Roseanne McCosh: Why I Am Voting No to the UFT Contract

Roseanne has been in touch for a number of years - she follows issues very closely and shares them with her staff at PS 8 in the Bronx. She was chapter leader for a number of years before passing it on to the next gen. She shared this with teachers in her school. She has never been to a MORE meeting. So Roseanne represents rank and file teachers. So when Unity attacks the opponents of the contract as being just malcontents who will oppose everything Unity does, Roseanne is clearly an example that the opposition to the contract goes way beyond the usual suspects.

By the way, Roseanne emailed me that she agrees with me that an overemphasis on the money issue results in ignoring all the other crap not being dealt with regarding working conditions, which are not addressed -- other than - possibly- the paperwork issue -- and we'll see how that works out. But Roseanne also points out that the money  issue is what people are talking about. So here she focuses on that.

In the last few contracts we gave up seniority rights, the right to grieve letters in the file and agreed to additional time twice (The 100 minutes that Randi sold as time for paperwork quickly became 150 minutes of teaching).  And despite what the UFT is saying, there are givebacks in this contract too.  And the money is not as good as they’re selling it to be. This is a complicated contract to explain with respect to the money.  But for those who look at the money as a deciding factor, stick with me---I will discuss the money as well---and you will probably have to read it a few times to fully grasp it.

GIVEBACKS:

• The suspension of all union rules in some schools:  Unity/UFT will sell this as an SBO which is in the hands of the staff to vote upon.  It’s a dangerous precedent for a union to agree to allow some members to subvert our contract.  In the long run it makes it easier for NYC to chip away at out contract yet again in a subsequent contract.  Am I the only one among us who thinks it is completely inappropriate for a UNION LEADER to advocate for the elimination of a union contract in some of our schools as part of a new contract? I have to believe there are many like minded colleagues who see this as a dangerous, slippery slope to eliminating our rights right here at PS 8 in the future.  This is all I need to vote NO---but there’s more.
• ATRs are being sold out:  It will be easier for the DOE and principals to conspire to fire them.  If our school burned down tomorrow, we’d all be ATRs.  If budget cuts caused excessing, some of us would be ATRs.  Whether an ATR is a good or bad teacher is irrelevant.  This system has always had the opportunity to document incompetent teachers and fire them as long as the system exercised due process.  Lazy administrators not willing to do the leg work to document true incompetence is the root of the problem but yet the media blames the union.  My point is that in order to protect the good teachers we must also protect the bad.  The same rights that protect the bad also protect the good.  Should we throw out the right to a jury trial in this country just because some criminals go free at times? 
• Evening parent conferences have been doubled and extended to 3 hours.  Sure the grade and faculty conferences are gone but they were NOT held at night.  Now we get to come to work even more exhausted than usual another 2 days.
• TIME SWAP:  The 150 min after school tutorial is gone and replaced with 80 minutes of PD every Monday and an additional 70 minutes on Tuesdays as follows:  parent meetings, phone calls (40 min) and 30 minutes of a meeting of some kind.  I call this a giveback.  Here’s why:  When we first agreed to additional time Randi (past UFT president) sold it as time for us to do paperwork and an opportunity for a big raise that will finally put NYC on par with suburban salaries.  So until we actually get to use the time for paperwork and our salaries are truly comparable with the suburbs, it’s a damn giveback.  
• The Teacher Evaluation Changes are more beneficial to administrators than to teachers.  Speak to me if you want details, I’m writing too much as is.
• Health Care Concessions:  They won’t tell us what it is other than NYC wants 3 Billion in savings.  Seriously.  No one knows what they are going to cut.  Reporters asked for details.   No one answered.  What does that tell you? 
• Delay of Retro and Pay Increases with 0% interest.  The last time the City did this we were paid 9% interest.  This time 0% interest.  I call that a giveback.

The $$$:

The headlines read 18% with full retro.  This misled all of us until we started to read the details.  I bet when you read that headline you thought what I thought:  8% for 2009-2011 that other union got and then some other equally distributed percentages that would lead us up to 18%....Plus retro from the start.  WE WERE WRONG!!!!!!!

• Fall 2014:  We will get a $1000 one time bribe to vote this crap contract in. We will get 1% for 2013 (May 2013 thru April 2014) and another 1% for 2014 starting in May 2014.  For me, at top salary, that means BEFORE taxes I will have about $83 in my paycheck.  For those earning 60-70 thousand, you’ll be lucky if you see an additional $40 in your paycheck after taxes and pension deductions if they come out of your paycheck (including TDA).
• While NYC refused to give us an 8% raise in 2010 or 2011, they gave other NYC unions 8%.  The UFT is trying to convince us that they won because they got that 8% as retro.  The initial email sent to us didn’t include any details so I did some digging and discovered why they withheld the details: 

• That 8% will not be fully included in our paychecks until 2018.  Not the retro---but the actual increase that should have been in our paychecks from 2011 to the present will not be seen in full until May 2018. They will dole the 8% out in 2% increments in May of the following years 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018.  Now I will address the retro for that 8%:
• The retro we are owed on the 8% will be doled out in 5 increments starting in October 2015 and ending in October 2020.  By the start of the school year in 2018 we will only have seen 1/4 of that retro.  By October 2019, 3/4 of the retro will have been paid to us and the final piece of the crap pie will be served to us in October 2020.  Other unions will have had that money in their pocket for almost 10 years by the time we get it and the UFT calls that a win.

So what are all the pay increases that we can expect and when can we expect them?  When will retro for pay increases be paid? I created a table on the next page. 

Lingering Questions:  What exactly are the 3 Billion $$$ in health care concessions?  How screwed are the people who are looking to retire between 2015 and 2018?  The delay in payment increases and retro has to affect your final average salary and pension in some negative way.  But you will have to calculate that yourselves.  For me---I am retiring before the final retro payment and before the new top salary becomes my final average salary because no money in the world can keep me from suffering under this dysfunctional system for one more day than I have to.   I don’t care if I get gypped---I’ll be free! And because my past brothers and sisters in this union were strong and fought hard, I will retire with an income I can live on.  I’m sorry for those of you who will not reap the same rewards. But if you vote yes to this contract, you kind of deserve to continue to get screwed. At what point will you say “No, I’m not eating another crap sandwich being served up by our own union leadership?” Take a stand NOW.  Vote NO

Roseanne McCosh, PS 8X.

