Mike Schirtzer: Why MORE Will Run In The 2016 UFT Elections

Mike Schirtzer responds to ed notes (The Great Scott-Schirtzer Debate: Boycott UFT Elections or Not) and nyceducator (The Great Debate--Just How Rigged is the UFT Election?) blogs on the upcoming 2016 UFT election.

Mike Schirtzer (Left) makes a point in election debate with the elderly guy to his right

by Mike Schirtzer

• UFT Delegate Leon M. Goldstein HS
• Vice-Presidential Candidate 2013 UFT Elections- MORE Caucus
• Vice-Chair NYC Region ST Caucus-NYSU

1. UFT members pay attention
Running in 2016 would give us the chance to build on the lessons learned. One of the important lessons came when we held local election happy hours in Staten Island and Bay Ridge Brooklyn. These are not typical activist areas, but in each case we had over 50 people, most who had no idea there was a such thing as union election or caucuses. It exposed MORE, the UFT elections, and our positive alternative message to people we would never reach other wise. Many of the contacts we are still in touch with today, support us, distributed our literature and joined us again when we hosted contract information sessions.

2.  Fundraiser
People are more likely to give you money and time when they know there is something you are striving for. I would not donate to an "uncaucus" cause, but would donate and volunteer If I believe I can make a difference.

3. Expose the lack of democracy
The only way to understand something is to be in it. Kinesthetic, hands on learning is what works best. If you want someone to understand the UFT leadership structure they actually have to be involved in it. Explaining adcom, executive board, the fact that all VPs are at large, delegates are not proportional, slate voting, the NAC corrupt bargain, and the unmatched, unprecedented power of retirees, can not be understood unless your actually running in the elections. Sitting on the sidelines and asking people to boycott, without an intricate understanding of that what we're supposed to be boycotting is counter-productive. No one will bother to look into the corrupt structure unless they are invested in it.

4. You have to stand for something
But you also have to stand for someone- opt out, contract, social justice  - you have to have a constituency to represent and members to be involved. We can not call ourselves a movement of rank and file educators and only speak for ourselves. The only reason we can claim to speak for thousands of UFT members is by looking at post election results. Why would any media outlet or grassroots organization have anything to do with us if we can't prove we represent anyone? You can represent ideas, but there needs to be a movement behind those ideas or else who will take you seriously? It is very impressive to say over 5,000 active UFT members voted for us. It shows we have a following. We won 40% of the high school vote, yet have no representation in UFT, If we don't run and that lose the right to claim supporters

 5. Goals
We must give the people something to fight for- if you're not running then what are we fighting for?  We are not GEM, I'm glad there is Change The Stakes, NYSAPE, but that's not what we are. There needs to be a group of public school educators that actively advocates for teacher's working conditions which are inherently connected to student's learning conditions. We formed as a union opposition caucus. MORE's formation came out of groups agreeing to come together and challenge Unity/New Action. People want something to strive for. Even if it's something that may seem impossible to reach. There is no reason to keep on going if we don't give people a reason to get involved. Our many campaigns are great, but do not resonate with all UFT members. Defeating Unity and offering a better vision is something that can and will unite us a all, no matter your race, gender, borough, level, title. UFT elections is the the great equalizer.

6. Indicator of our campaigns
We have invested so much into fighting opt out, the terrible contract, test based evaluations, fighting for the schools all our children deserve- let's see how effective we have truly been. We have hosted forums, conferences, meetings, happy hours, petitions. We need to measure how effective they were or see if we need to change things up. MORE, has been a lot more active than our predecessors. This election will be a measuring stick of where we are at.

7. Identity
We have solidified ourselves on social media, NY Times, WNYC, Chalkbeat, NYSUT magazine, blogs, Facebook, Twitter, NY Post, our association with ST Caucus - we are more known than ever before. I feel MORE has become a name that people associate with positively. They know we fight union leadership, but they also know we fight for the rights of teachers, students and parents.

8. Officer slate
We have a few people who have worked tirelessly since the last election. They have not taken anytime off and worked hard to keep the organization going even when some decided to sit it out. We have worked hard to organize and mobilize others and what's wrong with tasting the fruit of our labor? We have dedicated our full lives to the caucus since the last election. We feel we can stand with the likes James Eterno, Kit Wainer, and Julie Cavanagh. We will bring name recognition, respectability, and a real fighting spirit to our candidacies. We are respected teachers, union leaders, and have gained the trust of those in our building and beyond. Many of us have spoken in public and are not afraid of the media. We deserve to have a stage to stand on and a platform to speak truth to the power. We are confident people will rally around us

9. Petitioning/Distributing
This is the chance for our members to go around their chapters and nearby schools to open up conversations around what the rank and file want for their union leadership. As Karen Lewis has said "Social Justice Unionism is member driven, member driven, member driven". This is a key moment for the leading members of opposition to bring literature around, gain contact information, but most importantly listen to our members. This will make us better leaders and ultimately a better caucus.

10. Beacon of hope
Bran Stevenson, the great civil rights attorney, who fights for justice for the wrongly convicted, has said when there is is no hope, times are rough, it is important that someone is there to give hope. Hope is what get people through the day. There are many who have come to us and said I can't be active, but I'm happy you exist. The election gives people the opportunity to have hope. There have been many dark times in our history, what seemed to be insurmountable odds. One only needs to look at Dr. King and the civil rights movement. After the dogs, hoses, bombings, lynch mobs, the terror of the Jim Crow south- the movement continued to fight day after day for equality, voting rights, and justice. There were people that said over and over again- stop, sit this one put, and yet the movement persevered. Even when their allies said it's an impossible fight, the numbers are against you, they kept on and they won. I am not trying to make a false analogy to the civil rights movement, obviously our causes are far different, but I, like many others, look to the movement to draw inspiration and lessons. The lesson has to be, never give up, fight everyday, every minute for what you believe in!

I can not and do not officially speak for our democratic organization, but firmly believe this represents the will of our members. At a meeting in the summer of 2013 it was democratically voted on that MORE will indeed be an electoral caucus in the 2016 UFT elections. 
Mike Schirtzer

The Onion: Pros and Cons of Standardized Testing

http://www.theonion.com/graphic/pros-and-cons-standardized-testing-50388

As the American education system continues to place more emphasis on standardized testing to measure academic achievement, critics have argued that it can be more harmful than helpful to students’ development in the long run. Here are some of the pros and cons of standardized testing:

As Ravitch says:

Read it and laugh.

