expensive for what they were getting - just another program for profit. They chose not to go with SFA because they could get more for the buck elsewhere.

Stern has also pushed the program being offered by Kathleen Cashin, one of the 4 super superintendents left from the regions, claiming her program was the most rigorous. But she ended up with the lowest total of schools of all 4, while Judy Chin, considered the least rigid, got the most schools. Many Principals seem to have voted with their feet for the least restrictive environment. And that will probably end up being an illusion too.

Another irony here is that the UFT leadership with Randi Weingarten leading the way, partnered with Crew in implementing the SFA program with the support of the UFT run Teacher Centers. When the UFT complained about the rigid programs implemented by Klein, SFA teachers had a good laugh. Oh, the hypocrisy!

I have one more bone to pick with Sol Stern over his article when he says:

The Bloomberg administration must have known that the UFT would have to protect its senior teachers. Along with a coalition of activist groups that opposed the entire reorganization, the union began organizing a massive City Hall protest rally. The mayor initially hung tough: he called his own mini-rally, attended by 100 supporters, attacked the “special interests” blocking progress in the schools, and likened the UFT to the National Rifle Association.

But the next morning, the mayor was breakfasting with union president Randi Weingarten. After a weeklong negotiation, the administration took both the new funding proposal and the tenure initiative off the table for the next two years—by which time Bloomberg will be packing to leave City Hall. The mayor may have been right about the “special interests,” but his retreat had plenty to do with politics and his own interests. A big fight with the teachers would have damaged his reputation as the “education mayor” and threatened his potential White House run.

Th UFT gave the impression of protecting senior teachers, who were not really protected, as all the ATR teachers and the inability of so many to find jobs in the Open Market System have proven. Who really blinked? As previous posts here have pointed out, Weingarten wanted as little to do with a rally as Bloomberg.

Who blinked first?

Klein Defends Class Size Reduction Plans

by Norman Scott
special to The Wave for the July 20th edition
July 18, 2007

Facing severe criticism over his plan to spend the money coming to the NYCDOE from the CFE lawsuit, Chancellor Joel Klein has mounted a rigorous defense. Detailed presentations were made at the monthly Panel for Educational Policy meeting on July 16 on the much criticized plans to reduce class size but did not prevent Manhattan’s Panel member Patrick Sullivan from voting against the plan or Queens’ Panel member Michael Flowers from abstaining. The other members of the Panel approved the plan.

Klein followed up at a sparsely attended press roundtable held the next day. He went into some detail on a controversial aspect in his class size reduction plan: to create 400 collaborative/team teaching classrooms that will consist of a 60/40 % split of regular ed students and special ed students, with two teachers in the room specializing in each of these models. Klein forcefully made the point that the two-teacher model will certainly mean a class size reduction for the regular ed children.

Due to low attendance from the major dailies, this reporter had an opportunity to engage in a give and take with the chancellor on this issue. Will there be a para included, as there are currently paras in many special ed classes? “Only if the IEP of a student calls for it,” said Klein. These paras are known as management paras directed at a particular child and not as general paras in the classroom. For some special ed students used to two adults in the classroom, this plan may not result in an improved ratio. Klein said that this collaborative model has worked very well in some schools, but did not give any specifics. Some Long Island districts have instituted a similar model to some success but an aide or para is often added to the mix.

“Did he expect some parents of the non-special ed students to complain about their children being placed with special ed students,” I asked? “Hey, this is New York, what would you expect,” he responded? I followed up with a question about class size caps. “Around 25,” he said. Another reporter raised the point that this sounds more like a great model for mainstreaming, not necessarily reducing class size. Klein said that in a class of 25, for both the 15 non-special ed and the 10 special ed students, this would be such a reduction.

I raised the point that all groups, the union, parent groups and the DOE seem to agree on one point: increasing the number of schools will be necessary to accomplish serious class size reduction. If he feels this collaborative model of two teachers in a room can be successful, why not try it across the board in schools that are deemed to be failing by inundating the school with extra teachers instead of just closing them down? He responded that each school has to be looked at individually.