Roseanne produced this table:

The UFT Has Declared This A Victory???????? Basic math and common sense proves they are poor judges of what it means to be victorious.
Year and % of Increase	Year/Month Money Increase Will Be Seen in Our Paychecks	Year/Month Retro On This $$$ Will Be Paid
2009-2010 = 4%	Between May 2015 and May 2018 (a 6-9 year wait from the date we earned the money.)	Between October 2015 and October 2020 (1/8 in Oct 2015, another 1/8 in Oct 2017.  Also, 1/4 in Oct 2018, another 1/4 in Oct 2019 and the final 1/4  in October 2020)
2010-2011 = 4%	Between May 2015 and May 2018 (a 5-8) year wait from the date we earned the money)	Between October 2015 and October 2020 (see details above)
2011-2012 = 0%	We get NOTHING for this time period	No retro to be had on ZERO%
Nov 2012-Apr 2013 = 0%	We get NOTHING for this time period	No retro to be had on ZERO%
May 2013 = 1 %	Fall 2014	The UFT timeline is unclear but sometime before January 2015 we will get the retro on the lousy 1%.
May 2014 = 1 %	Fall 2014	The UFT timeline is unclear but sometime before January 2015 we will get the retro on this lousy 1%.
May 2015 = 1 %	May 2015	Retro not necessary
May 2016 = 1.5 %	May 2016	Retro not necessary
May 2017 = 2.5 %	May 2017	Retro not necessary
May 2018 = 3%	May 2018	Retro not necessary
In the past the UFT and NYC had delayed pay and or retro and we received juicy interest payments and got February break added because of it.  We didn’t give something for nothing.  To put it simply, THIS DEAL SUCKS! If they can’t afford to pay us, then give us something that doesn’t cost them a dime---like the elimination of the 150 minutes of extended time! While the UFT wants us to settle for these scraps, the transit workers union got a better deal:  They already got their 4%+ 4% with full retro and while we get 0% for 2011 and 2012, they got another 4%.  And for 2013 and 2014 they get 3% while we get 2%.  They got full pay and retro immediately!  FDNY and NYPD will hold out for more.  They have already panned what the teachers are being offered.

 

MORE Press Advisory: NYC Public School Educators to UFT Leaders: “Go Back to the Bargaining Table!”

This was sent out to the press last night. Even if you are not part of MORE, join the campaign by downloading and printing leaflets for your school. MORE is willing to help organize events in your local area around your school to discuss the contract to counter the Unity spin.

FOR PLANNING PURPOSES: May 6, 2014

CONTACT: Harris Lirtzman (during the school day) OR Megan Moskop , media@morecaucusnyc.org

**News Advisory**

UFT CONTRACT: NOT A DONE DEAL UNTIL THE MEMBERSHIP VOTES

NYC Public School Educators to UFT Leaders: “Go Back to the Bargaining Table!”

MORE --  A UFT Caucus -- Calls for Teachers to Vote “No!;

Launches grassroots campaign for “Contract NYC Educators Deserve”

WHEN: Wednesday, May 7 2014, approximately 6:15pm (After UFT Delegate Assembly)

WHERE: SW Corner of 6th Ave and 54th St, in front of Hilton (1335 Ave of Americas, NYC)

WHAT: MORE-UFT (Movement of Rank and File Educators) calls for UFT members to vote “no” on the leadership’s contract proposal. The bargain under consideration:

• Spreads what UFT leaders call an “18% raise” over nine years. This amounts to a 2% raise per year - the approximate rate of inflation.
• Ratifies a teacher evaluation system based on the use of student test scores to evaluate teachers, despite a growing movement against over-testing, including parents who are opting children out of the tests.
• Does not address pay disparities, such as the salary cap for Occupational Therapists and Physical Therapists and low starting salaries for teachers.
• Ignores members’ calls for stronger checks against abusive administrators.
• Divides teachers with extra “merit pay” for those picked by administrators.
• Undermines due process protections for teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve.

MORE calls for a grassroots negotiation process driven by members’ participation. Teachers across the city generated MORE’s, “The Contract NYC’s Educators Deserve.”

WHO: MORE, a growing UFT caucus in the UFT, organizes for a democratic, militant union, based on the motto "Our working conditions are our students’ learning conditions!”  In 2013 MORE co-organized the “More than a Score: Talking Back to Testing Forum” with parents in Change the Stakes and the “Fair Pay for City Workers Forum” with members of over a dozen unions. MORE ran candidates in the New York State Teacher’s Union (NYSUT) elections in April (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbkqXmDz62Y).

VISUALS: Teachers wearing T-shirts and buttons will gather with signs and banners.

RSVP: e-mail media@morecaucusnyc.org

###

The Movement of Rank and File Educators is the Social Justice Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers.  To learn MORE, visit www.morecaucusnyc.or

MOREista Brian Jones to Run for Lt. Gov on Green Party

Well, I guess the UFT won't be endorsing the Green Party against Cuomo and Duffy, his Lt. Gov ed deform slug who tried to shove the mayoral control shiv into Rochester when he was mayor there.

I am excited to let you know that Brian Jones has stepped up to run as the Green Party candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

Brian would not just balance the Green Party ticket. He will multiply it.

To be sure, balance is good. He's downstate; I'm upstate. He's a Teacher; I'm a Teamster. He's black; I'm white. He's younger; I'm older. 
Brian brings a record of effective and significant organizing, speaking, and acting on the issue that I am hearing the most about from voters as I campaign around the state: public education.

Governor Cuomo's education policies are openly advancing the privatization of public education sought by the hedge funders and corporate contractors who seek to profit from education spending. Cuomo is doing what the hedge funders who invest in charter schools are paying him to do with their over $1 million in campaign contributions to Governor 1%. 

But the people who want to fight back and vote for an alternative are growing every day. Students are being denied a sound basic education by the corporate privatization agenda. Parents are angry at the high-stakes testing linked to Common Core-poratization, which is really about privatization and profits, not quality education. Teachers are up in arms at the attacks on their wages, benefits, working conditions, unions, and very standing as professional educators.

Taxpayers all across the state want an alternative to the Cuomo's rich man's budgets that lavish tax breaks on the rich while so many school districts face fiscal distress. Dozens of districts are headed for outright insolvency and takeover by a state-appointed control board even as their property taxes still go up and school funding, staffing, and programs still go down 

Brian is a leader in the movement for quality public schools and resistance to the corporate reform agenda. He believes that quality education should be a human right, not a just a luxury for those who can afford it.