Then ask yourself why the writers at the Onion are so much smarter than every major newspaper, TV channel, and other mainstream media.

Just whose rights do these civil rights groups think they are protecting? -- What the UFT should be asking instead of excusing their support for testing

...when I see these civil rights groups come out in favor of  testing

and in opposition to the opt-out movement, not only do I have to think that they are ignoring the research around high-stakes testing and inequality, but I also have to question just whose rights they are protecting. ... Wayne Au

The UFT leadership has used the so-called civil rights leaders support for high stakes testing and their opposition to opt out as an excuse for their own inaction. WAPO's Valerie Strauss published Wayne Au's exposure of these groups, groups that are funded by ed deform champions Bill Gates and the Walton Foundation.

Not this point by Au:

Knowing that along with the Gates Foundation, both the Broad Foundation and the Walton Foundation constitute the “big three” in major philanthropic funding for the corporate education reform effort, I decided to dig just a little more. While I couldn’t find any connection between the Broad Foundation and the 12 civil rights organizations opposing the opt-out movement, I did find two that are also funded by the Walton Foundation:
  There is a deep irony here, considering the Walton Family’s track record with regards to civil rights. For instance, in 2012 civil rights leaders called on Walmart and the Walton Family to withdraw from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC is famous for promoting hyper-conservative policies and laws, including the “stand your ground” gun laws associated with the murder of Trayvon Martin. Walmart and the Walton family have spent millions fighting against universal preschool in California, supporting public school voucher programs in various cities, and other conservative initiatives.

And there’s this: According to Making Change At Walmart, Walmart is the largest single employer of African Americans in the country (20 percent of the 1.3 million total employees), pays employees an average of $8.81 an hour, and under Walmart’s definition of full-time work, an employee would only earn 65 percent of the 2014 federal poverty rate for a family of four.

Interesting that the UFT is lining up with the anti-labor Walton Foundation, one step removed. Strauss introduces the Au piece:

A dozen civil rights groups this week issued a statement contending that parents opting their children out of high-stakes standardized tests are harming at-risk students. That sparked a response from the Network for Public Education, saying that high-stakes standardized tests are hurting these young people, not the opt-out movement. You can read both statements here.

Here’s a different look at all of this, by Wayne Au, an associate professor in the School of Educational Studies at the University of Washington Bothell, and an editor for the social justice teaching magazine Rethinking Schools. Most recently, with Joseph J. Ferarre, he co-edited the book, Mapping Corporate Education Reform: Power and Policy Networks in the Neoliberal State. His research interests include critical analyses of high-stakes testing, critical educational theory and practice, curriculum studies, and multicultural education.

Just whose rights do these civil rights groups think they are protecting?

The civil rights organizations who made their statement against opting out see high-stakes, standardized testing as a solution to educational inequality, while others, like myself, see ample evidence that high-stakes, standardized testing is exasperating educational inequality and therefore needs to be rejected as an inherently damaging measure.
There is a very strong critique of the civil rights organizations’ anti-opt-out statement, written mainly by my good friend, colleague, and noted test-resister, Jesse Hagopian, with the endorsement of the Network for Public Education, so I’m not going to take up a close reading and critique of the civil rights organizations’ anti-opt-out statement. However, anytime I see “grassroots” groups promoting the agenda of the corporate education reformers, like what happened here in Washington State with charter school reform in 2012, I’m always compelled to follow the money.

 And Au certainly does follow the money:

http://twitthat.com/ljUkL

A Jersey Teacher Responds to Alfred G. Binford's Defense of Pearson

New Jersey spent $108 million dollars on the PARCC and I have to buy pencils out of pocket... The aim of Pearson is to lay the ground work for the colonization of public schools systems in largely minority urban communities by contributing to the stack ranking of teachers leading to expedited terminations and the shuttering of so called failing schools.

A Jersey Response to Alfred G. Binford's WaPo piece in Defense of Pearson

The view from the trenches of a Newark Public Schools teacher differs significantly from the perspective of Alfred G. Binford, managing director of assessment and delivery at Pearson. Binford claims that Common Core State Standards provide students with a solid foundation in reading and math. New Jersey previously had well designed standards particularly for English as a Second Language, which is my area of expertise. The Common Core does not address the needs of English Language Learners. The unstated goal of instituting national standards is to create a uniform market for multinational corporations such as Pearson.

The PARCC robs New Jersey students in testing grades of six weeks of instruction, not to mention the untold hours devoted to prepping for the Endless Testing Regime. In addition, my school is under lock down each day until testing is completed. Some children not being tested are deprived of specials teaching Art, Music, World Language because they are utilized in test administration. Teachers receive test results after students have exited their classrooms and are, thus, unable to use the assessments to drive instruction. Teachers are prohibited from examining test questions, thereby, blindfolding them in any attempts to analyze student strengths and weaknesses. Binford’s postulation that the test results provide a vital snapshot of student performance and growth is laughable.

New Jersey spent $108 million dollars on the PARCC and I have to buy pencils out of pocket. Coincidentally, Commissioner of Education David Hespe sits on the PARCC Consortium Governing Board cementing the cozy New Jersey relationship with Pearson. Binford contends that the New Jersey Department of Education was contacted by Pearson to protect the interests of students who had yet to take the PARCC. It was my impression, however, that Pearson was attempting to protect its financial investment in test questions by violating student privacy. The fact not clearly comprehended by Pearson is most New Jersey school children are minors and are, therefore, not parties to non-disclosure agreements.

Despite Binford’s assertions, equity for all students is not ensured by strong accountability and assessment systems. Pearson testing does not mitigate the effects of homelessness, hunger, incarceration, drugs, fatherless children, crime and violence on children growing up in poverty. The aim of Pearson is to lay the ground work for the colonization of public schools systems in largely minority urban communities by contributing to the stack ranking of teachers leading to expedited terminations and the shuttering of so called failing schools.

Abigail Shure

Ed Notes reporter in New Jersey.