Throughout the press conference and at the PEP meeting, Klein time and again reiterated the point that just about every decision, from instruction to major policy initiatives, is data driven. The accumulation and analysis of data has been the heart of the extensive restructuring of the system, but critics have claimed that the data has been focused to support the Chancellor’s programs.

At the PEP meeting, panel member Richard Menschel, a Bloomberg appointee, asked Klein if there have been any studies on the impact class size has on instruction. Klein responded the studies have been mixed and emphasized that teacher quality was the prime factor in effective instruction, not class size. As part of a two minute presentation the public is allowed, I was able to respond that all one had to do was look at the class sizes in Long Island and Scarsdale and at the exclusive private schools where parents pay $30,000 a year, basically for lower class sizes.

At the press conference, I was able to bring up a question on Klein’s emphasis on teacher quality. Since he was so data driven, where is the data that points to what makes an effective teacher, especially since he wants to pay teachers based on merit? Or is it just a case of “you know one when you see one?” I pointed to informal exit polls I had taken from teachers leaving the system and with private school teachers who choose to work for less pay rather than work in public schools. They point to 3 factors: high class size, the overemphasis on testing and the inability to control what happens in their classrooms. Are the conditions in the schools preventing the ability to attract quality, experienced teachers?

He responded in some detail, pointing to schools that have hundreds of applicants for every open position, while other schools have a great deal of trouble recruiting teachers. Teachers want to work where they are respected, where there are good conditions and where they are paid based on the effort they put in. “An effective teacher is one that gives the children a full year’s worth of instruction,” he concluded.

Comment: I covered the July 17 press conference for The Wave and tried to write this piece as an impartial reporter rather than an opinion piece. Klein responses to the questions were not glib with the usual PR tilt but I felt in a thoughtful manner. At the end he sort of threw up his hands with an attitude of "Norm, you just don't get it." Maybe I don't. But I liked that. He actually seems to believe in the stuff he is doing, which I can accept. A true believer with a moral streak and some disdain for people who just can't see where he is going. The problem is, he is the one who just doesn't get it.

Video: PEP rubber stamps CFE

Other than seeing Patrick Sullivan break the unanimity of the rubber stamp PEP panel by voting NO on the "plan" for CFE money, the best part of going to PEP meetings is touching base with people like Noel Bush and Lisa Donlon from District 1 (lower east side) parent group. I knew Noel was up to something with his video camera. See Joel play with Blackberry. See Patrick ask probing questions. See one of the usual PEP shills raise a disingenuous question about whether studies show that low class size makes a real difference - I'll address this idiocy in a separate post.

Here's Noel's Post on the nyc education news listserve:

Here's some amateur video of an intense, substantive debate at yesterday's meeting of the Panel for Educational Policy about the merits of the city's plan for the CFE money. All PEP members were deeply engaged, asking probing questions and exhaustively probing the matter of whether the DOE's plan complies with state regulations and fulfills the spirit as well as the letter of the CFE. The panel engaged in passionate debate that extended well into the late evening. The final vote (there are, of course, votes for everything the PEP does) was a
close one, with members on both sides of the issue expressing detailed, reasoned arguments for their conclusions. It was truly an example of the democratic process in action -- a demonstration that public education really is in the hands of concerned citizens who understand the significance of their decisions in the lives of our city's schoolchildren. This was, indeed, a validation of the wisdom of mayoral control, and a full repudiation of the critics of our wise Mayor Bloomberg and his ingenious right-hand man, Chancellor Klein.

Oh wait a minute, sorry, wrong reality. (*Knocks self upside head*)

Anyway....

http://district1parents.net/pep-rubber-stamps-cfe

Food, Glorious Food ... at the PEP

At last night's Panel for Educational Policy meeting at Tweed, the monthly go-along with BloomKlein gang (with the exception of Manhattan rep Patrick Sullivan and at times Queens' rep Michael Flowers), a presentation on the feeding program that the DOE has instituted city-wide was made, with samples on the way in for the attendees. Now, this in no way competes with the spread the UFT offers at its Exec. Bd. meetings, but it was a nice touch. Klein said he heard the food is pretty good. Apparently he doesn't go near the stuff himself. But not me. I ate. Twice. Once at the meeting and once when I got home. Not bad. But I prefer the old Jamaican beef patties, where all you had to do was collect the oil from the trays and run your car for a week on it.

