Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Norm's Hedge Fund Quote on WNYC
Mayoral Control of Schools Debated
The City Council tried to jump start a discussion about mayoral control of city schools by holding a lengthy public hearing yesterday.
by Kathleen Horan
NEW YORK, NY March 04, 2008 —REPORTER: Mayor Bloomberg has had control of the school system for 5 years and Albany will soon consider whether his successor should keep that power.
Several council members criticized the mayor for not reaching out to the community enough. That was one point that Chancellor Joel Klein was willing to give opponents, but he said the system is working very well on the whole.
Retired teacher Norman Scott called for change at yesterday's hearing. He said the practice of removing educators and replacing them with lawyers and business people is outrageous.
SCOTT: What would you think if Bloomberg suddenly called me up and said, "Hey Norm, I know you never dealt with money, but I'd like you to manage my hedge fund." This is basically what people are doing by turning the systems over to people who have never worked in the system.
REPORTER: Yesterday's hearing is just one of many discussions about mayoral control that are getting underway before the its set to expire or be renewed by Albany in 2009.
http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/94526
Thanks to David B, da man.
http://www.wnyc.org/news/articles/94526
Thanks to David B, da man.
Monday, March 3, 2008
My Birthday Present...City Council Hearings on Mayoral Control
Gee, how did they know that is what I wanted for my B-Day? (Well, I did get my Beef Wellington at "One if By Land..." last night.) I get to cover for The Wave and then switch hats and spew my 2 minutes of venom. Back later tonight with a report.
Update:
The very disappointing news is that every politician seems to want mayoral control in some form but just wants to tweak it. Later in the day, when real parents and teachers spoke they really got to the guts of the issue. Some of them are sending their testimony which I'll put up on the Norm's Notes blog but probably won't get to it till next week.
Randi flew in from Ohio and was actually very good - the UFT should put up her testimony. She wouldn't take a stand on mayoral control because she's waiting to hear the results of the UFT governance meetings. Okaaay!
Leonie Haimson spoke and so did Lisa Donlon, who pointed to some achievements under community control. Queens' David Quintana also made a strong statement. As did another parent from District 24. Ellen Raider from ICOPE and Gene Prisco from ICE, along with me were on the same panel when we spoke. I'm not sure anyone was listening.
I spoke about getting politics out of education. Sure! Ask politicians to do this. I pointed to how shameless they were about staying silent when Joel Klein got a waiver to be Chancellor. I said a bunch more but need to check my notes and I'm too lazy to do that now. You've probably read it here already.
Know what I think? They're all scared shitless of Bloomberg and his money. When he is gone, he will still exercise enormous influence over education to assure the monster will not be dismantled.
Check out Tuesday's NY Times for Jennifer Medina's story. I'll add some pics to this post tomorrow.
I tried to blog live from the Council chambers but only got this far before my wi-fi conked out (I was using that little XO laptop). I walked in towards the end of Klein and Walcott's testimony.
City Council Chamber, City Hall
March 3, 2008
12pm
Vacca wants bigger role for dist supt.
Who do parents go to?
Klein says parent coordinator. [Of course they work for DOE, not parents.]
Yassky agrees significant progress has been made under Klein due to someone being in charge. Wants to improve mayoral control.
Jackson: PEP - mayor appoints most of panel. They are looked at as rubber stamps. Brings up Monday Night Massacre and firing of 3 panel members over 3rd grade retention. Why not have independent panel members?
Walcott: they are independent volunteers [sure, they demonstrate that all the time]. They should be accountable to people who appoint them.
John Liu: Top down accountability - how many CEO's? Klein says about half dozen. They have response. but subject to me. Used to be called Directors. Walcott thinks there used to be ceo's at old doe.
Brings up grad rates. Klein claims grad rates have risen from 47% in '86 to 51% in '02 to 60% in '06. Highest in 20 yrs. State says it is 50%.
Rubber Room on the Radio
Posted to nyceducationnews listserve:
The public radio show, This American Life (350: Human Resources), recently included a piece about NYC DOE's Rubber Rooms. Download a podcast or listen to it online at
http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?sched=1232
The true story of little-known rooms in the New York City Board of Education building. Teachers are told to report there instead of their classrooms. No reason is usually given. When they arrive, they find they've been put on some kind of probationary status, and they must report every day until the matter is cleared up. They call it the Rubber Room. Average length of stay? Months, sometimes years. Plus other stories of the uneasy interaction between humans and their institutions. The Rubber Room story was produced by Joe Richman and the good people at Radio Diaries.
Also Posted here
The public radio show, This American Life (350: Human Resources), recently included a piece about NYC DOE's Rubber Rooms. Download a podcast or listen to it online at
http://www.thislife
The true story of little-known rooms in the New York City Board of Education building. Teachers are told to report there instead of their classrooms. No reason is usually given. When they arrive, they find they've been put on some kind of probationary status, and they must report every day until the matter is cleared up. They call it the Rubber Room. Average length of stay? Months, sometimes years. Plus other stories of the uneasy interaction between humans and their institutions. The Rubber Room story was produced by Joe Richman and the good people at Radio Diaries.
Also Posted here
And thanks to David B for slideshow and posting here (part 1 9:30 minutes):
Will GHI/HIP Merger and Privatization Raise Costs?
Monday, March 3, 2008
Recently, we have been made aware of the dangers of the GHI/HIP merger, which is supported by the UFT and most other unions. Guess what? The unions get a windfall out of this – nothing to do with the members, of course, who will probably get screwed by higher costs. After all, this is all about privatization which will remove state controls – we've seen how corporate greed works out.
It should be pointed out that the UFT has been part and parcel of the move to privatize the public schools, whether in support of charters like Green Dot or their own charter schools, the backing of Gates and Annenberg money to control public ed policy, etc. Plus making sure to get their swag from the professional development money train – a regular little corporate model, our UFT.
We had a brief discussion on this at last Friday's ICE meeting and will be following up. The group fighting this will be giving out a leaflet at the Delegate Assembly this Weds. The have been going around to opposition caucus meetings of various unions to make their objections known. Recently hundreds of people attended a hearing on the issue. Many were locked out until they called NY 1 and "suddenly" space was found for them.
Right now New York City has been opposed, fighing for a bigger share of the cut. (My God! We're on the same side as Bloomberg!) But expect that to be settled soon.
Everyone should start asking questions about this. What are the unions getting? How will that affect the members? What are politicians getting? Check contributions from GHI/HIP to campaigns, etc.
Ed Notes had this report on Feb. 25, 2008:
There are UFT members and others who feel the merger of HIP and GHI is a bad thing. The result will be a joint privati
zed HIP/GHI operation instead of being under public control. Instinct says that is not a good thing. Check it out here. http://socialistparty-usa.org/stopthemerger/Anthony Weiner called for Congressional hearings on the HIP/GHI merger back in Nov. '06, stating:
I write to request that you convene Judiciary Committee hearings early in the next Congress to examine whether consumers are being adequately protected from anti-trust concerns when health care insurers merge.
In New York, the two health care insurers that cover 90 percent of the City’s municipal employers, GHI and HIP, have announced their intention to merge. The Department of Justice and the State Insurance Department have both approved the union, failing to find any anti-trust concerns.
But the City of New York believes that the new merged health provider will create a monopoly, eliminating the City’s leverage when negotiating for employee health coverage, and empowering these two health insurers to demand taxpayers pay them tens of millions of dollars more than they currently receive.
As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said today, the proposed merger, “is taking away the City’s ability to negotiate a fair price for health care plans. . . .The City’s tax payers are going to be so royally taken advantage of. . .so [GHI and HIP] can rip us off.”
Yesterday, Judge Kenneth M. Karas of the Southern District of New York refused to intervene to block the merger.
This most recent proposal is part of a larger pattern of insurance mergers. Oxford was purchased by UnitedHealthcare in 2004. And last year, the parent of Empire Blue Cross and Blue Shield, the largest insurer in New York State, was purchased by Wellpoint for $6.5 billion.
This issue demands enhanced oversight. I look forward to focusing on anti-trust issues facing the health insurance industry early in the next Congress.
If anyone has info on the follow-up, share it.
Think the UFT would ever support Weiner for Mayor? I bet Bill Thompson, our Comptroller and the UFT fave for mayor, supports the merger. Don't know for sure, just a guess.
The Weiner letter is at:
http://www.house.gov/list/press/ny09_weiner/061117merger.html
The president of the Medical Society of the State of New York believes the conversion of the GHI-HIP insurance company would have a negative impact on patient care and payments to physicians. - Jan. 30, 2008. Read in full here.