Skinny Awards, June 9: Support Leonie's Work and the Leaders of Opt Out - and go to a great party too

If there is one event you should support, this is it. I've been to every single

Skinny (Not Broad) award dinner. I intend to be there to celebrate with my colleagues in Change the Stakes and NYC Opt Out and our allies in NYSAPE. And a freak'n 4 course dinner too.

Class Size Matters 7th Annual “Skinny” Award Dinner

Leonie Haimson and Diane Ravitch,

Patrick Sullivan and Monica Major

Emily Horowitz, and Cynthia Wachtell

invite you to

Class Size Matters 7th Annual “Skinny” Awards Dinner

When: Tuesday, June 9 at 6:30 PM
Where: Il Bastardo/Bocca Di Bacco
191 7th Ave (21st St)
New York, NY 10011

A fundraiser for Class Size Matters

This year we are honoring the NY leaders of the Opt-Out movement:

Change the Stakes

NYC Opt Out

New York State Allies for Public Education

Please join us for an opportunity to enjoy a four course dinner to celebrate three organizations that led a historic movement resulting in 200,000 students refusing to take the NY state tests this year.

Ticket Information:

http://www.nycharities.org/events/EventLevels.aspx?ETID=8217

$250 – Defender of Public Education

$150 – Patron

$75 – Supporter

Thank you for your support and we hope to see you there!

If you can’t attend, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to Class Size Matters, to help support our work

Newark Teacher Union Election in Midst of Turmoil, as Del Grosso steps down

[Brandon] Rippey, a social studies teacher at Science Park High School, lost to Del Grosso by just nine votes in the last election. Nonetheless, the “New Visions” slate allied with Rippey won control of the union’s executive board, and he is expected to be a formidable challenger to Abeigon and Dixon. “What’s at stake: the

Newark public schools, the teaching profession, and the union itself,” Rippey said last night, following a debate with Dixon. “The (New Visions-led) caucus has been the only group that has stood up consistently in their defense.”... NJ Spotlight

Brandon Rippey and NEW Visions are part of our national alliance of caucuses, UCORE. (We are meeting in Newark in July- how nice it would be to celebrate a victory by Brandon.) I've been at various events with Brandon and would love to see him become president of the NTU.

[By the way, Diane Ravitch reports on the new LA teacher contract - LATU has also been captured by one of the UCORE associated caucuses with Alex Caputo-Pearl as president. Note that they got some class size limit assurances - something you will never see with Unity Caucus in charge here.

Los Angeles Teachers Agree to Néw Contract]

Remember how Del Grosso brought Randi in to negotiate the contract between her and Cami Anderson and Cristie - a contract they hailed and ended up screwing the teachers - and also led to a new caucus - the NEW caucus to almost push Del Grosso out of office. NEW won the Exec Bd and only lost the presidency by a few votes. (Is the 3rd candidate a New Action like stalking horse designed to split off enough votes from NEW Visions so Abeignon can win?

Knowing Brandon and the politics behind him, they will reach out deep into the parent and student community to build ties so that if they ever take actions like strikes or sick-outs, they will have extensive community backing.

So, suddenly, the Del Grosso people - Abeignon -  to stave off the challenge from Rippey, who would be Cami Anderson's worst nightmare, became militant - as we reported recently: Newark Teachers Union Upcoming Job Action..

Then came the sickout rumors for next week we reported on yesterday.

Newark: Will there be a mass sick-out next week? 

Abeignon is "repositioning" himself for the election as a "militant" to fend off Rippey. Until the day after the election  - if he wins.

Bob Braun had a report on the reaction to the proposed sick out from a Cami slug:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=672952396167713&substory_index=0&id=343757852420504&refid=17

Her reference to a "faction" within the union representing Newark teachers is an apparent allusion to the ongoing, three-way union election that is happening just as the NTU leadership has promised to take job actions in an effort to block subjecting eight more public schools--including East Side and Weequahic high schools--to s-called "turnarounds" in which faculty hours and programs are changed.

John Abeigon, the chief organizer for the NTU and one of three candidates for the union's presidency, denied the union had plans for a sick out which he said would subject participating teahers to the same punishments as would a strike. He said the union would pursue "job actions" designed to "escalate the chaos" within the schools and the community.

"Nothing, not even a strike, is off the table," Abeigon said. "But it certainly wouldn't be our first dish."

Teachers Union Leadership Change Comes at Critical Time for Newark Schools

John Mooney | May 7, 2015

Del Grosso to end 20-year tenure at helm as contract talks loom and controversy continues over Anderson’s ‘One Newark’ reforms

For the first time in 20 years, Joseph Del Grosso won’t be running for reelection as president of the Newark Teachers Union.
Marking the end of two decades of union leadership in the state’s largest school district, Del Grosso will step down as leader of the vocal and influential union at a time when the city’s schools are still in turmoil over state-appointed superintendent Cami Anderson’s “One Newark” reorganization initiative.  His decision to not seek reelection wasn’t a big surprise, as he had hinted for several months that he might step down and has not been in good health for longer than that. Repeated efforts to contact him over the last two days were unsuccessful. Still, Anderson is not likely to see any greater support from any of Del Grosso’s likely successors.
The three candidates certified by the union on Tuesday are:

• John Abeigon, the NTU’s director of organization and a close ally of Del Grosso;
  
• Michael Dixon, the union’s elected secretary-treasurer; and
  
• Branden Rippey, a leader of a dissident faction of the union, who says the NTU has been too easy on Anderson.
  

 The union vote is taking place by mail-in ballot, starting May 26. Ballots will be opened and counted on June 23.

Newark: Will there be a mass sick-out next week?

Lucky these jokers are not in charge of an Ebola infected nation.

From: Chief Talent Officer
Sent: Friday, May 08, 2015 4:16 PM
To: Teachers - ALL
Subject: Possible NTU Action

Good Afternoon,

It has come to our attention,  that a faction of the NTU membership is planning and encouraging teachers and other employees to engage in a mass sick out next week.  This is a reminder that such tactics will be in violation of the NPS/NTU Contract and is not protected activity.

Please be further reminded that the District considers a mass sick out as a partial strike.  Public employees do not have a right to strike in New Jersey.

Any employee who participates in the sick out will face disciplinary action.