Broad Jumping

The Educational Intelligence Agency's Mike Antonucci reports in this week's posting on his coverage of the NEA convention:

The delegates also pulled their annual punch at Eli Broad, referring to committee an item that directed NEA to "aggressively work to expose the dangers of pursuing the 'Broad Prize' and other veiled awards promoted by those who seek to destroy public education."

Don't expect even a light jab from the AFT at Broad, who gave the UFT charter school $1 million and is the backer of Green Dot charters' Steve Barr who has been in a love fest with the UFT's Randi Weingarten. When Weingarten takes over the AFT next July, will her connections to Broad be one of the sticking points in the long-sought merger between the AFT and NEA?

The Broad prize has been much coveted by BloomKlein so they can use it politically to validate their daily reorganizations of the schools. Getting the Broad prize for NYC would be the equivalent of the Bush Administration getting the Halliburton prize for humanity.

People consider it a slam dunk they will win it this year (announcement is Sept. 19) so the Broadies can use NYC for their own political purposes: defang teacher unions, privatize as much as possible, etc.

Pretty ironic, eh, for Broad to give $1million to both BloomKlein and Weingarten? But then again, you know the mantra of this blog - that the UFT collaboration with BloomKlein has been instrumental in allowing them to do what they did to the system - sort of a 5th column. You know, like in the old WWII movies, where you are shocked to find out the supposed leader of the Resistance was actually working for the Narzi's all along.

The one chance to make a statement opposing them by holding a massive rally on May 9th was undermined by Weingarten who sold teachers on the deal by claiming the deal with Bloomberg would keep schools from being penalized for hiring higher salaried teachers. See if that's true by checking out the post: The Bronx is burning with ATR's.

Note: Leonie Haimson came up with an interesting idea for a date to hold a rally: Sept. 18, the day before the Broad prize is announced. Want to bet my pension the UFT will nix that idea?

A Smoking Bush

Hedging my bets if the post on parochial schools offends the higher powers. Couldn't find a burning bush but found the next best thing in the back yard. Not a bad view from the rear window. One more reason to never leave home.

But, alas, I may have to. Can't resist tonight's PEP meeting at Tweed to watch lone Klein critic on the PEP, Patrick Sullivan, question Klein about the small school grad rates and other goodies. I may even bring along a video camera.

Booted

Friday I was getting a hair cut when the phone rang. My haircutist (new word, here) got a phone call from a friend who was crying over the fact her son was just booted out of the parochial school he was attending. After his junior year.
"Why," I asked after she hung up?
"For failing his classes," said the barberista.
Thinking of the discussions I used to have with pro-voucher people like Sol Stern I said, "The people who argue for vouchers always deny parochial schools throw kids out."
"Are you kidding," she said? "They throw kids out all the time. And they took my friend's money for summer school and THEN threw him out. He actually received more attention when he went to the local public high school. Even though he fooled around there they went more out of their way to help him."
"So why did she move him?"
"You know, Catholic school. She thought the discipline would get him serious."
"Sometimes kids have to take responsibility. My advice," I said "is to tell him to drop out and get a job for a while. That should do it."
By now, most of my hair was on the floor. I'll get the rest of the story next month.

Comment: Steve Orel founded the WOO in response to the pushouts of low performing kids in Birmingham. With so much now at stake in public schools (principal bonuses should add too the pot) the amount of pushouts and not so gentle refusals to take certain kids in the first place would increase dramatically. Read Jeff Coplon's piece (posted on the Norm's Notes blog) on the public NEST school for a prime example of how a principal operates to manipulate the school population.

Steve Orel: December 20, 1953 – July 7, 2007

Posted at Susan Ohanian's web site:

http://susanohanian.org/show_commentary.php?id=517
and at Norm's Notes
Read our previous post here.

The Bronx is Burning ... with ATR's

A UFT official writes in an email to one of my correspondents:

"The number of veteran teachers in excess in the Bronx is huge. 33% of the teachers at Stevenson have been placed in excess this June and a whopping 56 employees from Evander Childs have been excessed. Dozens from Walton are out, including the Chapter Leader. Meanwhile, on the hiring committees that I have been attending, at least 3/4 of the applicants have been Teaching Fellows with shiny new Trans B licenses."