Brian helped organize the Movement of Rank and File Educators, the social justice caucus of the United Federation of Teachers. He has had op-eds on education policy printed in the New York Times, the Indypendent and other publications. He has appeared on Democracy Now!, MSNBC, and New York City media speaking to these issues. He co-narrated the film, The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman. He contributed to the book, Education and Capitalism: Struggles for Learning and Liberation. Brian has also lent his voice to several audiobooks, including The John Carlos Story: The Sports Moment That Changed the World and Howard Zinn’s one-man play, Marx in Soho. Brian is the recipient of a 2012 Lannan Cultural Freedom Fellowship. 

In short, Brian is not just better on the issues. He is better qualified than anybody the Democrats or Republicans are capable of finding to run for Lieutenant Governor on their tickets.

Please nominate Brian Jones for Lieutenant Governor at the Green Party convention on Saturday May 17 in Troy.

And please, make a financial contribution to our campaign today so that after the convention, we can hit the ground running.
-Howie Hawkins
Candidate for the Green Party nomination for New York Governor

Howie Hawkins
http://www.howiehawkins.org/


 =====
Why I moderate comments - Spam, spam, spam. Every day spammers try to load up comments with ads and I won't allow that to happen. So I moderate for that reason, not to censor anyone. All comments that are not spam are allowed.

Press Conf Protesting Charter Law at 9AM/ Charter Gold Rush to Come in NYS

9AM: presser starting now, followed by 10AM City Council hearing on charters.

WHAT:          Press conference to protest new state law requiring New York City to give charter schools preference for space and resources, while schools in community school districts need space and resources to properly serve public school students.     

WHO:            NYC public school parents, City Council members, elected parent leaders, public education advocates and allies

WHEN:         Tuesday, May 6, 9AM

WHERE:      Steps of Tweed; 52 Chambers Street in lower Manhattan

City Council hearing on charter schools at City Hall to follow at 10AM.

 =====

NY law creates charter "gold rush" in NYC attracting people in it for the $, warns even charter advocate

http://go.shr.lc/1mv11tz 

New state law changes makes opening charter schools in New York City easier than any other in nation

Recent state law changes are making New York City the friendlist in nation for opening charter schools.

Get ready for a charter school gold rush.

Recently enacted changes in state law created an environment for opening charter schools in New York City that’s friendlier than almost any other city in the nation.

“From an infrastructure perspective, things have never been better,” said James Merriman, the influential CEO of the New York City Charter School Center.

“We have the governor and state Legislature to thank for that.”

Would-be charter school operators have already contacted the center asking for information on the benefits of the law spearheaded by Gov. Cuomo. It requires that the city provide new or expanding charters with space in traditional public school buildings or rent for privately-owned space.

The law also increases per-pupil funding for charters from $13,527 to an estimated $14,027 by the 2017-2018 school year.

“It changes the whole game,” said Ric Campbell, 61, co-founder of the South Bronx Early College Academy. “It’s a huge advantage.”

Campbell’s middle school received its charter in December and won’t open until September 2015 with 110 kids and $300,000 dedicated to facility-related expenses.

If Campbell qualifies for the new benefits he could spend the money on hiring four more teachers, laptops for each student, field trips to college campuses or more arts and music programming, he said.

He’s not the only one excited by the benefits of the new law.

“Everyone who reaches out to our organization is considering whether they are eligible,” said Kyle Rosenkrans, vice president of policy and advocacy at the Northeast Charter Schools Network, which works directly with 183 schools.

Critics have blasted the law.

James Merriman, the CEO of the New York City Charter School Center, said that from an infrastructure perspective, things have never been better

“Gov. Cuomo has given a green light to a separate and unequal school system that favors privately run charter schools and underfunds traditional public schools,” said Zakiyah Ansari, advocacy director for the Alliance for Quality Education.

The charter movement is counting on the continued support of Cuomo, who is listed as honorary chairman of a private education conference in Lake Placid beginning Sunday and attended by charter operators and deep-pocketed hedge fund donors.

“It’s not just about putting more money in the public school system, it’s trying something new and that's what charter schools are all about,” Cuomo has told charter supporters.

That doesn’t sit well with Ansari.

“Political contributions from super-wealthy ideological promoters of privatization have too much control over education policy under Cuomo's new law — instead parents and communities should be in the driver's seat for their children’s future,” she said.

Rosenkrans was guardedly optimistic about the law, which he said includes a lot of vague language that still needs to be hashed out.

Still, observers expect an avalanche of applicants for the 52 remaining spots allocated by the state for new charter schools in New York City — and teachers eager to land jobs.

That’s on top of the 21 approved charter schools set to open in the city this year.

All told, that means 73 new charter schools in the coming years.

Campbell worried the new funding might lure would-be charter operators with the wrong priorities.

“It will attract more people, but for the wrong reasons,” he said. “Those of us that believe in the mission will do it anyway. If you get into this for money, you’re going to be disappointed.”

Factless Danny Feldman is Outraged at Arthur Goldstein Over Contract Crticisms

WHAT DID YOU EVER DO BESIDES WHINE AND TALK ABOUT FALSE LOYALTY OATHS?  -- Danny Feldman accusing Arthur Goldstein, who actually does something as chapter leader of one of the largest schools in the city, with almost 300 members.

Gee, Factless Feldman, get a clue. As a union official did you actually know what chapter leaders did?

Diane Ravitch, who praised the contract, also gave Arthur space to respond. He did. Brilliantly. Feldman took umbrage and lays out a typical Unity response - with hints of red-baiting, fear mongering about the  only alternative to turning down the contract is a strike, claiming the critics are lying, etc -- all with no facts of his own. Call him "Factless Feldman." Actually, I love Danny's comment in all Caps -- shows Unity people are a tad nervous.

I'll try to put up a long post reporting on yesterday's almost surrealistic Ex Bd meeting where over 15 MOREistas attended and participated in.

Read Arthur's latest on his blog:

How Much Does This Contract Cost?