Sincerely,

Vanessa Rodriguez,
Chief Talent Officer

John Dewey Scandal as Farina Protects Principal and Video: Norm at the April PEP confronts Carmen Farina on double standard and describes Success Charter Schools

Fifteen months later, the schools chancellor hasn't addressed massive grade fixing at Brooklyn's John Dewey High School...

That was the headline last Friday as Juan Gonzalez did another piece on the John Dewey HS credit recovery cheating scandal, asking the golden question:  When will Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña address the massive grade fixing scandal at John Dewey High School in Brooklyn?

In this video I confront Carmen Farina about her double standard for principals like Kathleen Elvin and teachers after NYCLetEmPlay teacher David Rosen was sent to the rubber room while the principal of John Dewey HS has been under investigation for many months but still allowed to run the school.

My theory is that Farina loves cheating principals like Elvin who keep her grad rates up the the cheating standards established under 12 years of BloomKlein. Imagine if Farina ran an honest ship -- the phony Bloomberg grad rates would drop like a stone and the press and ed deformers would go nuts attacking the shit out of Farina and de Blasio. So I get it - that for self-survival, Elvin despite a 15 month investigation, stays and great teachers and student advocates are pulled from their schools within hours.

 In my PEP speech I also addressed the issue of Success Charters with a game of "Guess the school" where I ask "what schools have lots of extra underwear for kids who are prevented from going to the bathroom? (Hint: someone named Eva runs them). There's nothing like smashing away at Eva than having her minions in the audience. (And she also dropped in.)

And I did it in a nifty 2 minutes - you can boil your egg while watching this.

https://youtu.be/eH8YblzFbSM




When will Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña address the massive grade fixing scandal at John Dewey High School in Brooklyn?
Teachers there began registering complaints in February 2014 that their administrators were creating phantom classes for failing students and secretly inflating grades to boost the school’s official graduation rate.
Eight teachers even gave testimony in early December to the School District’s Office of Special Investigations about the bogus scheme. Some claimed their names were attached to courses they never taught, others that they were ordered to instruct and grade students in subjects for which they had no state license..
The teachers provided investigators hard evidence: copies of faculty rosters, individual student schedules, internal emails, even audio tapes of conversations with superiors.
But 15 months later, the Department of Education is mum.
Among hundreds of Dewey records obtained by The Daily News is the transcript of a single student who graduated last June.
His name was redacted from our copy, thus we refer to him here simply as King, for he just might be the “king” of credit recovery.
Under state regulations, students who fail a subject required for graduation can make it up in one of three ways: either attend summer school, repeat the course, or take “targeted credit recovery” -- a class where they get remedial work for their specific weakness.
But the state spells out strict limitations on credit recovery. It cannot be offered to students who were frequently absent from their original course. The student must be taught by a teacher licensed in the subject matter. And after taking the remedial work, the student must demonstrate “mastery” of the subject.
Most importantly, students cannot receive more than three credit recoveries in core academic subjects for their high school career.
Well, student King’s transcript shows he passed 11 credit recovery courses in the spring of 2014, the semester before his graduation! Seven were in core academic subjects.
That’s not just breaking regulations, that’s smashing them.

In one course at John Dewey high school last spring titled Project Graduation, a single teacher was assigned to 35 different subjects to 63 students, including some of those seen on this partially redacted document: Geometry, Health, Living Environment, Earth Science, Global Studies, Economics and a Math Elective.

Even more amazing, King appears to have passed those 11 remedial courses while carrying a regular load of nine other classes.
He received, for example, got credit for five courses during Period 0, before the start of school. Two of those, 9th grade global studies and health, list the teacher only as “Panel 111.” That’s the room number of Principal Kathleen Elvin.
King also managed to take Earth science 2, environmental science 2, and physcial education during the same period, and he received the same grade for all five courses -- 65.
Then, after a full day of regular classes during Periods 1 to 8, King got credit recovery for six additional courses after school. They included Writing Across the Curriculum, US History 4, Algebra 2, Earth Science 1, 10th grade Global Studies, aand another gym class..
Principal Elvin declined our request to discuss credit recovery practices at Dewey or even what kind of early morning instruction occured in her office. She referred questions to officials at Tweed..
“It wasn’t credit recovery, it was fraud,” one veteran Dewey teacher said.
That teacher said many on staff got assigned to a course called “Project Graduation,” into which hundreds of failing students were placed.
Emails reviewed by the News show some declined to give grades in subjects outside their expertise, and others questioned why their names were listed for classes they never taught. But most followed orders.
More than a year after a few brave teachers risked their careers to blow the whistle, nothing has happened.
Why the delay in the face of such overwhelming evidence?

The Great Scott-Schirtzer Debate: Boycott UFT Elections or Not - Friday, May 8, 4PM

The first in a series of Ed Notes posts on why the UFT elections are meaningless and should be boycotted.

75-80% of the UFT working members boycotted the UFT 2013 elections. These people are actually voting - with their feet - in a meaningless election with nothing at stake.

I don't know how often I have to say it -- Unity has so stacked the deck for the past 60 years, it is not possible to dislodge them from power. Not only that, but by buying off New Action, which is now a bogus opposition appearing on the ballot to siphon off votes from the legitimate opposition, it is almost impossible to win the 7 high school exec bd seats, which New Action, when it was legit, used to win in almost every election. Last time, MORE got around 1335 HS votes, Unity 1575 and NA around 450 which went into the Unity line. Thus, if NA has run with the opposition instead of in partnership with Unity, Unity would have lost those seats. The UFT Exec Bd is 100% Unity endorsed and has been since 2007. Before that, since 1991 there were a few voices of opposition on the board.

At one time, many of us felt it was really important to try to win those 7 out of 100 seats. I no longer feel that way. NA had those seats for over a decade without Unity support and ICE/TJC had them for 3 years. What good did it do in the overall scheme of things?

Mike Schirtzer has been arguing with me over this issue  -- we have almost daily chats and it always comes up. So we decided to debate this afternoon in a Manhattan diner in front of a group of ICE and MORE people who will be free to toss spoonfuls of rice pudding at us.

This will rival the Lincoln-Douglas debates - Mike is Douglas - I'm growing a Lincoln like beard right now.

Since the 2010 UFT elections, I have urged the groups I was in - ICE in 2010 and MORE in 2013 - to boycott what I would loosely term the "election," and "election" so illegitimate, that the very act of running justifies what is a fundamentally undemocratic process.