*For readers outside the NYC area
ATR: Absentee Teacher Reserve
Recent UFT contracts have so drastically changed (eliminated) seniority rules that used to allow senior teachers to bump junior teachers in their license area. Now they just become substitutes. For those of you who think this is a good thing, keep watching an eye on the ensuing chaos that is occurring. I maintain that with all the evils of seniority, it is still the best (only) way to maintain some level of stability in the system.

Macklein

This past Weds. I was off to see the new Australian modernized version of Macbeth over at the Quad cinema but made a stop at Sony Wonder on 56th and Madison to check in on the robotics gang who were there for the day in the atrium doing exhibitions of FIRST Robotics and FIRST LEGO League. Kids, parents and teachers from Stuyvesant, Lehman HS, HS of Computers and Technology and MS 217Q.

So as I enter the atrium, a few of the teachers come running over, "You missed him. You missed him."

"Missed who," I said?

"Klein. (NYC Schools Chancellor) Joel Klein was here."

"You mean Joel Klein made a special trip down here to see the kids and the robotics," I said disbelievingly?

"No, He just happened to be passing through, checking his Blackberry. We tried to engage him and get him to stop by to talk to the kids but he said he had to catch a plane."

Aha. Serendipitous corroboration that Joel Klein has absolutely no interest in seeing what kids are doing unless it can be used for public relations. And since he didn't have his massive PR core with him, why give even 30 seconds of his precious Blackberry time to stop and say hello to the kids?

These teachers were being polite (and they still work in the system.) Lucky I missed him. I wouldn't have been.

(You can read the feel-good part of the story at my Norm's robotics blog.)

As for Macbeth, a fine movie. We've had our own version here in NYC playing for the past 5 years. In the leads? Who have had the most blood on their hands? YES! BloomKlein in the lead. And do I have to tell you the top choice for Lady Macbeth?

Too Little, Too Late on Class Size...

....UFT uses borough hearings as "Do Nows" to let out a little gas as a way to control militancy.

While we all appreciate the eloquent comments from so many people like John Elfrank-Dana (see post below this one), the reactions of parent groups and the UFT is a case of too little too late.

David Quintana commented on this blog:
I never understood why Randi and most of the other coalition members believed the empty promises of the Tweedies and allowed Bloom/Klein to effectively disrupt and cancel our original rally...We had the Tweedies nervous and they were on the run...Parents got little or nothing in return...Lets be honest...Our side blinked...I know many CPAC members wanted the rally to go forward, even after the UFT bailed out...A parents rally is needed now more than ever...

Our April 20 post titled, "A Unique Opportunity had been missed," was a reaction to the bitter disappointment over the cancellation of what was expected to be a massive rally on May 9th that was killed by the deal between Mayor Bloomberg and a coalition of parents and teachers, but it is clear it was Randi Weingarten's dealings with Bloomberg that killed the rally.

Why? Because Weingarten has the same alliances as BloomKlein do: Eli Broad, the Clintons, Green Dot charters, etc. She can get away with rhetoric criticizing Bloomberg (and note how the UFT has focused on Klein, as if he is independent from Bloomberg), but any street action that actually would have results is too dangerous. The enthusiasm at the Feb. 28th rally at the church that was the precursor to the excitement among teachers and parents in planning the May 9th demonstration scared Weingarten as much as Bloomberg.

Ironic, since she had so much to do with building a good coalition of groups that for the first time was a credible threat to BloomKlein. I never believed she ever intended to hold the demo May 9th in the first place. Her role is not to lead any street movements but to make backroom deals that would prevent any possibility of militancy getting out of the hands of the leaders.

Think of it as a bottle of gas. The leadership keeps things under control by letting out a little at a time and then shutting it once some steam is let out. The current storm of testimony in front of the bogus borough panels set up by Tweed is a perfect example. Busy work and Do Nows for the activist people in the UFT, including the opposition. I can' tell you how many of my colleagues who are opposed to Unity raced down to speak. To what end?