Danny Feldman

May 4, 2014 at 11:28 am

LET’S BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR; RETIREES DO NOT VOTE IN CONTRACT REFERENDUMS. TO IMPLY OTHERWISE OR TO IMPLY DOUBT SHOWS THE OPPOSITION’S TRUE COLORS: THEY WOULD DECEIVE THEIR COLLEAGUES IF THEY COULD. JUST BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE DISHONEST DOESN’T MEAN THAT I WOULD BE. YOU SEEM TO HAVE NO DIFFICULTY SPREADING McCARTHY-LIKE LIES. IF PEOPLE DISAGREE WITH YOU THEY MUST BE WRONG–AND EVIL. VERY REPUBLICAN. AS A LONG-TIME UFT ACTIVIST AND ELECTED REP (SCHOOL AND DISTRICT), NOW RETIRED, I WILL ATTEND DA BUT I WON’T VOTE. AND I WON’T RECEIVE A BALLOT IN THE MAIL EITHER. I WANT TO HEAR THE ARGUMENTS, WITNESS THE SPECTACLE. I ACTUALLY WENT ON STRIKE–TWICE–IN ’68 AND ’75. I’VE PICKETED, RALLIED AND DISTRIBUTED LEAFLETS TO OUT-OF-TOWNERS OUTSIDE RADIO CITY MUSIC HALL IN 20 DEGREE WEATHER. I’VE LIVED THROUGH WAGES FREEZES, WITHHELD MONEY, THE WORKS. EVEN 2 PREPS A WEEK! WHAT DID YOU EVER DO BESIDES WHINE AND TALK ABOUT FALSE LOYALTY OATHS? WHEN THE POPULATION’S READY TO TAKE A FANTASY GENERAL STRIKE TO CLOSE DOWN THE CITY UNTIL THE RICHIES GO AWAY AND LIFE BECOMES FAIR, LET ME KNOW.

Reply

 

Arthur Goldstein

May 4, 2014 at 12:17 pm

First of all, Danny, I neither said nor implied that retirees vote for contracts. Second, while you may not like it, the Unity-UFT invitation-only application most certainly contains a loyalty oath. I have seen it and can produce it.
I resent and reject your implication that, as chapter leader of the largest school in Queens, I am not active. That’s abject nonsense.
I further resent and reject your implication that I am “spreading McCarthy-like lies.” It’s unfortunate you see fit to resort to invective rather than civil discussion. It’s unfortunate that you offer no evidence whatsoever your gratuitous accusations. I understand, of course, that there isn’t any.
I am weary but accustomed to this style of argument, and it’s precisely this intolerance for dissenting views that have reduced our organization into one in which fewer than 20% of working teachers deem it worth their time to vote in union elections.

Charter WaitList Balderdash Exposed - Show Us the Names

WAIT, WAIT. DON’T MISLEAD ME! - NINE REASONS TO BE SKEPTICAL ABOUT CHARTER WAITLIST NUMBERS.”

I have always challenged the charter lobby wait-list bullshit - challenging them to show is the names. They won't. So with the lobby releasing info today that there are billions and billions of parents clamoring to get their children into the charter plantations so they can be treated like serfs, it was good to see this counterattack.

Fellow Education Bloggers,

This is “National Charter Schools Week.”

Even the President is rejoicing with a proclamation: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/05/02/presidential-proclamation-national-charter-schools-week-2014

The National Alliance of Public Charter Schools is expected to release their annual pronouncement about the number of students on charter school waitlists.

Kevin Welner and Gary Miron have a MUST READ memo entitled, “WAIT, WAIT. DON’T MISLEAD ME! - NINE REASONS TO BE SKEPTICAL ABOUT CHARTER WAITLIST NUMBERS.”

You can access the memo at: http://nepc.colorado.edu/files/nepc-policymemo_waitlists.pdf

Thanks Kevin, Gary and NEPC for all you do to shine the light of truth,

Jonathan Pelto

The contract: Ravitch Raves, MORE Friendly Critic Asks Why 'NO"?

Hi Norm, 
In face of Diane's latest I see that MORE is planning lots of action to get folks to vote no on the contract.  I wonder if this is such a good idea.  Does anyone consider this is helping to isolate MORE?  I have been following most of the discussion. It is hard to see where MORE's priorities truly lie except against what ever the leadership says or does... a concerned contact 

Well, I don't agree - this person is not Unity and is on the MORE discussion list -- but claiming that the opposition is just about NO has been the standard Unity attack against any opposition. MORE has and will be talking about the kind of contract teachers and children deserve -- Yes, Virginia (and ed deformers) our contract has and should help defend children too --- if MORE makes a mistake, it will be to ignore this angle -- even if teachers will say children are not a factor in a contract it is MORE's obligation to show why it is a factor.

Rather than isolate MORE, a campaign will consolidate people opposed to the contract -- many of whom are not activists or even anti-Unity generally. Once the contract battle is over only a small percentage may join MORE and become active in the internal union struggles. Based on history, most won't. But MORE, trying to build an effective long-term alternative to Unity, must try.

This is not about just saying that MORE is opposed to anything Unity puts forth. In fact MOREistas are often more reasonable about Unity than I am -- they don't classify them as the enemy and collaborator with our ed deform enemies and their enabler. I pretty much oppose anything Unity does because even if it looks good on the surface, I believe it has to smell underneath. But that is Ed Notes, not MORE.

I think there are lots of reasons to vote NO. Will the majority of teachers think so? I bet not. Accountable Talk will also vote NO but he doesn't see great prospects even if the membership turns it down ("No" Problem). 

I basically agree with him but would vote NO too. As I will write in a follow-up post, I never voted YES on a contract over a 30-year period -- and it was never the money for me but the working conditions. I know the money is on everyone's mind right now - along with the ATR issue -- but I have many more gripes than these - which I will point to in my follow-up.

I believe that given the well-spring of dissatisfaction out there so far with the contract and with the Unity leadership in general, MORE has an obligation to lead a VOTE NO campaign. If not MORE, who else?

I think of this vote as a referendum of sorts on the Unity Caucus leadership -- like an election --  without the retirees to distort the vote (they can't vote on contracts) and with a much larger turnout than the regular election where 52% of the vote were retirees and less than 20% voted.

MORE's efforts will help maximize the opposition to the contract even if the leadership doesn't get sent back to the negotiating table - which if they were, it would be a victory - at the very least moral - even if they came back with roughly the same contract tweaked.

So, go forth young MOREistas - many of you into your first contract battle -- and maybe your last - and learn from the successes and errors you may make. Learn so that you can build a better caucus. Gain entry into more schools to expand your network. Go forth and organize your brethren and sistren who are ready to move to a new phase and become organizers themselves. Then when it's over, take an honest analysis of what was gained and lost. And I will bet my concerned contact that MORE will not be living in isolation.

Arthur Goldstein responds to Diane praise on her blog (yes, for Ravitch bashers, she hears everyone's voices.)

Arthur Goldstein: Why I Don’t Like the New Teachers’ Contract in NYC

The Ravitch contract rave is below the jump.

A Newark Teacher Issues Warning to NYC Teachers on Contract -

It is more than mere coincidence that the challenges of the “historic” Newark contract are now being exported to New York City teachers. Do not allow Randi Weingarten to dance the minuet at your reception..... A Newark Teacher

Has Randi evolved into a whirling dervish?