The UFT take from Arthur Pepper is here. Pepper will supposedly be on the Board to protect your interests (supposedly.) He says: Most importantly, all through the process both GHI and HIP have pledged to their subscribers to keep to the mission of affordable and quality health care.
Sort of like the DOE "pledge" to reduce class size. But there's more about the incest between the UFT and HIP.
Ira Goldfine reported on ICE-mail yesterday:
Tonight's Jeopardy answer is:Arthur H. Barnes senior vice president for External Affairs and Corporate Contributions at HIP Health Plans
and the question is "Who was Sandra Feldman's husband?"
The share of the pot that will be given to NY State upon the two companies merging is huge and the UFT has been part of this for years -- this was talked about before Randi ever made her entrance into the UFT. Supposedly the unions were going to get a piece of the action in return for their support.
Loretta Prisco followed up on ICE-mail with this report:
Recently I ran into an old friend at a concert. During intermission, she told me about the hearings that she went to about the ghi/hip merger and it is going for-profit. She was really incensed, and to be honest, I couldn't quite get to the facts. So I called her.
There were 70 listed speakers - there were reps from other unions - who all spoke against it. She is looking for the list of speakers for me.
The Emblem presentation did not talk about quality of care at all.
One union rep challenged them about jobs leaving NYC. Emblem assured them that there would be no loss of jobs to NYC. The rep said that 15 jobs had already moved out to LI.
No doctors spoke.
She is pretty disgusted over the fact that the UFT wasn't there and that we are not getting info - "we are professionals - smart - and should be getting some facts - pros and cons". She is as upset over how the union is dealing (or rather not dealing with us on this ) than the possible loss of services and increased fees.
She said that NYC was against it at the hearing - but now, as we know, for it. NYS is in favor of it because as a for profit - they can collect taxes. Again, nothing about quality of care.
But Loretta, they pledged to keep up the quality? Cynic!!
Sunday, March 2, 2008
A Teacher's Dilemma...
... how the DOE/UFT eats its young
Unionizing or Truly Uniting?
A great post at Syntactic Gymnastics.
It was great to see that she got a lot of value out of the Teachers Unite Forum (I think she is referring to Michael Fiorillo's brilliant analysis of privatization.) If she stays in NYC I hope she works with Teachers Unite, ICE and other progressive forces to create a movement for change.
Some excerpts (read the entire piece at http://syntacticgymnastics.blogspot.com/) illustrate the bankruptcy of the UFT leadership from the point of view of a teacher not affiliated with an opposition caucus and fairly new to the system:
SG's great insights reminds me of a conversation I had with a long-time chapter leader and teacher of over 20 years who supports the work of ICE and Ed Notes but insists on remaining under cover – deathly afraid (wrongly, I might add) that when they [admins] come for him/her, the UFT would do what it could to knife him/her in the back if he/she were an open ICE supporter. A bit paranoid, he/she won't listen when I say that the more vocal you are the more protection you get if it is perceived you have allies. (Bully admins and UFT hacks look to pick on the weak and isolated.)
I pointed out that when Shanker, who was viewed as so much more powerful and influential than Weingarten (not true either, by the way, but more on that another time), was in power, the opposition did so much better. The response:
"The union was much stronger then and principals were afraid. With the union being so weak, so many people are paralyzed with fear and afraid to open their mouths about anything, including being critical of Randi."
A year ago, Syntactic Gymnastics wrote:
Interesting that such similar feelings come from both vets and newbies.
The impact of the Tweed/UFT collaboration is bridging the gap.
Unionizing or Truly Uniting?
A great post at Syntactic Gymnastics.
It was great to see that she got a lot of value out of the Teachers Unite Forum (I think she is referring to Michael Fiorillo's brilliant analysis of privatization.) If she stays in NYC I hope she works with Teachers Unite, ICE and other progressive forces to create a movement for change.
Some excerpts (read the entire piece at http://syntacticgymnastics.blogspot.com/) illustrate the bankruptcy of the UFT leadership from the point of view of a teacher not affiliated with an opposition caucus and fairly new to the system:
I was even a chapter leader for a time. I knew enough to be skeptical of the administration's motives, but I was floored when I realized just how little support I could expect from the UFT. I have reached out to them on numerous occasions, always hoping that something good would come of it, but most of the time, I hear promises from the UFT reps and District Reps that never come to fruition and I just live in fear about the negative consequences.
If the teachers "won't stand up", or so the UFT DR's stance goes, then "what can we do?"
The problem with this logic is that the teachers won't stand up with the UFT if they can't trust the very people who are supposed to be looking out for their interests. The teachers won't stand up when every effort is made by the DOE and the principals to splinter the staff and create a culture of fear. The UFT should have been on the ground, uniting the staffs of these small schools, from the very beginning of all of the reorganizations. They shouldn't be waiting around for the desperate cries for help, only to pass the buck when it's clear the situation is hopeless. The teachers will NOT stand up with the UFT, because the UFT is not ultimately serving their interests lately. I mean, think about it. If the organization itself is top-down (I just learned that the District Reps are appointed by Randi herself!), how could it possibly be serving the interests of the teachers? Yet it's not as if the teachers are scaredy-cats who are all too afraid to do anything. On the contrary, the teachers are much smarter and refuse to align themselves against their own interests. That's why they are not so willing to stand up right now.
SG's great insights reminds me of a conversation I had with a long-time chapter leader and teacher of over 20 years who supports the work of ICE and Ed Notes but insists on remaining under cover – deathly afraid (wrongly, I might add) that when they [admins] come for him/her, the UFT would do what it could to knife him/her in the back if he/she were an open ICE supporter. A bit paranoid, he/she won't listen when I say that the more vocal you are the more protection you get if it is perceived you have allies. (Bully admins and UFT hacks look to pick on the weak and isolated.)
I pointed out that when Shanker, who was viewed as so much more powerful and influential than Weingarten (not true either, by the way, but more on that another time), was in power, the opposition did so much better. The response:
"The union was much stronger then and principals were afraid. With the union being so weak, so many people are paralyzed with fear and afraid to open their mouths about anything, including being critical of Randi."
A year ago, Syntactic Gymnastics wrote:
...after being burned so badly last year for speaking out, and trying so hard to "position" myself well politically this year, I am reluctant to go to the union out of fear. I can't believe I am so intimidated, but honestly, I am not convinced the union would be able to protect me. And I'm not convinced that it would be worth the harassment and intimidation that would probably result.
I love teaching and don't want to quit, but I refuse to be abused like this!
Interesting that such similar feelings come from both vets and newbies.
The impact of the Tweed/UFT collaboration is bridging the gap.
Helen Marshall, Where Are You....
.... when it comes to appointing a Queens rep to the Panel for Educational Policy?
Who is Helen Marshall? She is the Queens Borough President whose responsibility it is to appoint a member of the PEP, the rubber stamp replacement for the old Board of Education. Since Bloomberg gets to choose the majority of members, the only chance for any representative voice on the Panel comes from the 5 borough president choices. Most of them use them as a political football to curry favor with Bloomberg, ie. Brooklyn's Marty Markowitz who wants to run for mayor and has been currying Bloomberg's support. Marty's rep used to be Martine Guerrier, for a while a decent choice (she voted against Bloomberg on 3rd grade retention at the Monday Night Massacre) but ended up being appointed to the $150,000 a year job as CEO of Parents, or something like that.
The lone exception has been Manhattan borough president Scott Stringer, who showed major guts in choosing Patrick Sullivan to bring the voice of parents, children (and teachers too) onto the Panel. A NY 1 story talks about how the Manhattan rep was the only member of the PEP to raise questions about the budget cuts.
Marshall has exhibited the spine of a political hack by refusing to give Queens a voice on the Panel for the past 3 months, a time major issues have been discussed, like the capital budget which is so crucial to the severely overcrowded schools in Queens. A perfect example of how the system of mayoral control without oversight has continued the use of the schools as political footballs. She is term-limited and will be stepping down at the end of 2009. Her successor should NOT be given the power to choose reps on whatever governance plan is put in place.
I will make sure to make this point when I speak at the City Council Governance hearings tomorrow (my birthday, by the way – can I give myself a better B-day present that to be able to slam BloomKlein in public? Well, getting a new computer helps too.)
I have decided to throw my hat into the ring for Queens PEP rep. I know, borough reps (though not the Bloomberg appointees) must have children in the schools. Anyone got an extra kid to spare? Or I'll just adopt.