Would you be surprised if you found out that these borough events were part of a plan hatched by Bloomberg and Weingarten as a way to let out that gas just enough to shut people up and distract them from calling for a demo?

When the deal in April was announced, I posted the following on the issue of class size to the influential NYC Education News listserve, which is dominated by activist parents in the NYC area:

"On class size, I don't care what they say or what committees they form. They do not believe that reducing class size will have the same impact spending money on professional development will. That is their mantra... They will say one thing and do another. To put any trust in Tweed given their record is a mistake."

Many other posts to the listserve made similar points. NYC High School Parent Council head David Bloomfield: Promises of consultation on class size, drop out prevention, and middle school reform seem little more than crumbs.

The leaflet put out by the Independent Community of Educators (ICE) at the April Delegate Assembly said on the class size reductions in the deal:
"Expect spinning the wheels. ICE’s position has always been that there will be no reductions in class size without contract negotiations."

The reactions of the UFT and parent advocacy groups - attend press conferences, write politicians, speak out at the borough meetings are all fine. But if all they do is let off steam then it is just a case of marking time - more of the same old, same old.

Forget all of this and start building for a rally at City Hall this fall. We have been told all along by Weingarten when we kept calling for the May 9th rally to be held (the UFT rescheduled it's Delegate Assembly on May 9th) and when the Manhattan HS chapter leaders' call for a rally was rejected by Weingarten and Unity Caucus at the DA (see video of the DA here) with the argument that we will hold a rally if the DOE goes back on its deal.

Holding that rally on May 9th would have been the best way to get class size reduction and many other items on the agendas of parents and teachers. But the age-old reliance on politicians and the leadership of Randi Weingarten has misdirected all too many people away from the understanding that street action works. No one seemed to learn the lesson that was made so strongly at the February 28 rally that frightened BloomKlein into sitting down at a table that was heavily tilted in their direction. But when the very person supposedly leading the movement is really in alignment with Bloomberg, the chances of putting something together that will actually have an impact is very unlikely.

Only when there is a movement of teachers independent of the yoke of Unity caucus and a corresponding movement of parent groups not under the dominance (and fear) of the UFT leadership, will there be a chance to have an impact.


Follow ups:
An article and leaflet handed out by ICE "What was gained and what was lost" and the "Top 10 reasons to oppose the reorganization".

Speaking of Class Size by John Elfrank-Dana

John is the chapter leader of Murray Bergtraum HS in Manhattan.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

http://laborslessons.blogspot.com/

Here I sit at the DOE hearing on the new Fair Student Funding scheme in the Project for Excellence (or something like that).

I made the following statement, facing the parents in the audience, which required me to turn my back on the Chancellor's panel (no disrespect intended).

Statement for Hearing on NYC Dept. of Education Contracts for Excellence

Millennium High School

7/11/2007

Good evening parents, students and colleagues. My name is John Elfrank-Dana. I am a social studies teacher at Murry Bergtraum High School, UFT Chapter Leader, Adjunct Professor at Fordham University and Carnegie Scholar. I am here tonight as a matter of conscience. I am here because I believe the success of the public school system is essential to preserving and extending our democratic society. And I am here especially because I am concerned your children are being systematically disenfranchised.

I came to teach at Murry Bergtraum in 1986. What I saw there was a vibrant educational community; a community to which I was hoping to send my own children some day. However, I am sad to report to you that it is no longer the case. My own children now attend school in a suburban district with class sizes of twenty-five or fewer students in buildings not over-crowded. My children, as did the children of many of the corporate bureaucrats who now run this City’s education system, have an educational advantage over my students at Bergtraum. This disparity is immoral and undemocratic.

The result of this injustice has landed Bergtraum on the No Child Left Behind’s hit list of failing schools. Once a model school, recognized nationally for its business program, Bergtraum is now a holding pen for large numbers of students the DOE doesn’t know what to do with as a result of the its rushed and reckless move to create small schools. As a result of this imposed injustice on our school we are required to take corrective action. We are told to evolve into a complex of “Small” Learning Communities. At Bergtraum we are taking on this challenge full steam. However, the prospect of successfully carrying out the required cultural change is not auspicious, as we are a school of 3500+ students and staff, in a building designed for 2400, with class sizes remaining at 34 and hallways swelling with students in the heart of a three-session school day. The term “small” is meaningless for us.