Randi’s Dance Repertoire
by A Newark Teacher

In an interview with Josh Eidelson of Salon, Randi danced the hora, circling round and round the issues as she staunchly defended Bill Gate’s Common Core baby. 

… the problem is the Common Core has been associated with testing rather than the deeper learning intended to promote... So you have a massive implementation failure that has masked the potential of these standards to help the transition from rote memorization in schools, to helping kids become critical thinkers and knowledge-appliers…
Instead of managing a process that is supposed to be professionally driven, [Newark Superintendent Cami Anderson] walked away from it, and is embarked upon a process to privatize the Newark system....The contract had some strong protections for Newark educators… pieces of pay based upon test scores, which our folks in Newark were willing to do…That contract had enough significant protections that Cami Anderson tried to waive those protections.... Randi Weingarten 

For some reason unbeknownst to Randi, Common Core has come to be associated with standardized testing. Always willing to be helpful, I will take a stab at analyzing the conundrum. The raison d’etre for Common Core is to create a national education market for Microsoft, Pearson and others to hawk their instructional and assessment products. Common Core provides the adhesive for a highly profitable enterprise.

A problematic implementation of the Common Core has impeded the progression from rote memorization to deep critical thinking. Let me ask my readers! Back in the day when you were in school, was your experience comprised primarily of rote learning? I can recall, off hand, memorizing number facts and multiplication tables. On occasion, we had to learn sacred text by heart;

We hold these truths to be self-evident
Four score and seven years ago
I have a dream that my four little children
Two roads diverged in a wood
Hold fast to dreams. For if dreams die

In the years I have been teaching, less and less emphasis has been placed on what came to be called “drill and kill.” It often seemed to me that we had moved too far in the direction of, “Let’s figure out the reason for everything.” In Randi’s world far removed from the public schools of the United States, Common Core has been hampered by an improper rollout. If we were to re-roll it baby, all of our children would be writing profoundly critical information essays on the texts they have closely read and annotated for the zillionth time.

Back on the home front in Newark, State Superintendent Cami Anderson was gravely disappointed to learn that she did not hit all her targets for her bonus. As per njspotlight.com, Cami missed two quantitative goals. Surprise, surprise, the renew schools did not outperform the schools they replaced. Unfortunately, not even one renew school showed significant growth in achievement. Jane David reported in Educational Leadership that the research shows that renew schools in other cities are not faring much better.

Although I am certainly no education researcher, the whole premise of the Turnaround Theory looks shaky to me. OK, so you hire a new principal, throw out all the teachers, rehire less than half the old teachers, bring on board a bunch of newbies, keep all the same students and presto all the children will turn into super-duper test takers.

To explain the Newark fiasco, Randi switched gears to the fancy foot work of a tango as she harkened back to the implementation theme.

According to Randi, it was not she who sowed the seeds of the Newark predicament and the contract she termed "historic" was not flawed. 

No, it was Governor Chris Christie, sitting at the helm of the state run district, who did not implement the contract with fidelity. If only Chris and Cami had followed the letter and the spirit of the contract, a nasty plan like One Newark, which provides for the possible firing of a third of the teaching force, would never have come to fruition. 

Randi was instrumental in negotiating the contract, which featured "pieces of pay based upon test scores" and then she rammed it down the throats of Newark teachers. I, personally, received two phone calls from national AFT staffers attempting to overcome my objections to the contract.
In the Spring 2014 issue of American Educator Randi opined,

As a data point, VAM is informative; as a high-stakes measurement used to sort, rank, and evaluate teachers-it is wrong.

Let me see I can get this straight. For the purposes of the Newark contract in the Fall of 2012, Randi favored VAM.

In the Spring of 2014, Randi opposed VAM.

Then, earlier this week, Randi lavished praise on Newark teachers for taking the merit pay plunge and accepting evaluations partially based on VAM.

Has Randi evolved into a whirling dervish?

May I offer a word of caution to my brothers and sisters in New York City? Be very wary of efforts to loosen tenure protections for ATRs.

Do not for one minute think that the weakened union contract provisions afforded to one hundred, or two hundred, or three hundred schools today will not arrive at your school tomorrow. I was an Employee Without Placement (the Newark version of ATR) for a year and it was a very insecure existence.

In my view, merit pay is divisive, poisoning the atmosphere with a competitive ingredient that does not foster the cooperation necessary among teachers to build academic achievement. It is more than mere coincidence that the challenges of the “historic” Newark contract are now being exported to New York City teachers. Do not allow Randi Weingarten to dance the minuet at your reception.

A Newark Teacher

Advice to MORE on Contract Strategy

Norm, you strike me as a realist. What are your thoughts on getting this voted down?... Roseanne McCosh PS 8x

Roseanne asks a good question. Before trying to respond I want to lay down some historical points because being out of schools for a decade I don't have the best feel for the mood of the members, other than the fact that some old supporters of Ed Notes have been in touch about getting a NO vote. Are they realistic?

I can only go on my experiences over the 2005 contract battle where the ICE/TJC campaign attracted many formerly non-activist teachers to the struggle. With social media flying all over the place, Unity no longer controls the media or the message. But I still believe organizing doesn't take place on a keyboard but face to face.

Roseanne talks about her experience:

Asking questions of a DR is fine but unless we already know the answer we won't know if we are being lied to. When they send a unity shill to my school I usually ask questions when I already know the answers. My questions are usually designed so the other people in the room become informed of what I already know and if the answer is untruthful---I can call them on it. There are a couple of informed people in my school who always help spread the truth. That's how teachers can be effective in their schools. Pick some point people to attend each meeting over the lunch periods who can counter the bullshit thrown at us. Last time a contract was shoved down our throats I was able to rebut the bullshit for members to hear and I followed up with a letter with counterpoints to what said at the meeting. I'm not an optimist but it won't take much effort for me to do that again so I will and maybe---just maybe there's a spark of hope.  Roseanne McCosh PS 8x

My answer to Roseanne about the chances for a NO vote would boil down to: How many more Roseannes are there out there to do what she does to counter the Unity spin? For in every school with a strong MOREista we are getting sings of NO votes. But no one has seen the memorandum yet -- they will be available at the UFT Exec Bd meeting tomorrow night at 6PM. Perdido is seeing a modifying of the attitude -- go leave a comment as to where you stand.

Perdido Street School

UFT Contract - What Will The Rank And File Do? -
AFTER BURN: 2005 contract battle redux - did the opposition grow?

