Susan Ohanian and the gang at the Educator Roundtable have concocted this fabulous video:
Now showing at:
http://susanohanian
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=520DAgjCHdc
Written and edited by Norm Scott: EDUCATE! ORGANIZE!! MOBILIZE!!! Three pillars of The Resistance – providing information on current ed issues, organizing activities around fighting for public education in NYC and beyond and exposing the motives behind the education deformers. We link up with bands of resisters. Nothing will change unless WE ALL GET INVOLVED IN THE STRUGGLE!
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://district1par
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?
Thanks for the historical and structural overview described in the post and the first comment. You can rely on ICE to provide background information on grave union issues such as these, and I regret deeply, both on a personal and a collective level, that the people running this union and ultimately responsible for maintaining our existing job protections break so frequently with long-standing union goals.
I would like to comment on something the Chancellor has pushed for and what he has actually done.
One of Klein's earliest and most continuously iterated goals has been to be able to put good experienced teachers where they are needed, in the more difficult schools. His two recent initiatives, the Open Market hiring system and the way teachers will soon be paid (directly from the principal's budget), have not only hobbled his cause, but have shown him to be duplicitous.
Experienced senior teachers who indeed want to work in tough schools for a variety of reasons (the commute, the level, the challenge) have just become expensive. It is attractive for a principal to avoid calling them in for an interview, let alone hiring them.
Young teachers who spend a year or two in a difficult school are already looking to transfer out, to what they think is a better school in another district or out of New York City altogether. There is no reason for a new teacher to settle into a school with a difficult environment or one they're not happy in when adequate skills and a low salary makes them highly marketable. They'll apply to the schools with good reputations, and by gosh, they'll get those jobs.
It used to be that job vacancies were frozen until excessed teachers were placed, but the Human Resources people are no longer allowed to do this. The vacancies will be filled with new and fairly newly instructors, some of whom do not yet have a Masters. And even before these young teachers get tenure and full certification, they too will get the chance to look for and take that job in a "better" school. This is not conjecture, I already know of many examples.
The Lead Teacher program puts a few experienced teachers in difficult schools - for a salary bonus, and for only half their time teaching. That's a failure for the city's kids no matter how they spin it, and since it's a form of merit pay, it's a failure for labor, too.
There is not one item in the chancellor's agenda that will put good experienced teachers in full-time teaching programs in difficult schools and make them want to stay there.
The Chancellor is a fraud, the Mayor still backs him, and it looks as if Union leadership has a different agenda than what's in our best interest. I can't believe they thought these schemes would be of any use to the profession in the long run. It's something else, and they don't want us in on it.
We should not view the issue solely from the perspective of teacher rights. One issue I would like to deal with is the argument Klein makes that a school system should not be about job protection but about teaching and learning. Weingarten I believe goes along with these beliefs as evidenced from her actions and by info from the inside that she talks about getting rid of bad teachers and not being worried about protections. I believe there's an argument to be made that seniority rules create stability and school cultures that overcome the instances of the bad teacher being protected (I still think there are as many poor teachers if not more since BloomKlein and many people loyal to the principal will be protected no matter how bad they are.) Stable schools include experienced people who often share their knowledge. Kids have long-standing relationships with teachers in these schools. The assault on seniority had done as much damage if not more to the educational institutions as it has to the traditional union perspective that you raise.