I have been refining my case for boycott for the upcoming 2016 elections. Mike Schirtzer disagrees and offered to debate me. Today is the official opening of my boycott campaign.

I sense I may not be able to convince MORE but I will try to get them not to run and leave Mulgrew, running on the Unity and New Action line with 100% of the vote - instead of the 80% or so he would get if MORE ran. 

Today, Mike and I and the other participants will not only examine the issue of boycotting the election or not but also engage in an analysis of past election outcomes. 

This is not defeatism on my part, as some people have charged in the past when I pointed out we cannot win. Oh, just believe and miracles and they will happen. Or I hear, "we know we can't win but an opposition must run." Why?

I will discuss how running in an election when you know you cannot win plays out with people you are trying to get to vote for you. Do you lie to them, worried they won't bother to vote if they know it doesn't mean anything?

Thus a very good point on my side. Don't lie to people, give them the real deal and try to formulate a plan to force changes that would one day make UFT elections relevant.

To my mind, given that raising the vote totals in elections has been futile -- and I believe the Unity people want totals to rise given the embarrassment to the union of having 52% of the votes come from retirees.

So my theory is that by making the vote totals drop and thereby probably raising the retiree (who always vote in higher numbers) percentage would put the election in the place it deserves - a farce.

I will advocate the uncaucus concept -- how to run a campaign in an election season without actually running a slate as a way to gather support for demanding massive changes in the UFT election process by denying them enough votes to the extent that the election becomes the farce it really is. I will present the case that participating in the farce endorses the fundamentally undemocratic process.

While all this goes on, Mike will be advocating the same old same old - and thus meeting the Einstein definition of insanity - doing the same thing and expecting different results. But he can enjoy eating his rice pudding.

Will NYSUT ST Caucus Impact AFT? - Welcome to Stronger Together Caucus - MORE Gets Seat on Steering

NYSUT has 600,000 members and is by far the largest component of the AFT's 1.5 million membership. NYSUT has always been a reliable Unity Caucus rubber stamp for NYC Unity Caucus, which has used its control of NYSUT Unity caucus to control the AFT and its Progressive Caucus version of Unity.

Thus the shakeup in NYSUT since Randi and Mulgrew pulled their Revile Slate knockdown of their former allies, Iannucci and crew. Their boy, Andy Pallotta has been like a bull in the chinashop, managing to alienate everyone he comes in contact with beyond the usual sycophants. And there is always good old Alan Lubin around to pull the strings.

The rocket rise of Stronger Together and Beth Dimino to the leadership of the first opposition to NYSUT Unity/Revile has the potential to be cataclysmic for the national teacher union - or not. I know ST first got together a year ago, I was still disappointed that it had zero presence at the AFT14 convention in LA. But after last week's RA, things are really looking up.

First - Beth and Brian St. Pierre reached out to MORE in the fall of 2013 and it was lucky for all of us that Mike Schirtzer was astute enough to get on the case and build a strong relationship with them. There were a whole bunch of MORE people who actually argued against getting involved -- I don't even know how to categorize their views - some kind of supposed analysis on organizing based on studying ancient, dusty tomes, which somehow haven't actually resulted in very successful organizing. But I'll leave that for another day.

Luckily, there are some rational MORE people like Lauren Cohen (see her video) and Jia Lee and Julie Cavanagh and James Eterno who jumped into the pool with Mike and Beth and Brian. They were joined by non-MORE Arthur Goldstein and shook up the NYSUT RA at the Hilton last year. James has a piece up on ICE today: JOIN STRONGER TOGETHER
It's only 10 bucks and sends a message to Unity if lots of NYC teachers join.

There is a reason ST reached out to MORE and elected Schirtzer to the steering committee. They want to build alliances between the state and NYC  opposition to Unity. But they are not stopping there. They are also getting involved with the national groups MORE has been working with - United Caucuses of Rank and File Educators (UCORE). I have been attending various versions of UCORE meetings since 2009 and I'm still waiting for something to happen -- they will meet in Newark in July.

But if ST and UCORE actually do make an effort at the AFT`16 convention in Minneapolis, we may see some shaking of the tree when Unity tries its bully tactics. I'm basing my continued support for UCORE based on their willingness to organize for AFT16. (There are sticky issues here since CTU president Karen Lewis must be in Randi's Progressive Caucus in order to hold onto an AFT Exec Bd seat and that puts CORE Caucus, Karen's caucus in Chicago, and also a key component of UCORE, in somewhat of a bind as to how active they can be in opposing Progressive Caucus. Some even say that these kinds of entanglements make UCORE into a discussion group only. UCORE (still unnamed) was non-existent at AFT14 and in fact I believe there was some kow-towing to Unity at times.

See my AFT14 reports:

• LA Confidential: AFT Travel Day, Part 1 - Posted Fri, 7/11/14 6AM
• AFT Convention Roundup: Travel Day Part 2 - Common...Posted Fri, noon.
• AFT Convention Update: Chicago CC Reso Goes Down O...Posted Fri 5PM
• Breaking - AFT Rumor - Reso on Duncan Coming? Rand...Posted Fri 5:30 PM
• AFT Convention 2014 Video: Randi Laugh Riot - on P...Posted Sat. 7AM
• #AFT14 Report - Recaps and Trends - Posted Sat
• #AFT14 Report: When Will the UFT/AFT Reclaim the Promise of a Democratic Union?
• #AFT14 Report - Tidbits
• #AFT14 Report - Common Core Debate - Epic Battle B...

• #AFT Convention - I apologize to non-slugs in Unit...
• #AFT14 - Randi says - AFT and NEA to For...
• #AFT14 Video - LATU Caputo-Pearl Lays Out Vision o...

Brian St. Pierre has written a wonderful must-read guest piece at NYC Educator.

ST Caucus Brings Real Grassroots Unionism to NYSUT

I'm not going to parse Brian's piece right now as I have to run to Botanic Gardens for the final day of the plant sale. But there is so much meat there and lessons on how Unity functions on the local, state and national levels I will do a follow up examining how they will try to buy out and coopt ST to try to turn them into New Action, light.  Like jobs or a stool at the table, anyone?
 