- –Queens unrepresented for 3 months
- –February PEP meeting was on the capital budget
- –With Queens needing so many more schools, the borough had no one on the panel
- –Education Notes editor throws hat into the ring
Who is Helen Marshall? She is the Queens Borough President whose responsibility it is to appoint a member of the PEP, the rubber stamp replacement for the old Board of Education. Since Bloomberg gets to choose the majority of members, the only chance for any representative voice on the Panel comes from the 5 borough president choices. Most of them use them as a political football to curry favor with Bloomberg, ie. Brooklyn's Marty Markowitz who wants to run for mayor and has been currying Bloomberg's support. Marty's rep used to be Martine Guerrier, for a while a decent choice (she voted against Bloomberg on 3rd grade retention at the Monday Night Massacre) but ended up being appointed to the $150,000 a year job as CEO of Parents, or something like that.
The lone exception has been Manhattan borough president Scott Stringer, who showed major guts in choosing Patrick Sullivan to bring the voice of parents, children (and teachers too) onto the Panel. A NY 1 story talks about how the Manhattan rep was the only member of the PEP to raise questions about the budget cuts.
Marshall has exhibited the spine of a political hack by refusing to give Queens a voice on the Panel for the past 3 months, a time major issues have been discussed, like the capital budget which is so crucial to the severely overcrowded schools in Queens. A perfect example of how the system of mayoral control without oversight has continued the use of the schools as political footballs. She is term-limited and will be stepping down at the end of 2009. Her successor should NOT be given the power to choose reps on whatever governance plan is put in place.
I will make sure to make this point when I speak at the City Council Governance hearings tomorrow (my birthday, by the way – can I give myself a better B-day present that to be able to slam BloomKlein in public? Well, getting a new computer helps too.)
I have decided to throw my hat into the ring for Queens PEP rep. I know, borough reps (though not the Bloomberg appointees) must have children in the schools. Anyone got an extra kid to spare? Or I'll just adopt.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Tweed Announces Closing of UFT...
...will be replaced by six smaller unions
EDNN News
UPDATED
The NYCDOE announced at the Tweed Courthouse that the UFT will be phased out over a 4 year period due to its failure at protecting members. Six smaller unions, will be opened, each headed by a potential successor to Randi Weingarten. Teachers will have a choice as to which union to join.
The announcement was made by Mayor Bloomberg and Joel Klein with a beaming Randi Weingarten at their side. "We know this closing may surprise some," said Bloomberg, "but we need a union that appears to be representing the members' interests while convincing them our reforms are best for them."
Each union will have a different theme.
Eyeglasses Are US will concentrate on frames with a separate enclosed mini-union focusing on lenses. A sunglass unit will open in 2010 in time for the next union election. "We're saving Armani for that time as it will bring in a lot of votes for Randi," said a UFT spokesperson.
A Dental Plan for You will be a theme-based union that will address issues teachers might have with brushing and flossing. All union members will get a free brush, some floss and a tube of toothpaste. Unity Caucus members will get teeth whitener in theirs.
GHI Joined at the HIP will provide guidance on how to take out loans to pay medical bills that will not be covered by the soon to be merged and privatized GHI and HIP. "Dont' worry," said a union spkesperson. "Randi Weingarten and Artie Pepper will be on the Board at HIP and will be able to find out the lowest interest rates."
Avoiding Grievances will address concerns of teachers who may feel the need to file a grievance. Special counseling will be offered a nominal expense until the urge disappears.
Collaborators UNITE is expected to attract teachers who want to work closely with their administrators. Special departments will be set up covering nodding correctly to express interest while keeping eyes wide open. Meeting Efficacy will be a mini union to assure that those who choose this option can handle attending meetings and professional development without blinking once.
Head for the Hills will be for the 83% of Teach for America teachers who plan to do their 2 years and head for the hills. Special units on writing a book about their experiences and how to become ed policy wonks will be set up.
EDNN News
UPDATED
The NYCDOE announced at the Tweed Courthouse that the UFT will be phased out over a 4 year period due to its failure at protecting members. Six smaller unions, will be opened, each headed by a potential successor to Randi Weingarten. Teachers will have a choice as to which union to join.
The announcement was made by Mayor Bloomberg and Joel Klein with a beaming Randi Weingarten at their side. "We know this closing may surprise some," said Bloomberg, "but we need a union that appears to be representing the members' interests while convincing them our reforms are best for them."
Each union will have a different theme.
Eyeglasses Are US will concentrate on frames with a separate enclosed mini-union focusing on lenses. A sunglass unit will open in 2010 in time for the next union election. "We're saving Armani for that time as it will bring in a lot of votes for Randi," said a UFT spokesperson.
A Dental Plan for You will be a theme-based union that will address issues teachers might have with brushing and flossing. All union members will get a free brush, some floss and a tube of toothpaste. Unity Caucus members will get teeth whitener in theirs.
GHI Joined at the HIP will provide guidance on how to take out loans to pay medical bills that will not be covered by the soon to be merged and privatized GHI and HIP. "Dont' worry," said a union spkesperson. "Randi Weingarten and Artie Pepper will be on the Board at HIP and will be able to find out the lowest interest rates."
Avoiding Grievances will address concerns of teachers who may feel the need to file a grievance. Special counseling will be offered a nominal expense until the urge disappears.
Collaborators UNITE is expected to attract teachers who want to work closely with their administrators. Special departments will be set up covering nodding correctly to express interest while keeping eyes wide open. Meeting Efficacy will be a mini union to assure that those who choose this option can handle attending meetings and professional development without blinking once.
Head for the Hills will be for the 83% of Teach for America teachers who plan to do their 2 years and head for the hills. Special units on writing a book about their experiences and how to become ed policy wonks will be set up.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Rubber Room Movie Team on Chicago Public Radio
UPDATE: Listen to 880 AM in NYC on Saturday March 1 at 11am for the program.
Greetings all,
We are pleased to announce that Chicago Public Radio's This American Life, a nationally syndicated weekly radio program with an estimated 1.7 million listeners, is teaming up with Five Boroughs to do a radio segment on New York City's Rubber Rooms. The radio segment, entitled "Human Resources", will air beginning this Friday, February 29th, and will feature audio from Five Boroughs Productions film footage as well as original interviews conducted by This American Life producers. This American Life is an award winning radio program, recognized time and time again for excellence in journalism, and we at Five Boroughs could not be more thrilled to be working with them.
Copy and paste the following links into your browser address bar:
Find This American Life broadcast times and stations in your area:
http://www2.pri.org/PublicSite/listeners/programlocator.asp
"Human Resources". (Once the show has aired you can stream the broadcast free at this link):
http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=350
Regards,
--
Jeremy Garrett
Executive Producer
Five Boroughs Productions
www.rubberroommovie.com
347-834-5206
If you want to contribute to the project, contact Jeremy at: jeremygarret@rubberroommovie.com
The RR movie trailer can be accessed here.
Greetings all,
We are pleased to announce that Chicago Public Radio's This American Life, a nationally syndicated weekly radio program with an estimated 1.7 million listeners, is teaming up with Five Boroughs to do a radio segment on New York City's Rubber Rooms. The radio segment, entitled "Human Resources", will air beginning this Friday, February 29th, and will feature audio from Five Boroughs Productions film footage as well as original interviews conducted by This American Life producers. This American Life is an award winning radio program, recognized time and time again for excellence in journalism, and we at Five Boroughs could not be more thrilled to be working with them.
Copy and paste the following links into your browser address bar:
Find This American Life broadcast times and stations in your area:
http://www2.pri.org/PublicSite/listeners/programlocator.asp
"Human Resources". (Once the show has aired you can stream the broadcast free at this link):
http://www.thislife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=350
Regards,
--
Jeremy Garrett
Executive Producer
Five Boroughs Productions
www.rubberroommovie.com
347-834-5206
If you want to contribute to the project, contact Jeremy at: jeremygarret@rubberroommovie.com
The RR movie trailer can be accessed here.
ARIS Smashed
UPDATE:
See Comment #4 for letter from David Yasky and Robert Jackson calling for ARIS contract to be cancelled.
Remember the famous spoof of 1984 with that Apple Super Bowl commercial attacking IBM with all those lemmings going over the cliff? (You can watch it here.)
They landed at Tweed.
(Many years ago I said that one day Joel Klein would be taken out of Tweed with his coat over his head – I half expected to see him among the Gambino Family crowd. Maybe he will be joined by Chief Accountability Officer Jim Liebman.)
Poor ARIS, Joel Klein's $80 million white elephant. Getting trashed all over the place.
Gary Babad is back with a satire over at NYC Public School Parents Blog "DOE Plans Billion Dollar ARIS Upgrade."