At Murry Bergtraum we demand a chance to succeed. The Mayor is obligated to provide the means for us to do so. The overcrowding must stop and class sizes must be brought down to levels comparable to surrounding suburban districts. We parents, students and educators, must continue to combine forces and mobilize using the methods of the great civil rights struggle against the corporatization of the school system. Over-sized classes are one component of a broader injustice taking place in our school system. It’s class size reduction that is the first and essential step in wresting control away from Mayoral tyranny over our schools and brining the “public” back into public education here in New York City.

Reviewing Weingarten Performance...

.... More Boo Hoo as Randi Weingarten runs around the city crying about the way the Tweedles at the DOE are allocating the CFE money. Robert Jackson calls a press conference. The CFE's executive director, Geri Palast , Weingarten, and Jackson will urge state officials to reject it. if it is not revised. Palast said litigation would be a last resort. "Before we consider further court action, we must raise a ruckus here and now," she said.

Here's a way to raise a ruckus:
RESINSTATE THE DAMN MAY 9TH RALLY THAT WEINGARTEN SOLD OUT

A parent on the NYC Education News listserve wrote:

On reviving the May 9th parent rally -- I vote for rescheduling it to the Tuesday after Labor Day -- and bringing our kids with us! Having it on that day (with the attendant loss of state aid for the missing kids) might help penetrate Tweed's consciousness about adding school days without consulting with parents.

Make sure to race on over to Pissed off Mom's blog to read her take on holding a rally.

Klein and Weingarten: separated at birth
Here's the best from Weingarten:
"Ultimately, ultimately after teacher quality, lowering class size is the second most important factor in helping children."

In today's David Herzenhorn finale to the ed beat in the Times, he quotes Joel Klein: “The most important thing in education is the quality of teachers,” Mr. Klein said.

They must have the same script writer.

Next time they use the term "teacher quality" ask them how you can tell a quality teacher. Or better yet, measure one. I don't know about others, but there were days (hours, minutes) when I was a quality teacher and times when I wasn't. Mornings I was top quality. After lunch, not so much.

Better yet, I was a higher quality teacher when class sizes were lower. Weingarten is putting the cart before the horse. Or is just behind the horse's ass.

I can't tell you what makes a quality teacher. It's one of those "You know one when you see one" deals.

This review came in from a teacher of Weingarten's appearance in the Bronx the other day at the DOE "hearing" where they gave everyone 2 minutes to talk.

Whining and mewling like a 6-mo. old kitten, speaking with no gravitas, dignity, or fire. She looked like she could be stepped on. When she was told she went past her 2 min. time -- as if she were just an ordinary public citizen -- she pleaded for extra minutes and whined something like "You only told us 3 days ago."

Being derelict in her duties as President of the Union. She should have been holding a press conference in front of cameras outside to make her points of non-inclusion in the process. She should have done everything that union leaders do. But no. She just looked like she was just one person in a small- size crowd. She made less impression than the group of 15 Spanish parents who actually spoke better, all carrying identical signs to back up their leaders' points. It was impressive, and it put the union to shame.

As for bringing up teacher quality at THIS meeting. It was off-point and gratuitous.

The Carnival Of Education: Week 127

Head over to the midway of the 127th Carnival of Education!
The very latest roundup of entries from around the EduSphere. Now playing at the Education Wonks.

We have 2 items submitted, which means this blog will get hits from all over the place. Let the word go out... BloomKlein have destroyed the school system an the UFT has helped them.

The Real Swindle is at Edwize

Look for updates to this post later tonight.

Boo Hoo, they are crying at Edwize over the class size swindle. Notice how the author, a full-time union employee and Unity Caucus member, doesn't dare use that hated word "rally."

Remember all the posts here about how the Manhattan high school chapter leaders call for a rally was turned down by the Unity horde (gee, how do you think the poser on Edwize voted?) with the words from the leadership, "If they don't adhere to the agreement (made in April) to kill the May 9th rally, we can still hold a rally." Really? Think it's time? Our reporting and calls for a rally led to another vicious mad-dog Unity leaflet attack on this blog.