And here is the ST call to join:

Dear ST Caucus Members,

We were thrilled with the support the caucus received at the NYSUT RA in Buffalo.  Over 500 delegates joined, 145 of which were local presidents.  Our inaugural caucus meeting was standing room only with incredible enthusiasm and support for our resolutions and democratic reform within NYSUT.  Our bylaws and a slate of caucus officers were approved.

While our constitutional amendment proposals were defeated, we were able to get the RA House of Delegates to pass three resolutions that address the flawed nature of the standardized tests in New York State.  The resounding voices of the Delegates at the NYSUT RA in favor of these issues will now compel NYSUT leadership to do the right thing for New York's students and teachers by supporting the opt out movement!

1. Resolution to support the "I Refuse Movement"

2. Resolution to recognize and thank opt-out parents

3. Resolution calling for the replacement of the  college and career readiness benchmarks 

As we move forward, we will be revising the voting amendments dealing with democratic reform within NYSUT for the RA next year. Please feel free to reach out to caucus officers regarding any concerns you might have as the year progresses. We truly want rank and file members to utilize this avenue because it will help focus our positions and determine our resolutions for the next RA. 

ST Caucus is open to any NYSUT Member in good standing, delegates and non delegates alike.  Please encourage every member in your local to join--a membership form can be found here.  T-Shirts in sizes M,L,XL,2X and 3X are still available for a $20 donation here.  We will continue to keep you informed of new developments.  In the meantime, please share information about the caucus with your local and follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

In Solidarity,

Chair: Beth Dimino—President Port Jefferson Station Teachers' Association

Treasurer: Beth Chetney—President Baldwinsville Teachers’ Association

Secretary: Laura Spencer—President Smithtown Teachers’ Association

Membership Chair: Michele Bushey—PAC, Saranac Teachers’ Association 

Vice-Chairs representing NYS by region 

1)   Central NY/Southern Tier: Angelee Hargreaves—President Port Byron Teachers’ Association

2)   Capital District: Megan DeLaRosa—President Shenendehowa Teachers’ Association

3)   North Country: Nate Hathaway—President Malone Federation of Teachers

4)   Tarrytown/Mid-Hudson: Mike Lillis—President Lakeland Federation of Teachers

5)   Nassau/Suffolk: Kevin Coyne—President Brentwood Teachers’ Association

6)   NYC:  Mike Schirtzer—UFT Delegate; MORE CAUCUS

7)   Western NY (Buffalo):  Joe Karb—President Springville Faculty Association

8)   Western NY (Rochester): Orlando Benzan—President Brockport Teachers’ Association

So-Called Civil Rights Leaders Support Testing Despite history of Tests used to violate civil rights Plus UFT Uses them as Excuse to Waffle on Opt Out

Doing the Bidding of Their Corporate Funders, These 12 Paid For Groups Denounce the People's Movement to Opt Out of High Stakes Testing... Sam Anderson

...the notion that subjecting students to high-stakes tests is a “civil right” is inherently misguided... High-stakes standardized tests, rather than reducing the opportunity gap, have been used to rank, sort, label, and punish students of color.”..... NPE press release

A turn in the road: We Demand --- more tests?

I heard the line once again the other day from someone who works at the UFT - that the UFT won't jump on the opt out bandwagon so as not to insult the Bill Gates bought so-called civil rights leaders who support testing. But why be surprised. The UFT/AFT are also bought by Bill Gates.

I have more respect for Sam Anderson as a black leader than all of these people. Look what these so-called leaders say:

But we cannot fix what we cannot measure.  And abolishing the tests or sabotaging the validity of their results only makes it harder to identify and fix the deep-seated problems in our schools.”

We cannot fix what we cannot measure? How about the income disparity in communities of color? Do we need to measure that before raising the minimum wage, which would have a beneficial impact way beyond testing their kids?

We need to not be afraid to challenge these people and the UFT excuses - we should toss the NPE press release in their faces.

PRESS RELEASE: Network for Public Education

Response to The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights Statement on Opting Out

May 5, 2015 Civil Rights, NPE, Press Release, Testing / Opting Out

For Immediate Release
Robin Hiller Executive Director, Network for Public Education
Phone (520) 668-4634
Email  robin@networkforpubliceducation.org

Today, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights led 11 civil rights groups into a national disagreement with students who have exercised their constitutional political free speech rights and chosen to opt-out of high-stakes testing.

The Network for Public Education supports those who choose to opt out, because we believe these tests are now causing harm to students, and to the cause of educational equity. Seattle teacher Jesse Hagopian has written a response to The Leadership Conference of Civil and Human Rights’ statement, which the Network for Public Education shares here. He states, “High-stakes standardized tests, rather than reducing the opportunity gap, have been used to rank, sort, label, and punish students of color.”
We support opting out of high stakes tests because:

• There is no evidence that these tests contribute to the quality of education, have led to improved educational equity in funding or programs, or have helped close the “achievement gap”.
• These tests, particularly those associated with the Common Core, have become intrusive in our schools, consuming huge amounts of time and resources, and narrowing instruction to focus on test preparation.
• These tests have never been independently validated or shown to be reliable and/or free from racial and ethnic bias.
• Instead the Common Core exams are being used as a political weapon to claim huge numbers of students are failing, to close neighborhood public schools, and fire teachers, all in the effort to disrupt and privatize the public education system.

Thus, the notion that subjecting students to high-stakes tests is a “civil right” is inherently misguided.
Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig, Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies and NPE board member stated, “The alleged benefit of No Child Left Behind and national required annual high stakes testing was to unveil the achievement gaps, and by doing so, close them. After more than a decade of high-stakes testing this never happened. Instead, thousands of neighborhood schools— the anchors of communities, especially in poor and minority neighborhoods — were closed and their students sent to another low performing and poorly resourced school much further away from their home.”
The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights argued that data obtained through standardized tests are “the only available, consistent, and objective source of data about disparities in educational outcomes.” This statement is completely false. There is reliable disaggregated national data available from NAEP. There are a number of student outcomes available to consider the success of students, schools, districts, states and the nation. More importantly, we must pay closer attention to data that demonstrate the differences in opportunity between schools.
While persisting inequality between schools is our real challenge, the political framing supported by testing is instead a focus on the failure of our students and teachers in our public system. This rhetoric is then linked to school “reform” policies that have made the real agenda very clear—continuing to underfund schools and replace our locally controlled public school systems with privately controlled schools. Private control allows the opportunity to profit from equally under resourced and poor-performing charters, for-profit on-line schools, and vouchers for private schools (which opt-out of testing). Without democratic control, these schools are free to create a constant churn of temporary teachers whose work is largely reduced to worksheets and canned software programs for test preparation.
The Seattle NAACP recently urged parents to opt out of the SBAC test, and stated:

Using standardized tests to label Black people and immigrants as lesser—while systematically underfunding their schools—has a long and ugly history.
It is true we need accountability measures, but that should start with politicians be accountable to fully funding education and ending the opportunity gap. The costs tied to the test this year will run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. If the State really wants students to achieve academic performance at higher levels these dollars should be put in our classrooms and used for our children’s academic achievement, instead of putting dollars in the pockets of test developers.