I attended a press conference a few years ago when Klein announced how data would be accumulated for teachers to use. Based on my knowledge of the state of computer access in schools (which has suffered severe deterioration under BloomKlein) and the state of available time available during the school day for teachers to check such data (which has also suffered severe deterioration under BloomKlein) I raised this issue with Klein:
Shame on the NYC press corps for ignoring this issue.
ARIS has also been taking hits from the pros. When the system was announced a year ago, the juiceanalytics blog called it an $80 million super mugging.
A new blog post follows up at www.juiceanalytics.com/writing. It is worth repeating in full. How to Feel Better About Your Data Warehouse Fiasco
See Comment #4 for letter from David Yasky and Robert Jackson calling for ARIS contract to be cancelled.
Remember the famous spoof of 1984 with that Apple Super Bowl commercial attacking IBM with all those lemmings going over the cliff? (You can watch it here.)
They landed at Tweed.
(Many years ago I said that one day Joel Klein would be taken out of Tweed with his coat over his head – I half expected to see him among the Gambino Family crowd. Maybe he will be joined by Chief Accountability Officer Jim Liebman.)
Poor ARIS, Joel Klein's $80 million white elephant. Getting trashed all over the place.
Gary Babad is back with a satire over at NYC Public School Parents Blog "DOE Plans Billion Dollar ARIS Upgrade."
I attended a press conference a few years ago when Klein announced how data would be accumulated for teachers to use. Based on my knowledge of the state of computer access in schools (which has suffered severe deterioration under BloomKlein) and the state of available time available during the school day for teachers to check such data (which has also suffered severe deterioration under BloomKlein) I raised this issue with Klein:
"The reality on the ground, is that teachers will not be able to access all this other than on their oen time at home, and that is just not real." Klein just shucked the question off (I guess he figured threats to send teachers to the rubber room for not burning the midnight oil at home checking the ARIS data would suffice.)
Shame on the NYC press corps for ignoring this issue.
ARIS has also been taking hits from the pros. When the system was announced a year ago, the juiceanalytics blog called it an $80 million super mugging.
Ah, the sweet smell of a swindle. Don't you just hate it when consulting companies cajole deals with hand-wringing about technology and, especially, preying on clients' lack of expertise?
Teachers are underpaid, hardly appreciated, and overworked. I can only wonder what the half-life is of a system that asks teachers to log on to get information delivered by the "chief accountability officer."
A new blog post follows up at www.juiceanalytics.
How to Feel Better About Your Data Warehouse Fiasco
Here’s a little predictive analytics:
About a year ago I took a swipe at the “$80 million supercomputer to analyze NYC student achievement.” It smelled more like a super sales job than a super useful analytical tool.
At the time I had said:
Teachers are underpaid, hardly appreciated, and overworked. I can only wonder what the half-life is of a system that asks teachers to log on to get information delivered by the “chief accountability officer.”
Well, it appears that things haven’t gone that smoothly with the supercomputer. Today I received a link from Leonie Haimson, a NYC education advocate, to a story entitled SCHOOLS COMPUTER AN $80M ‘DISASTER’.
Not only has the supercomputer struggled to gain much traction with users (“The school system’s new $80 million computer super system to track student performance has been a super debacle, teachers and principals say.”), it has coincided with severe budget cuts.
We see these data warehousing problems all the time with our clients, and the NYC supercomputer displays all the hallmarks:
- Delivery delays: Nearly six months after the Department of Education unveiled the “first of its kind” data-management system, the city’s 80,000 teachers have yet to log on because of glitches and delays.
- Bad user experience: Many principals have complained that it runs slowly, lacks vital information, and is often too frustrating to use.
- Complicated training and set-up: School officials were hoping to have everyone hooked up and trained within months…delays in creating IDs and passwords for teachers
- Trying to do too much; delivering too little: The principal added that she preferred to get student information from a combination of old data systems “rather than wait for ARIS to churn and churn and churn and maybe give me half the report I need.”
- Massive cost: Complaints about the expensive system - on which nearly $35 million has been spent so far - have gotten louder since the city unceremoniously chopped $100 million from individual school budgets last month.
- And yet, few success anecdotes to justify the investment: ARIS had already enabled her data team to analyze the performance trends of the school’s many English-language learners.
It does offer one thing that I haven’t seen before: a Chief Accountability Officer.
A Short Guide to the WTO, the Millennial Round, and the Rumble in Seattle
With NAFTA becoming a major part of the political campaign between Clinton and Obama, I remembered Ed Notes re-printing an article about free trade. It was shortly before the WTO meeting in Seattle and cleared up a number of misconceptions I had and forced me to confront my basic instinct to be a supporter of unfettered free trade. After all, we were taught in high school and college economics that a major reason for the Great Worldwide Depression of the 1930's was the restriction of free trade (the Hoot-Smalley tariff bill was a major villain we were told.) Then ca
me the riots that disrupted the conference and shook downtown Seattle like no earthquake could. I guess the powers that be never read Elaine Bernard's article.
While not stated, applications of market-based and corporate agendas to education systems can be implied.
Ed Notes reprint from the Jan. 2000 edition
A Short Guide to the WTO, the Millennial Round, and the Rumble in Seattle
By Elaine Bernard
November 24, 1999
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is coming to Seattle at the end of November and tens of thousands of labor, environmental, and progressive activists are organizing to give t
hem a hot reception. There are thousands and thousands of pages out there - on the net, in progressive journals, articles, even books, on the WTO. But rather like trade agreements themselves, sometimes the very volume of materials available on the topic overwhelms the uninitiated reader. So, I thought I would put together a quick guide to the WTO, to the Seattle meeting, and to the various debates within the progressive community on the WTO.
What is the WTO?
It’s an international organization of 134 member countries which is both a forum for negotiating international trade agreements and the monitoring and regulating body for enforcing the agreements. The WTO was created in 1995, by the passage of the provisions of “Uruguay Round” of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Prior to the Uruguay Round, GATT focused on promoting world trade by pressuring countries to reduce tariffs. But with the creation of the WTO, this corporate inspired agenda was significantly ratchet up by targeting so-called “non-tariff barriers to trade” - essentially any national or local protective legislation which might be construed as impacting trade.
So, Aren’t we in favor of regulation?
Sure, but not the type of regulation proposed by the WTO, a powerful body of un-elected bureaucrats, who deliberate in secret with an aim to turning the entire world into one big market. Officially, the WTO has two main objectives: to promote and extend trade liberalization (by breaking down national “barriers” to trade), and to establish a mechanism for trade dispute settlement.
In practice, the WTO is seeking to deregulate international commerce and break open domestic markets for foreign investors. Its rule making seeks to free corporations from government regulation which would constitute a barrier to trade. It permits relatively unrestricted movement of money, capital, goods and services, while at the same time providing investors and corporations with extensive protection of their property rights. It even extends corporate property rights through the so called “intellectual properties” provisions. Intellectual property as defined by trade agreements is not about the creative powers of intellectuals. Rather, it is about protecting corporate ownership and monopoly over the patenting of plants, processes, seed varieties, drugs, and software. The intellectual property provisions are just one example of how there is extensive protectionism in this so-called “free trade” regime - but protection for corporations and punitive market discipline for workers, consumers and small farmers.
Freedom for Capital, Market Discipline for Labor
Here’s an example of WTO thinking. The WTO says that they can not deal with social issues, only “trade” forgetting that once you start to deal with trade in services, you are indeed dealing with many social issues. It says that it can only regulate “product” not “process.” With labor and environmental standards, what we normally regulate is process. It’s been an important acquisition of the labor, consumer, and environmental movements in recent years to move beyond the simple regulation of end product and regulate process - how things are made. It is in the very production methods that we can improve safety, eliminate hazards and develop cleaner processes. The difference between a shirt produced by sweated labor under near slave like conditions and a shirt produced by union labor under decent conditions isn’t readily obvious in the packaging (the end product) but rather its observed in the monitoring of the “process” of how the shirt is produced.
By contrast, when the WTO sees the interest of investors and capital threatened - it can spring into action and be quite powerful in its enforcement. So, for example, when workers are being forced to work with flagrant violation of labor law and safety codes, the WTO says there is nothing it can do. But let these same workers illegally produce “pirate” videos, or CDs (challenging a corporations copyright) and the WTO can spring into action sanctioning all sorts of actions against the offending country - in order to protect a corporations “intellectual property.”
Ok, back to Seattle, what is the millennium round?
The WTO wants to continue its campaign of trade liberalization and in particular it wants to increase the trade in services - including public services. Unfortunately, this means further turning over services such as health care, education, water and utilities to markets and international com
petition and undermining and destroying local control and protection of communities.
What’s the problem with markets?