We were able to observe the vote count and a few youngish women showed up from Staten Island because they didn't trust the vote - they had taken the day off. In terms of organizing by getting them involved with the caucuses, people like them were basically interested in the contract issue and ICE and TJC did not grow all that much. We had expected that the 2007 election would show some gains based on the fact that almost 40% of the working teachers voted against (see Kit Wainer: Historical Reference to Previous Contract Struggles). But the 2007 election was a disappointment and the outcome began to lead me to start thinking about going down a different road - which 2 years later became the non-caucus GEM focused not on the union but on defending public ed.

So I see things longer range -- will this struggle activate more people to take on other issues or does it all end once the vote count is in? My experience is the latter. But those were the days before social media, so now anything goes.
 
Because even if we get a NO vote, what next? They will make enough tweaks and keep selling.
In most schools the battle is to come. Every dist rep will demand a meeting and access to the staff. Unless there is a debate they will convince many. Their biggest argument will be "what is the alternative?"

MORE needs to have an answer with some specifics - what do we want out, what do we want in - because if we should win a NO vote what next?

More will be attacked for posturing. Unity will pull the strike card - that is the only alternative to a NO Vote and scare people.

MORE should raise all the issues about no cost items - like some way to protect people from bully principals, the end to discontinue, a panel to investigate a principal who keeps extending tenure, not just another comm to deal with paperwork but specific paperwork that should be eliminated - add your own.

In fact with a chance to improve at least some daily working conditions Unity Caucus took a pass - how about some stronger class size loophole protections?

We should praise the parent aspect - but the assumption that teachers must be forced is obnoxious - will they try to  match the charter school claims that teachers must give parents their cell numbers?

A whole bunch of stuff is PR to counter charters - and really a joke.

----
So much more to cover - so look for MORE.

How Unity is Selling the Contract and A Response from a Rank and Filer Who is Not Buying

What was the union's dream contract?  What were our demands?  How can anyone but the mayor declare this a victory?... High School teacher responding to email from UFT organizer

You know something is shaking when people I haven't heard from in years start sending me letters they are writing saying they will vote NO. These are not the activist MOREistas who spend a hell of a lot of time on union stuff, but rank and file people who very rarely get involved.

Below is a response to a Queen UFT/Unity operative who sent out an email selling the contract and announcing school visits (read it below the teacher's response). I'm keeping the names out of it.

Hello ------,

I will vote no.  I will encourage my fellow teachers to vote no.

This is not a well negotiated contract.  This contract seems like a good starting point for the MAYOR.  If these are the agreed upon conditions, where did the mayor start?  Did he suggest 0% for nine years with immediate termination of ATRs along with major healthcare concessions?

What was the union's dream contract?  What were our demands?  How can anyone but the mayor declare this a victory?

Use the link below to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics to see that the Consumer Price Index shows a 23% increase in consumer prices over the past 9 years.  Our contract gives us an 18% raise over the same time period.  This means that at the end of 9 years, we will be 5% poorer.  To drastically compound the matter, this contract is absurdly backloaded.  For the majority of these 9 years our salaries were even further below the adjusted consumer price index.

Previous contracts went through fact-finding and arbitration.  No such process occured here.  Nothing occured here.  I feel more betrayed by my union than I have ever felt by my administration.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Sincerely,

---------

Email from Queen UFT Organizing Committee

Please note:

       Because of the proposed contract, the schedule below is highly tentative.

May 5                                  John Bowne

May 6                                  Bayside

May 7                                  HSAB

May 7                                  Delegate Assembly

May 9                                  Townsend Harris

May 13                                UFT Organizing

May 13                                Queens HS Chapter Leaders

May 14                                Gateway

May 15                                Queens Vocational

Contract

                  What needs to happen now is for your Chapter Leader and Delegates to attend this Wednesday’s Delegate Assembly-that’s what you elected them for.

                        Then there need to be Chapter meetings at which the provisions of the proposed contract are explained and questions answered.  I hope to participate in many such discussions over the coming days.

                        It is essential that folks respond to the actual Memorandum of Agreement when it is available and not rely upon blogs and newspapers for their information.  To that end I will not myself be publishing any details of the proposed contract until after Wednesday’s Delegate Assembly, except for the Union’s press release:

Kit Wainer: Historical Reference to Previous Contract Struggles

Kit's history is an important starting point for the upcoming contract struggle. I have a different take on some of Kit's analysis - remember - my history of contract struggles goes back to the early 70s. But it is too nice a day and I am too lazy to get into it - though I may do a separate post at where I disagree.

But a few words before I head outside.

In 1995 I had just come back to activism after being elected CL in my school the year before. I was so focused on my battle with my principal I basically sat out that NO Vote campaign - though I did debate my district rep in my school. Besides - that was 2 years before Ed Notes - so I didn't have a vehicle anyway - and was not interested in working with TJC or New Action.

The 2005 battle was very different. ICE had been formed a year and a half before -- mostly in response to the New Action sellout and also a reaction to how TJC viewed things. Though feelings with TJC were still ruffled, we united for this campaign and did pretty well. New Action members of the negotiating committee had voted for the contract, though Mike Shulman later denied it (Randi announced at the DA that the vote was unanimous and Shulman didn't say a word that she was wrong. NAC insiders told me there was a revolt from within - Shulman argued that if they opposed the contract Randi would be mad at them -- but they insisted on the very least a leaflet saying they opposed, though they wouldn't do any organizing around it - as a cover for them.

The ICE/TJC opposition campaign garnered almost 40% of the vote against. Can that happen again?

Some Lessons of Previous Contract Struggles, Part 1

http://morecaucusnyc.org/2014/01/28/some-lessons-of-previous-contract-struggles-part-1/#more-2851

January 28, 2014 — 6 Comments

By Kit Wainer
Chapter Leader, Leon M. Goldstein H.S.

In the 25 years I’ve been a UFT activist I’ve lived through many. I’ve learned some lessons from these struggles that I thought might be useful to share as we head into another contract period. From 1993-2012 I was a member of Teachers for a Just Contract. From 2012 to the present I have been a member of MORE.