The use of high-stakes tests has become part of the problem, rather than a solution. We reiterate our support for parents and students who choose to exercise their political free speech and opt out of high stakes tests, and call on our nation’s leaders to shift policies away from these tests.

And also see:

Mercedes Schneider: Why Did Only 12 Civil Rights Groups Oppose Opting Out?

MORE Teachers: Silenced NYC Public School Teachers, remove gags and speak out and Stand with Students & Parents to support “Opt Out” actions

I hear this was a great joint venture between Change the Stakes and MORE.

Videos from Michael Eliot with the awesome ladies from MORE: Jia Lee, Alexandra Alves and Katie Lapham. All are current or past steering
committee members.

http://youtu.be/3SVIP6lj1rM

Jia Lee

http://youtu.be/EUAQbwwQTjQ

Alexandra Alves 

http://youtu.be/C5O0x5eXNGo

Katie Lapham 

https://youtu.be/STpiVFIYh2I


And one gentleman: Marcus McArthur

http://youtu.be/c8DqRJmKi4k

Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Contacts: Michelle Baptiste:      John Antush after 3:30 pm

May 5, 2015 testing@morecaucusnyc.org

PRESS RELEASE

Silenced NYC Public School Teachers, remove gags and speak out and

Stand with Students & Parents to support “Opt Out” actions

Reclaiming our ethical profession New York City Public School Teachers demand real education, instead of high-stakes tests

Washington Square Park, (Garibaldi Square, just east of the fountain)

New York City.

In the wake of the April 2015 testing period in New York State and a growing opt out movement, public school teachers have been blindfolded and gagged. We are not allowed to look at the tests and our right to speak with parents about our concerns is restricted by ambiguous threatening rules from NYSED. Without the ability to view, openly discuss or engage meaningfully around the tests, we are unable to support our students and families, which, as teachers, is our ethical responsibility.

“Not only have we been blindfolded and gagged, but our hands have been tied as well: Test prep prevents me from addressing my students’ particular life situations, cultures, languages and concerns. I have a responsibility to help my students learn to think truly critically, and to know what it means to be a citizen who is an active participant in democracy and contributes to the common good. You can’t have it both ways, offering in-depth learning and just practicing for tests. The incessant testing interrupts real teaching where the student’s actual work that informs what teachers do. We have an ethical imperative to promote learning in service of the public good” - Karen Arneson, a Reading Recovery teacher at PS 2.

Alexandra Alves, a teacher at PS 1 Meyer London said, "The testing obsession has hurt our English Language learners in the most insidious of ways. Instead of using the conversational English that is used by newcomers, the Common Core NYSESLAT test samples, which are now available for public viewing, require academic language that the students don’t know yet. And to make a bad situation worse, as a NYC teacher I am not supposed to discuss this problem with the parents of these children.  We have a moral imperative to serve our communities, including the students who are just beginning to learn English.”

As public school teachers from across New York City we cannot stay silent about the consequences and harm being done to children as a result of policies that lack input from teachers, parents and educational experts. Colin Schumacher , a teacher at the Earth School, has called for teachers to reclaim the ethical basis for teaching, and presented “An Ethic For Teachers of Conscience in Public Education.”  Colin, who refused to administer NY State tests, said “We have an ethical responsibility to preserve public education.”

Across the state, many teachers and principals who are also parents have opted out their own children.  “I am a teacher and a parent. I opted my son out, because high stakes testing is unethical and any policy that ignores the concerns of stakeholders is problematic and void of democratic principles.”- Jia Lee, Earth School teacher, parent, and Conscientious Objector.

“The weight placed on high stakes tests takes time and resources away from our school’s ability to develop students’ creative and academic potential. I’ve known students who would thrive in a setting where the arts are valued, but because the tests always come first, many students never even get exposed to the depth and joys of working in the arts. We have a moral imperative to attend to the development and well-being of each of our students.” - Katie Lapham, PS 214, 1st grade, bilingual Ed and ESL

"High stakes tests are nothing more than legalized income discrimination. We know that your parents' income is the greatest predictor of how you will do on those tests, but we use them to determine who graduates from high school and gets employment, who gets into specialized high schools, and who gains access to the Ivy League. They're used to justify the rich's access to the nation's best opportunities while the poor are denied opportunities, not because they're not just as talented or skilled, but because the game is rigged in favor of the rich." - Marcus McArthur, Special Education teacher, City-As-School High School. 

Ed Week: Opt-Out' Push Gains Traction Amid Common-Core Testing

My lame attempt to take a selfie with a blackberry - looks gross? Blame the chicken parm and the strudel I ate tonight

Nice headline. But they quote Eva vassal Jenny Sedlis?

"While I'm sure there is some genuine parent pushback, there's no question the teachers' union ginned up dissatisfaction so that union members would not be held accountable for student learning," said Jenny Sedlis, the executive director of StudentsFirst New York, a state affiliate of the Sacramento-based StudentsFirst.