Markets are fine, in their place, but they must not be permitted to replace social decision-making. Markets should not be confused with democratic institutions. Markets, for example, might be useful in determining price of goods, but they should not be mechanisms for determining our values as a community. Markets are oblivious to morals and promote only the value of profit.
So, what do we want to do about the WTO?
Resistance to the free trade agenda and the continual drive to undermine social decision-making and democracy is the basis of unity for all the groups protesting the WTO. Beyond that profound and important agreement, there are wider differences about what to do about the WTO.
Resisters want to abolish the WTO
Some of the groups coming to Seattle are supporters of the resistance movement - arguing that the trade liberalization program of the WTO is fundamentally flawed and we would be better simply abolishing this dangerous organization. They argue for building the global resistance and constructing global solidarity from below.
Reformers believe they can transform the WTO
Others, in particular much of organized labor argue that while the WTO trade liberalization program is deeply flawed, it’s now well established as a powerful organization and that the concept of negotiated trade regulation is vital to the health and welfare of the world community. They argue that if core labor rights, environmental protections, and what the Europeans refer to as a “social clause” was inserted into the WTO’s mandate and practice that it could be transformed.
Resisters, reformers and rebels from around the globe will be gathering in Seattle later this month in a remarkable international solidarity action challenging the WTO’s corporate agenda. While there are important tactical differences in approaches to the WTO, there is also a fair degree of unity in action and in identifying the WTO as an important global institution promoting policies which are contributing to the growth of inequality and the undermining of democracy. The protest in Seattle maybe be both the last major, international demonstration of the century and the beginning of a new powerful global solidarity movement.
Elaine Bernard is Executive Director, Harvard Trade Union Program. Copyright (c) 1999 Elaine Bernard.
me the riots that disrupted the conference and shook downtown Seattle like no earthquake could. I guess the powers that be never read Elaine Bernard's article.While not stated, applications of market-based and corporate agendas to education systems can be implied.
Ed Notes reprint from the Jan. 2000 edition
A Short Guide to the WTO, the Millennial Round, and the Rumble in Seattle
By Elaine Bernard
November 24, 1999
The World Trade Organization (WTO) is coming to Seattle at the end of November and tens of thousands of labor, environmental, and progressive activists are organizing to give t
hem a hot reception. There are thousands and thousands of pages out there - on the net, in progressive journals, articles, even books, on the WTO. But rather like trade agreements themselves, sometimes the very volume of materials available on the topic overwhelms the uninitiated reader. So, I thought I would put together a quick guide to the WTO, to the Seattle meeting, and to the various debates within the progressive community on the WTO.What is the WTO?
It’s an international organization of 134 member countries which is both a forum for negotiating international trade agreements and the monitoring and regulating body for enforcing the agreements. The WTO was created in 1995, by the passage of the provisions of “Uruguay Round” of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Prior to the Uruguay Round, GATT focused on promoting world trade by pressuring countries to reduce tariffs. But with the creation of the WTO, this corporate inspired agenda was significantly ratchet up by targeting so-called “non-tariff barriers to trade” - essentially any national or local protective legislation which might be construed as impacting trade.
So, Aren’t we in favor of regulation?
Sure, but not the type of regulation proposed by the WTO, a powerful body of un-elected bureaucrats, who deliberate in secret with an aim to turning the entire world into one big market. Officially, the WTO has two main objectives: to promote and extend trade liberalization (by breaking down national “barriers” to trade), and to establish a mechanism for trade dispute settlement.
In practice, the WTO is seeking to deregulate international commerce and break open domestic markets for foreign investors. Its rule making seeks to free corporations from government regulation which would constitute a barrier to trade. It permits relatively unrestricted movement of money, capital, goods and services, while at the same time providing investors and corporations with extensive protection of their property rights. It even extends corporate property rights through the so called “intellectual properties” provisions. Intellectual property as defined by trade agreements is not about the creative powers of intellectuals. Rather, it is about protecting corporate ownership and monopoly over the patenting of plants, processes, seed varieties, drugs, and software. The intellectual property provisions are just one example of how there is extensive protectionism in this so-called “free trade” regime - but protection for corporations and punitive market discipline for workers, consumers and small farmers.
Freedom for Capital, Market Discipline for Labor
Here’s an example of WTO thinking. The WTO says that they can not deal with social issues, only “trade” forgetting that once you start to deal with trade in services, you are indeed dealing with many social issues. It says that it can only regulate “product” not “process.” With labor and environmental standards, what we normally regulate is process. It’s been an important acquisition of the labor, consumer, and environmental movements in recent years to move beyond the simple regulation of end product and regulate process - how things are made. It is in the very production methods that we can improve safety, eliminate hazards and develop cleaner processes. The difference between a shirt produced by sweated labor under near slave like conditions and a shirt produced by union labor under decent conditions isn’t readily obvious in the packaging (the end product) but rather its observed in the monitoring of the “process” of how the shirt is produced.
By contrast, when the WTO sees the interest of investors and capital threatened - it can spring into action and be quite powerful in its enforcement. So, for example, when workers are being forced to work with flagrant violation of labor law and safety codes, the WTO says there is nothing it can do. But let these same workers illegally produce “pirate” videos, or CDs (challenging a corporations copyright) and the WTO can spring into action sanctioning all sorts of actions against the offending country - in order to protect a corporations “intellectual property.”
Ok, back to Seattle, what is the millennium round?
The WTO wants to continue its campaign of trade liberalization and in particular it wants to increase the trade in services - including public services. Unfortunately, this means further turning over services such as health care, education, water and utilities to markets and international com
petition and undermining and destroying local control and protection of communities.What’s the problem with markets?
Markets are fine, in their place, but they must not be permitted to replace social decision-making. Markets should not be confused with democratic institutions. Markets, for example, might be useful in determining price of goods, but they should not be mechanisms for determining our values as a community. Markets are oblivious to morals and promote only the value of profit.
So, what do we want to do about the WTO?
Resistance to the free trade agenda and the continual drive to undermine social decision-making and democracy is the basis of unity for all the groups protesting the WTO. Beyond that profound and important agreement, there are wider differences about what to do about the WTO.
Resisters want to abolish the WTO
Some of the groups coming to Seattle are supporters of the resistance movement - arguing that the trade liberalization program of the WTO is fundamentally flawed and we would be better simply abolishing this dangerous organization. They argue for building the global resistance and constructing global solidarity from below.
Reformers believe they can transform the WTO
Others, in particular much of organized labor argue that while the WTO trade liberalization program is deeply flawed, it’s now well established as a powerful organization and that the concept of negotiated trade regulation is vital to the health and welfare of the world community. They argue that if core labor rights, environmental protections, and what the Europeans refer to as a “social clause” was inserted into the WTO’s mandate and practice that it could be transformed.
Resisters, reformers and rebels from around the globe will be gathering in Seattle later this month in a remarkable international solidarity action challenging the WTO’s corporate agenda. While there are important tactical differences in approaches to the WTO, there is also a fair degree of unity in action and in identifying the WTO as an important global institution promoting policies which are contributing to the growth of inequality and the undermining of democracy. The protest in Seattle maybe be both the last major, international demonstration of the century and the beginning of a new powerful global solidarity movement.
Elaine Bernard is Executive Director, Harvard Trade Union Program. Copyright (c) 1999 Elaine Bernard.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Quality Teachers vs. Small Class Size
All you need to control this crowd is a quality teacher.
The so-called Education reformers always pose demands for lower class sizes in terms of, "We will need so many more teachers and so many of them will be of lower quality, the impact of lower class sizes will be negated."
Of course, they always start off with the usual (say this out loud with your lips pursed):
Ugh! Like either you're a quality teacher or you're not. No recognition of the impact on quality by conditions like class size, kids with problems, etc.
Unfortunately, the leadership of the UFT/AFT axis and most politicians have bought into this, which naturally leads to the "let's blame the teacher" and "It's all about professional development" and ultimately to a deskilling of teachers -- let's make teaching teacher proof - and what better way that teach to tests?
Two articles are worth taking a look at, both based on studies in England. "How Much Do Smaller Class Sizes Improve Teaching" here and Ed Week's "Teaching Quality Matters" .
There will always be a bell curve in any job.
Maybe we should not hold elections until we are sure all politicians are superior?
Or fight fires until all firemen are tops?
Close hospitals till all doctors are high quality?
Close down the legal system unless you can get Clarence Darrow?
Quality Lawyers? Quality Judges? - give me a break?
Or not put police on the street until we measure their effectiveness? They get credit in NYC for cutting crime by putting lots of police (did they measure their quality beforehand?) on the street.