NYC Educator has been on the case so make sure to check out his latest with lots of links.

I posted the following on the nyc education news listserve when there were calls to attend the Robert Jackson press conference at City Hall on Sunday and go to the borough hearings.

"It's fine to go ahead with all these activities. But the single thing that will have the most impact is to hold the massive rally that was originally planned for May 9th. The only reason they agreed to sit down at all was because of that threat. We know that Tweed is not to be trusted. Why fiddle around? Go for the gusto."

I'll be back later tonight with lots more on this issue, including commentary on calls to attend borough hearings run by the Tweedles (you can get your 2 minutes in which Randi did in the Bronx yesterday - bet she didn't mention rally.)

A New Teacher Story - updated

Scene: Elementary school in a very deprived area of the city.

Characters:
Principal, Queen bee type, arrogant and abusive. Don't know if she's from Leadership Academy* but perfectly typecast, if so.
* Yes she is

First year teacher, 4th grade. Results on tests are good. Does lesson planning with other 4th grade teacher.

Time: End of '06/'07 school year

Action: Teacher gets rating. Almost every category is a U, including "lesson Plans" which are the same as the other 4th grade teacher who got an S in that category. But new Teacher gets an overall "D" rating for the year. Other categories like appearance, neatness of room are left blank.

Question of the day:
Should she behave like most first year teachers would and be happy she did not get a "U"?

Hell No!

Fly in the ointment:
Teacher was never observed by principal. She calls a variety of people to complain, including the Leadership Academy and a higher up, the Local Instructional Supt. Gets a call back from LIS a few hours later telling teacher she is at the school looking at her Unsatisfactory observation. Teacher goes to school next day (last of the year) and goes to principal with chapter leader asking to see her file. Inside she finds an observation of a lesson she never gave signed with her name, but it is not her signature. She tells the principal that, who snatches the observation out of her hands.

What does teacher do? She calls the cops and tells them the principal forged her name. Principal is now under investigation. Hope she has a nice summer.

The teacher should be president of the UFT.

Postscript: Under this principal of a fairly small elementary school, 28 people have left in just a few years. The mission of Leadership Academy grads is to force out everyone they can and replace them with their own people, obviously using whatever tactics they can, even if immoral (see my stories on Kathy Blythe of PS 147K who was arrested at the instigation of a Lead. Acad grad) or illegal.

Sicko Union

We saw Michael Moore's "Sicko" the other day - at the behest of our 23 year old cousin who just graduated from college. It's nice to see interest in the issue of health insurance from the younger generation. But then again, faced with the prospect that they may have no health insurance, who can blame them?

There is no question the movie will have an impact on the debate, though I always have issues with some of the methods Moore uses in all his movies, especially his disingenuousness. There was also a feeling of exploitation. When you are up against the powerful forces arrayed aghast you on this issue, I guess some of it is justified, though in some cases Moore's case is weakened in his uncritical admiration for, say France, where certain elements of society do not seem exactly enamored, despite free health care. And when Moore points to the fact that so many other services are paid for in the public arena, like schools, I guess he isn't aware of the privatization efforts of people of BloomKlein ilk - by the way, Mike, examining what they did to education in NYC would be a fitting topic for your next documentary. Call it "Sicko II."

But this is about the UFT and the health care issue, inspired by a comment on ICE-mail by Sean Ahern:

"As the owner of HIP does UFT Inc. qualify as a health insurance company? When was the last time our so-called union called for a single payer national health insurance plan? Could it be that their business interests trump all others?"

Now, some members of the UFT will say, "Why should we care about universal health care? We have a pretty good plan." While "Sicko" points to the fact that even people with health plans can find themselves in financial risk at some point, I will take the road of saying that a union that has the resources the UFT has, should be out there fighting for such a basic right for all people in society, especially since so many of our students may not exactly be getting the best health care. Think that affects the job teachers can do?

But I haven't seen the UFT making too many of the political points that unions used to make. And don't expect the AFT to do any more when it has new leadership. As Sean says, they are business unions functioning more in support of the status quo than interested in changing it.