Jenny must be the one ginning up. She knows full well the UFT has to be kicked and dragged into supporting the opt out movement. Note how this article points to the 600,000 member NYSUT but doesn't point out that 30% come from the UFT which turned down the MORE attempts to support opt out - though word from the NYSUT RA is that they began to give ground to the inevitability. More on the NYSUT story - I know lots of interesting stuff, but as usual, would have to kill you if I told you.

http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/05/06/opt-out-push-gains-traction-amid-common-core-testing.html?cmp=ENL-EU-NEWS1-RM

Published Online: May 5, 2015

Published in Print: May 6, 2015, as Some Balk As Testing Rolls Ahead

'Opt-Out' Push Gains Traction Amid Common-Core Testing

'Opt-Out' activists set sights on hobbling states' exams

By Andrew Ujifusa

The push by activists of various stripes to have parents opt students out of state exams this spring has transformed skepticism and long-running anger over the direction of education policy into a movement with numbers and a growing public profile. Whether those activists can craft a durable and effective political movement remains an open question.

Advocates, standardized-testing opponents, and observers continue to debate the movement's true goals, the disparity between the proportion of opt-outs and their broader importance, and how much the demographics of participating parents hurt or strengthen the cause.

Recent events in New York state, where disputes over the fiscal 2016 budget ratcheted up tensions over the role of testing in state policy, show how the opt-out campaign can gain traction. After years of negotiations and disagreements with the state over evaluations, the 600,000-member New York State United Teachers called on parents to opt their children out of exams aligned with the Common Core State Standards, and tens of thousands reportedly have done so.

And in a sharp counterpoint to social-media monitoring conducted on behalf of the testing company Pearson to watch for breaches in testing security, last month a Facebook group opposed to New York state's testing posted portions of the state's English/language arts exam online.

In remarks last month, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan indicated the Education Department would intervene in states and districts with high opt-out rates. Sanctions for insufficient participation on federally required exams can include the withholding of Title I funds. Federal law requires 95 percent of students to be tested.

Many states don't have policies that specifically address opt-outs, according to a survey by the Denver-based Education Commission of the States. That uncertainty, along with many parents' anxiety over the footprint and variety of tests in public schools, has helped propel opt-outs, said Maria Ferguson, the executive director of the Washington-based Center on Education Policy, which tracks implementation of the common core and aligned tests.

"This stuff is really confusing. It does differ from state to state," Ms. Ferguson said. "People don't know what to do, and so it's like, 'We'll opt out. We'll free our children from this tyranny.' "

Searching for a Tally

Official statistics on the number and proportion of opt-outs continue to be hard to come by in many instances, but not always.

Last month, the New Jersey education department reported that for the first window of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers tests in English/language arts and math, the parental refusal rate for students in grades 3-6 was 3.8 percent. For high school juniors, who don't have to pass the test to graduate, the refusal rate was 14.5 percent. (The PARCC test is given over two testing windows.)

However, in New York, the state education department has not reported the number or percentage of parental opt-outs from the state's English/language arts and math tests, and does not plan to do so until the summer, according to spokesman Tom Dunn.

The Newsday newspaper in New York reported late last month that in two Long Island counties, roughly 32,700 students out of 67,600 eligible students in grades 3-8 (48 percent) refused to take the math test.
United 2 Counter, a group opposed to New York's common-core tests, reported in late April that statewide, there were about 193,000 opt-outs from the English/language arts test, and 151,000 opt-outs from the math exam. The statewide K-12 enrollment is about 2.7 million, with 1 million in New York City, although not all of those students are eligible to take the common-core test.

The group cites news media, union representatives, school officials, and parents as sources, but doesn't always put a name to them. Asked to what extent the public should trust the organization's numbers, Loy Gross, the group's co-founder and a math tutor in upstate New York, responded that, if anything, United 2 Counter undercounts the real tally of total opt-outs. She explained that parents involved with the group, for example, are told to count heads on three testing days and report the lowest of the three opt-out numbers.

Ms. Gross said schools have become "shackled" to the common core and aligned tests.

"These tests are not telling us anything that we haven't known since NCLB started," said Ms. Gross., referring to the federal No Child Left Behind Act. "The testing initially did give us some useful measurements. But ever since that point, it's become all about those measurements, that if we measure these kids enough, somehow they're going to grow faster."

While Ms. Gross acknowledged the NYSUT support for a boycott of the tests was an important step for the opt-out campaign, she strongly objected to the argument that unions are the true leaders of the push.

Among opt-out proponents, there's also a deep distrust of Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, and state K-12 governance, she said.

"The only thing left was to starve the beast," said state Assemblyman James Tedisco, a Republican who is sponsoring a bill that would require districts to inform parents about their rights to opt their students out of the state tests, and to provide alternate activities for opt-outs. "We're not going to take it any more."

But one advocate for the use of test scores in teacher evaluations said that without the self-interest motivating NYSUT, the opt-out campaign would lose critical fuel."While I'm sure there is some genuine parent pushback, there's no question the teachers' union ginned up dissatisfaction so that union members would not be held accountable for student learning," said Jenny Sedlis, the executive director of StudentsFirst New York, a state affiliate of the Sacramento-based StudentsFirst.

This year, New York legislators charged the state education department with overseeing a new teacher-evaluation system. Board of Regents Chancellor Merryl H. Tisch subsequently announced her plan to extend the deadline for implementing new evaluations from this November to September 2016. Ms. Tisch has urged parents not to opt their children out of testing, but she also vigorously opposes the idea that the federal government should respond to high opt-out rates by withholding funding from schools.

'Bootleggers and Baptists'

Just where the movement will ultimately lead is an open question.
Without a broad strategy that covers the full range of tests beyond common-core exams, Ms. Ferguson said, opt-out proponents' success may be limited.

But significant ideological divides may actually help the opt-out push in certain ways. According to Dick M. Carpenter, a professor of leadership and foundations at the college of education at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, the opt-out movement fits the "Bootleggers and Baptists" phenomenon articulated by economist Bruce Yandle. In this environment, groups that typically disagree sharply about issues, like liquor smugglers and religious anti-liquor activists, unite in their position toward a certain policy, like "blue laws" that restrict alcohol sales.

Similarly, opt-out can appeal to conservatives, who see the test as an intrusion of government, and liberals, who believe the tests hurt schools without helping instruction, Mr. Carpenter said.

For example, last month the Colorado Senate gave preliminary, bipartisan approval to a bill that reduces state testing to the minimum required by the federal government.

"It's an issue that's getting a surprising amount of attention in a relatively short period of time," Mr. Carpenter said.

Coverage of the implementation of college and career-ready standards is supported in part by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Vol. 34, Issue 29, Pages 1,16-17