So how come everyone is focused on quality teachers?
Because it's an excuse to do ed reform on the cheap.
Many teachers do struggle with things like control due to large classes. Many are well intentioned but the job is overwhelming. And there are superior people who can handle it all but we will never get all teachers to be superior - not with merit pay or no matter how much they are paid.
What strikes me is that the cost is always raised by people who didn't blink when enormous money appeared miraculously to fight a war. Imagine how demands for the same amount would be met as throwing good money away if a war on education neglect were declared.
A parent wrote on the nyceducation listserve:
I am not an educator, but a parent. I have had three children go through the public education system from Pre-K to High School. I can attest on a personal level smaller classes provide a better learning environment. The article cites the teachers we have as all being superior, or according to them we should get rid of the less than superior teachers and have the superior teachers teach to classes of 50 or 100. Since they are so good they can do that. Rather, in our current system, we have some superior, some good and some mediocre teachers. So baring the idea that we can just do away with the mediocre teachers, then wouldn't it be better for a mediocre teacher to be teaching to a class of 20 rather than 30. Maybe the less than perfect teacher would find the lower class size conducive to improving their teaching as they could then spend more time with each child. This seems to me like common sense, something sadly lacking in much of this ongoing debate.
Another parent followed with:
The other thing is that large classes cause much higher rates of attrition – so that you end up getting less experienced and less able teachers as a result and most high-needs, overcrowded schools. 50% of teachers said that large classes caused them to leave the profession – and in national surveys they say the best incentive program to attract them to and keep them working at high-needs schools would be small classes.
The so-called Education reformers always pose demands for lower class sizes in terms of, "We will need so many more teachers and so many of them will be of lower quality, the impact of lower class sizes will be negated."
Of course, they always start off with the usual (say this out loud with your lips pursed):
Teacher quality is the single most important determiner of a child's education.
Ugh! Like either you're a quality teacher or you're not. No recognition of the impact on quality by conditions like class size, kids with problems, etc.
Unfortunately, the leadership of the UFT/AFT axis and most politicians have bought into this, which naturally leads to the "let's blame the teacher" and "It's all about professional development" and ultimately to a deskilling of teachers -- let's make teaching teacher proof - and what better way that teach to tests?
Two articles are worth taking a look at, both based on studies in England. "How Much Do Smaller Class Sizes Improve Teaching" here and Ed Week's "Teaching Quality Matters" .
There will always be a bell curve in any job.
Maybe we should not hold elections until we are sure all politicians are superior?
Or fight fires until all firemen are tops?
Close hospitals till all doctors are high quality?
Close down the legal system unless you can get Clarence Darrow?
Quality Lawyers? Quality Judges? - give me a break?
Or not put police on the street until we measure their effectiveness? They get credit in NYC for cutting crime by putting lots of police (did they measure their quality beforehand?) on the street.
So how come everyone is focused on quality teachers?
Because it's an excuse to do ed reform on the cheap.
Many teachers do struggle with things like control due to large classes. Many are well intentioned but the job is overwhelming. And there are superior people who can handle it all but we will never get all teachers to be superior - not with merit pay or no matter how much they are paid.
What strikes me is that the cost is always raised by people who didn't blink when enormous money appeared miraculously to fight a war. Imagine how demands for the same amount would be met as throwing good money away if a war on education neglect were declared.
A parent wrote on the nyceducation listserve:
I am not an educator, but a parent. I have had three children go through the public education system from Pre-K to High School. I can attest on a personal level smaller classes provide a better learning environment. The article cites the teachers we have as all being superior, or according to them we should get rid of the less than superior teachers and have the superior teachers teach to classes of 50 or 100. Since they are so good they can do that. Rather, in our current system, we have some superior, some good and some mediocre teachers. So baring the idea that we can just do away with the mediocre teachers, then wouldn't it be better for a mediocre teacher to be teaching to a class of 20 rather than 30. Maybe the less than perfect teacher would find the lower class size conducive to improving their teaching as they could then spend more time with each child. This seems to me like common sense, something sadly lacking in much of this ongoing debate.
Another parent followed with:
The other thing is that large classes cause much higher rates of attrition – so that you end up getting less experienced and less able teachers as a result and most high-needs, overcrowded schools. 50% of teachers said that large classes caused them to leave the profession – and in national surveys they say the best incentive program to attract them to and keep them working at high-needs schools would be small classes.
Are Merrow Reports on PBS Fair and Balanced?
Reports on Paul Vallas - the uber Klein - check the state of the Chicago and Philly and now New Orleans schools as he goes on his path of destruction of public education.
And Klein Klone Michelle Rhee who may actually face push back from a union (as Andres Alonso is finding in Baltimore) and school boards. But maybe not.
Are the Merrow reports and podcasts fair and balanced? He's based in NYC. When will he take on the BloomKlein story or is that too delicate in that he might have to actually hear the voices on these listserves?
At the bottom of his emails:
Funding for our podcasts is provided by the Annenberg, William & Flora Hewlett, Bill & Melinda Gates and Wallace Foundations.
Ooops! Guess not!
The story on Michele Rhee a few weeks ago was so narrow - like the issue is merely about the right to fire people without due process or to close schools. There are much bigger issues here that go beyond Washington. The use of the term "failing" schools is an excuse for the Eli Broads and Bill Gates' to be part of a private takeover of urban schools. Basically, urban parents and teachers are being put under the dictatorship of one person while suburban get to control their schools.
Hey BUB!
Merrow advertises the videos on you tube using the expression "bloated and unresponsive bureaucracies." How ironic when that is exactly what Joel Klein and ultimately Michelle Rhee will create. While we always have BUBs - and many private corps do too - (ie. Microsoft compared to Google) what BUB often means is that true educators are saying "NO" to gimmicky reforms.
The Rhee report left out all the connections between the assault on parents and teachers going on in urban centers by Joel Klein, Andres Alonso, Rhee, Paul Vallas. Why not look at the results of this phony "reform" movement in Chicago which has had 13 years of it where Vallas played a major role? How did Vallas ultimately do there? In Philly? Now New Orleans?
Where are the stories of the St. Louis schools system after the A&M consultants came in? Now they too are in New Orleans after taking away a king's ransom from New York.
I'm sure without even knowing anything about Washington that Rhee has used high priced consultants and funneled money to all kinds of profiteers and privateers while cutting schools - bet she used consultants to tell her which ones to cut. Maybe even A&M.
There's a major story here in NYC that the national press, in it's fantasy of the phony reform movement wants to ignore. It is about the immense failures of Bloomberg and Klein. And the cover ups, etc. Why not try to get info on exactly what they spend on consultants, etc.? The Kremlin was easier.
I am posting at Norm's Notes a recent Merrow podcast announcement and a selection of examples from the voices of teachers and parents in NYC that illustrate the absolute either out and out incompetence of Tweed or even worse, a bloated and unresponsive bureaucracy.
And Klein Klone Michelle Rhee who may actually face push back from a union (as Andres Alonso is finding in Baltimore) and school boards. But maybe not.
Are the Merrow reports and podcasts fair and balanced? He's based in NYC. When will he take on the BloomKlein story or is that too delicate in that he might have to actually hear the voices on these listserves?
At the bottom of his emails:
Funding for our podcasts is provided by the Annenberg, William & Flora Hewlett, Bill & Melinda Gates and Wallace Foundations.
Ooops! Guess not!
The story on Michele Rhee a few weeks ago was so narrow - like the issue is merely about the right to fire people without due process or to close schools. There are much bigger issues here that go beyond Washington. The use of the term "failing" schools is an excuse for the Eli Broads and Bill Gates' to be part of a private takeover of urban schools. Basically, urban parents and teachers are being put under the dictatorship of one person while suburban get to control their schools.
Hey BUB!
Merrow advertises the videos on you tube using the expression "bloated and unresponsive bureaucracies." How ironic when that is exactly what Joel Klein and ultimately Michelle Rhee will create. While we always have BUBs - and many private corps do too - (ie. Microsoft compared to Google) what BUB often means is that true educators are saying "NO" to gimmicky reforms.
The Rhee report left out all the connections between the assault on parents and teachers going on in urban centers by Joel Klein, Andres Alonso, Rhee, Paul Vallas. Why not look at the results of this phony "reform" movement in Chicago which has had 13 years of it where Vallas played a major role? How did Vallas ultimately do there? In Philly? Now New Orleans?
Where are the stories of the St. Louis schools system after the A&M consultants came in? Now they too are in New Orleans after taking away a king's ransom from New York.
I'm sure without even knowing anything about Washington that Rhee has used high priced consultants and funneled money to all kinds of profiteers and privateers while cutting schools - bet she used consultants to tell her which ones to cut. Maybe even A&M.