1. Every contract announcement focuses members’ attention on the contract and on the UFT. However, not every contract, yields significant opportunities for mobilizing or even educating. Historically, some UFT contracts have consisted of minor cost-of-living wage increases and few changes in working conditions. The 1990 contract, for example, got us a 5% raise over one year and little else changed. In 2007 a two-year deal merely extended the terms of the 2005 contract until 2009, got us minor wage increases and raised top salary for teachers to 100K. Sometimes, although a contract passes overwhelmingly it contains some unpopular provisions which open organizing potential even if only among a minority of members. The 1993 contract, for example, was easily ratified but its 18-month wage freeze made it unpopular among many members and encouraged a handful of them to become active and form Teachers for a Just Contract. TJC lasted until 2012. It started as a group 7-8 people, a couple of whom were chapter leaders. We remained that size throughout the 1990s and published a newsletter a few times per year called “Class Action.” Unlike New Action, TJC emphasized the need for membership mobilization and specifically argued that “a union that has abandoned the strike weapon is at the mercy of the employer.”

The 2002 contract extended the work day for the first time in decades. Although it was also approved fairly easily, I believe the anger over the longer work day spilled over into the the 2005 contract fight. Neither the 1993 nor 2002 contracts led to vast political openings within the UFT. However, different opposition groups were able to make a number of contacts during the time the contract was debated. TJC, at least, was able to call on many new contacts afterward to help with literature distribution and to run on our slate in the UFT elections of 2004. The Independent Community of Educators formed in fall 2003, partially in response to New Action’s turn toward an alliance with Unity. TJC and ICE ran a joint slate for the high school Executive Board seats in 2004 and won. Apart from the high school seats, however, the two groups ran separate slates that year.

2. 1995. This was the only time in the UFT’s history that the membership voted down a contract which the leadership had negotiated. Never having faced a serious contract fight before the Sandra Feldman/Unity leadership took this one cavalierly. The pact was negotiated with the Giuliani administration only two weeks after the previous contract had expired. It was a 5-year deal with an 11% raise spread out over the final three years — no raises the first two years. It included a “retention incentive” — a withholding of 5% of all new teachers’ salaries to be returned only to those who lasted five years in the system. It added a 25-year longevity increment which would have meant increasing the

number of years required to earn top salary from 20 years to 25. It created C6 assignments. This was before the days of the blogosphere, so it was difficult to gauge membership sentiment at first. When Feldman brought the pact to the Delegate Assembly the meeting was raucous and — unusually — closed to non-delegates. Feldman warned that if we didn’t accept this deal Giuliani would start layoffs, first with paraprofessionals then with new teachers. Clara Barton High School Chapter Leader and future Vice President Leo Casey declared it was an elementary principal of union solidarity to stand by the weakest members — ie., accept concessions in order to prevent layoffs. Manhattan HS District Representative and Humanities HS Delegate Bruce Markens was one of the main speakers against, highlighting everything that was wrong with the deal. True to form, the Delegate Assembly ratified the deal.

Until that time I had never before held any union position nor had I ever had a real opportunity to organize co-workers around a union-related issue. On the Wednesday morning of the DA I wrote a letter to the chapter highlighting all the givebacks in the proposed contract and urged my colleagues to tell our chapter leader and delegate — both of whom were members of Feldman’s Unity Caucus — to vote “no.” An English teacher, acting on his own, started a petition to the chapter leader and delegate asking them to vote “no” at the DA. 80% of the chapter signed his petition. Nonetheless, the chapter leader and delegate voted “yes.” The next morning’s chapter meeting featured outraged members demanding to know how the chapter leader and delegate could simply ignore the unambiguous will of the members. This incident permanently damaged their credibility and was the main reason I was elected chapter leader the following spring. The English teacher who launched the petition was elected delegate.

Furthermore, because I had written the letter against the proposed contract members began coming to me to ask how they could help stop the deal from going through. Many of them started taking TJC’s “Vote No” leaflets to other schools. Suddenly our distribution mushroomed and leaflets were easy to give away, especially in the high schools. I remember going to a PD with people from various high schools and nearly everyone wanted a stack. Members were angry.

When the membership votes were tallied at the end of 1995 the contract was rejected by a margin of 54%-46%. At the time I thought a new day in union politics was opening. I figured the leadership had just been humiliated and the membership had just voted “no confidence” in Unity. But that isn’t how most members saw it. Even at my school, most members judged that the leadership had been taught a lesson and would now go negotiate something better. And Unity rebounded intelligently. Rather than criticize the members Feldman blamed the Giuliani administration for giving itself raises while asking teachers to take a wage freeze. Over the coming months TJC grew slightly and I gained some credibility as a leader among my colleagues but 1995-1996 did not become a year of substantial new activism. The leadership basically waited us out. In June 1996 Feldman and Giuliani negotiated a slightly less obnoxious version of the deal members had just rejected. The “retention incentive” was gone and the 25-year longevity became a 22-year longevity. But the double zeros and C6 were still there. Most importantly, the 1996 version of the pact included a retirement incentive which made it

possible for most members age 52 or older to retire. Thus a significant number of senior members were enticed to ratify a contract under which they would never have to work. This time members approved the pact by a margin of 3-1. TJC’s assessment was that by its inactivity in the early months of 1996 the leadership convinced the membership that it would not lead any new fights against the city and that this was the best deal they were going to get. Unfortunately, there was no consciousness among the members that through their own activity they could force a change in the UFT’s direction. And by the way, the layoff threat proved to be a bluff.

We also believed that Unity learned some important lessons. First, it would never again take a contract fight for granted. In the future it would much more actively defame opponents and do a better spin job to make defeats look like victories. Second, I believe that Unity concluded that in order to sell concessions, members have to be offered money. Asking members to accept even minor givebacks with no wage increase is tough because members can simply avoid the concessions by voting “no.” If the contract on which they are voting contains no raises, they lose nothing by rejecting it. Future concessions, such as the longer work day, would be packaged with significant salary increases and retroactive pay. The Unity leadership would apply these lessons with far greater skill in 2005, when it successfully sold the most damaging contract in the union’s history. How they did that is what we will explore in part 2.

Some Lessons of Previous Contract Struggles, Part2

http://morecaucusnyc.org/2014/01/31/some-lessons-of-previous-contract-struggles-part-2/

The 2005 agreement included raises, pro-rata pay increases to compensate for the longer work day, and full retroactive pay. Members were being offered substantial pay hikes and retroactive checks that, for some, would approach $10,000.