There's a major story here in NYC that the national press, in it's fantasy of the phony reform movement wants to ignore. It is about the immense failures of Bloomberg and Klein. And the cover ups, etc. Why not try to get info on exactly what they spend on consultants, etc.? The Kremlin was easier.
I am posting at Norm's Notes a recent Merrow podcast announcement and a selection of examples from the voices of teachers and parents in NYC that illustrate the absolute either out and out incompetence of Tweed or even worse, a bloated and unresponsive bureaucracy.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
UFT Undermining Rubber Room Suit, Teachers Charge
UPDATE: Thurs. Feb. 28 from Boubakar Fofana:
You make grave statements without naming your source. Who told you that "NYSUT lawyers withdraw from active 3020a hearings of plaintiffs" ?
"Teachers4action being criticized by some for putting people in jeopardy."
By "some" ? Again, what is your source ? Teachers4action put people in jeopardy by suing the DOE and the UFT ? How ?
This is absurd because the plaintiffs are the Teachers4action and Teachers4action is the collective name for the plaintiffs.
The UFT has a fiduciary obligation to protect its members and provide them with legal representation in the 3020a proceedings.You certainly know that.
I have news for you : I am a plaintiff and the following correspondence is proof of the fallacy of the piece you call breaking news. I do hope that you will make a correction on your blog :
Date:
UPDATE: Wed. Feb 27 9am
Breaking News: (If you have added info, email me or add it to the comments section).
UFT sued by Teachers4Action – Weingarten and SWAT Team member Betsy Combier named as defendants amongst others.
NYSUT Lawyers withdraw from active 3020a hearings of plaintiffs, claiming potential conflict of interest; will go to federal court to ask for ruling; teachers told they would have to pay for their own lawyer if NYSUT lawyers stay away; arbitrators informing teachers if they turn up without a lawyer they will be charged for the day of cancelled hearings; some teachers claim withdrawal of NYSUT lawyers part of pressure tactics to force plaintiffs to drop out of case.
On Jan. 31 I posted about how we broke into the Queens rubber room where the group "Teachers4Action" has been organizing to file a lawsuit against the DOE and possibly the UFT. Almost 50 teachers gathered in a church to meet. Think this is a threat to the UFT, which they claim has been working to undermine the suit? Weingarten even wrote letters to elected officials as part of this campaign. The candlelight vigil in November, originally planned as a protest by RR people who would have made the point about the UFT selling them out, was one such
undercutting action.
But she doesn't have to do the heavy lifting. When she created the SWAT team (named "The Three Stooges" by Jeff Kaufman on the ICE blog) back in the fall to supposedly assist the RR people, some viewed them as spies who would work to divide and defuse any militancy that might arise.
Now Teachers4Action are claiming they are under assault by the UFT, as evidenced by this email:
I wrote back in September when the SWAT team was announced, "If I were in the RR I wouldn't make plans to be back at my job real soon." Here are excepts:
You make grave statements without naming your source. Who told you that "NYSUT lawyers withdraw from active 3020a hearings of plaintiffs" ?
"Teachers4action being criticized by some for putting people in jeopardy."
By "some" ? Again, what is your source ? Teachers4action put people in jeopardy by suing the DOE and the UFT ? How ?
This is absurd because the plaintiffs are the Teachers4action and Teachers4action is the collective name for the plaintiffs.
The UFT has a fiduciary obligation to protect its members and provide them with legal representation in the 3020a proceedings.You certainly know that.
I have news for you : I am a plaintiff and the following correspondence is proof of the fallacy of the piece you call breaking news. I do hope that you will make a correction on your blog :
========================================
Mr. Cavallaro,
It is not easy for me to walk away from someone I am comfortable with, and whose professionalism is quite remarkable. Given the circumstances we discussed yesterday, I believe my interests will be better served if a private attorney represents me in the 3020a proceedings, although I don't understand the rationale for the NYSUT making the choice for me.
Regards,
Boubakar Fofana
============================================
Date:
Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:52:15 -0500
From:
"Antonio Cavallaro" <acavalla@nysutmail.org>
To:
CC:
Subject:
Re: Private Attorney
Mr. Fofana,
Thank you for your compliments. I appreciate that this was not an easy decision for you to make and that there is nothing personal in your decision. As I mentioned to you yesterday, our policy is that if we pay for the representation provided we must choose the attorney that provides that representation in order to ensure that the quality of representation meets our very exacting standards. Once that attorney is secured by this office, we have no right to oversee or direct the representation in any fashion, despite the fact that we will be paying that attorney's fees. However, we still have the responsibility, to ensure that the representation is ethically and competently provided. The only way we can meet our responsibilities under those circumstances, is to choose the attorney who will provide that representation ourselves. As I mentioned to you when we discussed this issue yesterday, if you wish for NYSUT to cover the costs of the representation, that is an absolute pre-requisite. I am sorry if you do not understand this requirement, but it is not negotiable. If you wish to secure your own attorney to represent you in this matter you will have to pay the attorney and all associated costs yourself. Alternatively, as I also explained yesterday, you may choose to continue with me as your attorney, so long as you are willing to sign a legal document which clearly indicates your knowledge of the possibility of a conflict of interest and waiving any objection to that possible conflict. In any event, I will immediately inform my managers of the choice you have made in this instance.
Thank You
Antonio Cavallaro
Associate Senior Counsel, NYSUT
Associate Senior Counsel, NYSUT
UPDATE: Wed. Feb 27 9am
Breaking News: (If you have added info, email me or add it to the comments section).
UFT sued by Teachers4Action – Weingarten and SWAT Team member Betsy Combier named as defendants amongst others.
NYSUT Lawyers withdraw from active 3020a hearings of plaintiffs, claiming potential conflict of interest; will go to federal court to ask for ruling; teachers told they would have to pay for their own lawyer if NYSUT lawyers stay away; arbitrators informing teachers if they turn up without a lawyer they will be charged for the day of cancelled hearings; some teachers claim withdrawal of NYSUT lawyers part of pressure tactics to force plaintiffs to drop out of case.
On Jan. 31 I posted about how we broke into the Queens rubber room where the group "Teachers4Action" has been organizing to file a lawsuit against the DOE and possibly the UFT. Almost 50 teachers gathered in a church to meet. Think this is a threat to the UFT, which they claim has been working to undermine the suit? Weingarten even wrote letters to elected officials as part of this campaign. The candlelight vigil in November, originally planned as a protest by RR people who would have made the point about the UFT selling them out, was one such
undercutting action.But she doesn't have to do the heavy lifting. When she created the SWAT team (named "The Three Stooges" by Jeff Kaufman on the ICE blog) back in the fall to supposedly assist the RR people, some viewed them as spies who would work to divide and defuse any militancy that might arise.
Now Teachers4Action are claiming they are under assault by the UFT, as evidenced by this email:
[A UFT rep] is attempting to intimidate teachers involved [in our lawsuit] and peel them off one by one in order to dilute our effectiveness. Word is spreading fast among the rooms that the UFT has declared war against the sacrificial lambs.
I wrote back in September when the SWAT team was announced, "If I were in the RR I wouldn't make plans to be back at my job real soon." Here are excepts:
Here's a link to the full Sept. 28 post.
In a post the other day I wrote "the screams of the people are beginning to be heard and with the potential national impact of blogs calling Randi a sellout, she is trying to make it look like they will do something-- she has assigned [a team of 3] to visit the rubber rooms and come up with suggestions. So she is trying to let the air out of the balloon."
It will be the usual "We hear you, we feel your pain." People will feel good like the union is paying attention and will stop organizing. A year later when nothing much has changed they will get the message: Talk loudly, carry a tiny stick.
Does "Education Week" Violate Journalistic Standards?
Education Week, a national weekly read by the Ed cognoscenti, has been accused by Deborah Meier, David Marshak, Philip Kovacs, Susan Ohanian, Jerry Bracey, William Spady of violating journalistic standards by humping a point of view that backs the kind of insanity we've seen here in NYC. They sent a letter and want others to join them. Read this important letter at Susan Ohanian's place.
I had my own recent bout with an Ed Week editor when they printed an article biased in favor of a report on teacher quality by Britain's Sir Michael Barber who was embraced by Bloomberg/Klein for his half-baked policies in England (now under some repudiation – I'll check it out in an upcoming trip to London.)
An article called "Teaching Quality Matters" states (my emphasis):
The world’s top-performing school systems and those coming up fast have a lesson to teach the others: Put high-quality teaching for every child at the heart of school improvement....
Neither resources nor ambitious reforms have been the answer to the need for school improvement, say the authors, Sir Michael Barber and Mona Mourshed of McKinsey & Co., the London-based consulting firm responsible for the report. They point to “massive” increases in spending and popular reforms—prominently, class-size reduction and decentralization of decisionmaking—that have failed, they say, to much budge the needle of student achievement many places.
You know. The old line about all you have to do is fix teacher quality and you overcome all (I'll write more on this soon.) But then again, the UFT's Randi Weingarten, the Clintons, et al. all sign on to this bull.)
I sent the following letter to the editor, who I've spoken to a few times in the past (and have some sympathy for, as she was once trapped in a train station for hours with nothing to read but Education Notes.)
I was wondering if Michael Barber, a noted trasher of class size as a factor, cited specifics of the studies he cites? He says many places. Did he give one example? If not, shouldn't he be challenged to do so instead of being allowed to leave the impression that class size reduction doesn't work?
I received this reply:
"Generally true?" "Many US school systems?" How about which ones? Where's the actual research to cite this, not that I trust research, which can be slanted in so many ways. But Ed Week is part of the cabal against spending real money on Ed reform – is is so
There are a few references in the report, but it is not really a scholarly work. I don't have it with me. I think his argument rests more on the fact that there has been a lot of class size reduction in places where achievement has stayed relatively flat, such as in many U.S. school systems. I think that is generally true, although you could certainly argue that classes need to be still smaller. I didn't have much space to offer challenges and had to give what space I had to people assessing the general worth of the report, which you should be able to get on the Web. You might a letter to the editor if you think his conclusions are misleading.
much easier and cheaper to blame the teachers. How about Ed Week calling for an accurate study (like we really need a study to tell us that much smaller classes, which I bet the elite critics pay a fortune to assure their own kids experience - like Bloomberg's kids going to Spence with 14 in a class) instead of adopting the "generally true" standard of research.The article, which you can read in full here, did include the following bone:
I never wrote that letter to the editor, but I think now is a good time.David P. Baker, who has extensively studied the results from international math and science tests, praised the study for clear conclusions that hold the possibility of pushing policymakers in valid directions. He said his own research showed that countries that reduced the spread in teacher quality tended to have higher test scores. At the same time, the Pennsylvania State University professor said the report might have taken better account of the effects of social disadvantage, which has a profound influence on school performance [the Richard Rothstein view].
Here is a list if you wan to join the party.
Virginia Edwards, Editor and Publisher gined@epe.org
Gregory Chronister, Executive Editor gchron@epe.org
Lynn Olson, Project Editor for Quality Counts lolson@epe.org
Karen Diegmueller, Managing Editor kdieg@epe.org
Mark W. Bomster, Asst. Managing Editor mbomster@epe.org
Monday, February 25, 2008
Cops attack striking teachers in Puerto Rico
NOTE: Keep an eye on the way the UFT/AFT addresses this issue. This is the kind of militancy that scares them - remember, unions of professionals collaborate, not strike. The
y will not oppose a support reso support the teachers but will probably substitute pablum.
Photos of police attacking strikers on Day Three of the Puerto Rican Teachers Strike:
http://boricua.smugmug.com/gallery/4403 647_oefw7#P-1-20
This is how the president of FMPR, Rafael Feliciano, ended his update for today. The strike is holding fast in its third day. 84% of students are not attending classes. 80% of classes across the island are not being held. 54% of teachers, or 23,000 are directly or indirectly (staying home) supporting the strike, of which 8,000 are participating on the picket lines [amazing statistic].
The Dept. of Education is warning parents that students will receive an "F" for their class grade and will not be promoted to the next grade as well as that the school year will be extended
A big demonstration is planned in front of the Dept. of Education for tomorrow at 1 PM. Feliciano adds "no hay triunfo sin lucha!"
y will not oppose a support reso support the teachers but will probably substitute pablum.Photos of police attacking strikers on Day Three of the Puerto Rican Teachers Strike:
http://boricua.
This is how the president of FMPR, Rafael Feliciano, ended his update for today. The strike is holding fast in its third day. 84% of students are not attending classes. 80% of classes across the island are not being held. 54% of teachers, or 23,000 are directly or indirectly (staying home) supporting the strike, of which 8,000 are participating on the picket lines [amazing statistic].
The Dept. of Education is warning parents that students will receive an "F" for their class grade and will not be promoted to the next grade as well as that the school year will be extended
A big demonstration is planned in front of the Dept. of Education for tomorrow at 1 PM. Feliciano adds "no hay triunfo sin lucha!"
This Wednesday at Hunter College, there will be an event to build support for the important and exciting PUERTO RICAN TEACHERS' STRIKE. The colonial government is trying to break that strike and destroy the Puerto Rican Teachers Federation. This is part of the same attack on public education that we face at CUNY, throughout the U.S., and many other places around the world.
This Wednesday, at 3:15 p.m. until about 4:30, Revolution Film Club will help hold an event in Thomas Hunter 109 (office of the Puerto Rican Club and Latino Honor Society) to hear more about the strike, including an
eyewitness account, hear a CD of great songs from the strike, and watch some videos about it.
All are invited who want to learn more about the strike.
This Wednesday, at 3:15 p.m. until about 4:30, Revolution Film Club will help hold an event in Thomas Hunter 109 (office of the Puerto Rican Club and Latino Honor Society) to hear more about the strike, including an
eyewitness account, hear a CD of great songs from the strike, and watch some videos about it.All are invited who want to learn more about the strike.
Joan asked about last Friday's rally. I was out of town, but activists there said there were about 80 people and it was very spirited. There's video coverage on U-Tube, (see link here), and a brief report from rhe NY support committee.
At the D.A. it will be very important to raise the resolution for UFT support to the strike. It was distributed last month, but did not get raised as a motion. Also, members of the New York support committee for the strike will be outside the D.A. distributing educational materials about the strike and asking for our support.
Link: VIDEO ON NYC RALLY IN SUPPORT OF STRIKING PUERTO RICAN TEACHERS:
VIDEO SOBRE LA MANIFESTACION REALIZADA EN NUEVA YORK EN APOYO A LA HUELGA DE LOS MAESTROS EN PUERTO RICO:
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=eHvcknPYL3s
VIDEO SOBRE LA MANIFESTACION REALIZADA EN NUEVA YORK EN APOYO A LA HUELGA DE LOS MAESTROS EN PUERTO RICO:
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=eHvcknPYL3s
Here's the report put out by the NY Support Committee for the Strike:
New Yorkers Support The Teachers Federation of Puerto Rico!
Friday, February 22, 2008
New York City
During a snow storm and 20 degree temperatures, NYC teachers, tradeunionists and political and community activists, responded to the call of the FMPR Support Committee – NY. At a picket in front the offices of the Free Associated Stated (ELA) government of Puerto Rico, in Manhattan at Park Avenue South, more than 80 demonstrators gathered to protest. With no need for electronic sound to project their voices, the group denounced the anti-worker actions of the government of Anival Acevedo Vilá and denounced the actions of the AFT and SEIU, U.S.-based unions, that have joined in efforts to destroy the organization of struggle of the Teachers in Puerto Rico, the Teachers Federation of Puerto Rico (FMPR).
Loudly and militantly chanting, accompanied by musical instruments, participants also distributed information to the press and area citizens as they left work for the day. The demonstration caused alarm with the security personnel at the new Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration offices of the colonial government of Puerto Rico.
Among the chants that the public heard were:
“¡Lucha Si, Entrega No!”
“¡Huelga o Convenio!”
“Puerto Rican Teachers, New York is With You!”
“¡FMPR, En Pie De Lucha”
“¡La Lucha Obrera, No Tiene Fronteras!”
“Support Puerto Rican Teachers, Support The Strike in Puerto Rico!”
“Say NO to Privitization! Say YES to Free Education!”
“¡Gobierno Colonial, Gobierno Patronal!”
LA Teachers Vote- 79% Don't Vote
It's a Duffy Landslide!
The United Teachers Los Angeles vote is in. The union sent out 42,952 ballots. Here are the results:
A.J. Duffy - 5,242 (12.2%)
Linda Guthrie - 2,112 (4.9%)
Becki Robinson - 1,468 (3.4%)
Barbara Eisen-Herman - 103 (0.2%)
Don't Give a Crap - 34,027 (79.2%)
A.J. Duffy - 5,242 (12.2%)
Linda Guthrie - 2,112 (4.9%)
Becki Robinson - 1,468 (3.4%)
Barbara Eisen-Herman - 103 (0.2%)
Don't Give a Crap - 34,027 (79.2%)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)