But there was great anger. Roughly 200 protesters showed up outside the Delegate Assembly, even though no group had prioritized building the protest. Weingarten moved the Delegate Assembly to the Brooklyn Marriott so that it could pack the room with retirees and union staff. Nearly 2000 delegates attended. Randi spoke for an hour to provide “context” for the contract. Then Elementary School VP Michelle Bodden spoke for ten minutes to argue for ratification. Weingarten asked speakers in favor of the deal to line up on one side and those against to line up on the other side.
The first speaker “against” was actually a speaker in favor of the contract. She said she had a bad knee and couldn’t walk over to the “for” line. Randi let her speak nonetheless and then called on another speaker “for.” I was the fourth speaker and the first one to oppose the contract. I spoke for 7-8 minutes. My strategy was to ignore most of the justifications Randi and Bodden had just made and address the issues I knew members were talking about. After me, only two others were allowed to speak “against” before District Representative Marty Plotkin called the question. On the first vote the delegates overwhelmingly approved the deal. Then Randi, responding to shouts from the audience, asked for a vote of only active members (non-retirees). This time the vote was roughly 60-40 in favor, not a good showing for the leadership at a meeting it controlled.

Dozens of people approached me at the DA, took “vote no” leaflets to distribute to their schools, and filled out TJC coupons to get on our mailing list. We held an open meeting about a week later at which several ICE members, one New Action/UFT member, and a few dozen independents showed up. The meeting decided to organize a picket outside UFT headquarters before the membership ratification vote. I believed at the time, and still believe, that was a mistake. The priority should have been literature distribution in the schools, doing everything possible to reach out to new people who were angry about the proposed contract but had not been involved in union issues before. Those kinds of people were not the types who would show up at a rally. But the rally idea prevailed and we held one in November. About 175 people came out.

Meanwhile Unity stuffed mailboxes around the city with literature claiming the proposed contract didn’t actually mean what it said. They said that by giving up the right to transfer more teachers would have the right to transfer. They said giving up the right to grieve letters in the file was insignificant because we never won those grievances anyway. They said the new C6 assignments would always be professional activities controlled by members. At a high school chapter leaders’ meeting one District Representative said that no students would actually show up for 37.5 minutes, that this was something that would only hurt elementary school teachers.

My sense (and I admit that I can’t prove it) was that in schools where there were oppositionists (TJC, ICE, or unaffiliated) who distributed “vote no” leaflets we convinced the membership. But in the majority of schools only Unity’s deceptive literature was seen.

In late 2005 the membership ratified the contract by a 63-37 margin. Among teachers the vote was 60-40. However, the anger over the deal was significant, even among those who voted “yes.” Both TJC and ICE gained many new contacts around the city and the momentum pushed us a little closer together. We ran a join slate in the 2007 UFT elections.

Unfortunately, I think the lesson Unity learned from this was that the mobilizations it authorized in spring 2005 raised membership expectations and made the contract a tougher sell. After that the UFT called for far fewer rallies. The union, for example, has done nothing comparable in recent years even though we have been without a contract for more than four years.

Rebecca Mead in New Yorker on Teachers Refusing to Give Test and on Louis C.K. Slam of Testing and Common Core

This week, teachers at International High School at Prospect Heights, which serves a population of recently arrived immigrants from non-English-speaking countries, announced that they would not administer an assessment required by the city. A pre-test in the fall “was a traumatic and demoralizing experience for students,” a statement issued by the teachers said. “Many students, after asking for help that teachers were not allowed to give, simply put their heads down for the duration. Some students even cried.” When a comedian points out the way in which the current priorities don’t add up, it earns even the attention of those who haven’t thought much about school since they graduated. But the brutal math of the New York City school system is no laughing matter.... Rebecca Mead, The New Yorker

Rebecca is an opt-out parent in Brooklyn and talks about our pals at the International School at Prospect Heights campus - see the video I made (Video and Press Release: NYC High School Teachers Refuse to Administer Test). 

The Louis C.K. story has been circulating for days, topped by his appearance on Letterman. I posted some of his tweets the other day - Even more Louis CK Tweets this time about CC and "Bill Hates"!!!

His kids go to public school in Manhattan. Here are some more links to stories.

Diane Ravitch: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-ravitch/louis-ck-common-core_b_5250982.html

An ed deform Newsweek writer, who claims to be a former teacher - attacked Louis and used the same old tired excuses, even resorting to pulling same race card used by Arne Duncan -- that it is white middle class people protesting because they have nothing to lose while ed deform will save the poor children on the plantation.

Louis C.K.        ✔ @louisck 

@alexnazaryan the things you say about me are shallow and mean but you posed in front of some books for your pic & thus sound smart.

Ravitch does touch on this issue in one of her responses to Nazaryan.

Actually, we at Change the Stakes are beginning to see a real uptick in parents of color joining the opt-out movement. CTS has been going into these neighborhoods to provide info for people.

"LOUIS C.K. HAS FIGURED OUT WHY OUR KIDS ARE SAD"

"Their love of learning is dying. And the only way to fix it is to listen to them."
by Ben Collins
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/news/louis-ck-education

Gothamist--has embedded clip of Louis CK on Letterman. First two minutes of video

http://gothamist.com/2014/05/02/video_louis_ck_slams_common_core_te.php

Boing Boing piece by Cory Doctorow:

http://boingboing.net/2014/05/02/standardized-testing-and-schoo.html

Louis on ABC News. On Facebook: 1 minute video.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10152184094139818&set=vb.214832449817&type=2&theater

 

May 1, 2014

Louis C.K. Against the Common Core

Posted by Rebecca Mead

On Thursday morning, thousands of children who attend public school in New York City will be sitting down for the second of three days of standardized math tests. Among them will be the offspring of Louis C.K., the comedian. Earlier this week, he took to social media to express his frustration at his daughter’s math homework, tweeting the questions she was required to solve to his more than three million followers. “My kids used to love math! Now it makes them cry,” he wrote.

Math looks different these days from when Louis C.K. and his contemporaries attended school, and many similarly aged parents have found themselves puzzled by the manner in which math concepts are being presented to this generation of learners as well as perplexed as to how to offer the most basic assistance when their children are struggling with homework. If you are over the age of twenty and not yourself a teacher, it is unlikely that you will have an intuitive facility with a “number line,” or know how to write a “number sentence,” or even understand what is meant by the omnipresent directive to “show your work.”
In several of his tweets, C.K. blasted the Common Core, the federally approved (but not nationally mandated) standards that most states, including New York, have adopted. Parental critiques of Common Core math problems have gone viral before. At the same time, defenders of the Common Core have argued that the standards themselves are not the problem so much as the poorly conceived or badly expressed curricula in which they are often embedded. This defense sounds reasonable enough, though parents whose children come home with worksheets presenting obscurely worded or illogically presented problems and bearing the words Common Core can hardly be blamed for conflating the two.

More:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2014/05/louis-ck-against-the-common-core.html