Preparing Teachers in Your School For UFT Officials Invasion

I'm receiving emails that the invasion of UFT officials to spin the teacher evaluation agreement (under the guise of talking about the budget cuts) is beginning.

I know the drill. They will come and talk and talk and talk, maybe leaving 5 or less minutes for questions. Don't let them get away with it.

Prepare the people in your school by handing out a list of questions based on some of the issues raised below.

Ask them why delegates, the exec bd and the membership no longer get to vote on contract modifications.

Make 'em sweat for their money.

The UFT is now soliciting opinions on Teacher Eval Agreement....

...and chapter leader John Elfrank responds

1. NEGATIVE: It’s a foot in the door for using Standardized Tests and Merit Pay.


2. NEGATIVE: The new system claims to eliminate what the UFT describes as a totally subjective system. Yet, seven of the eight criteria are the same. The UFT says the addition of an eighth criterion (test scores) changes everything. Can’t we find less subjective criteria other than standardized test scores? It’s gonna count for 40%! The UFT says it “limits the influence of state tests on teacher performance evaluations”, it actually INTRODUCES state tests into teacher performance evaluation. Anything less than 100% is a “limit”.


3. NEGATIVE: Since there’s still much that has to be “negotiated” the agreement will only lose some of what appeal it does have. For example, 40 of the eval will be test scores% for starters.


4. NEGATIVE: There are no specifics about how peer review would work, how test scores will be used.


5. NEGATIVE: The contract is NOT enforced now regarding Art. 8, so why should we assume the UFT will enforce what is in our best interests regarding this agreement? For example, if the UFT doesn’t want a “gotcha” system, why doesn’t it challenge the informal observations put in our files and used to U rate us? Read Teaching for the 21st Century… You’d never know it was meant to apply to our members. It was supposed to eliminate the “gotcha” observation.


6. NEGATIVE: Lead Teacher wannabes will compete with their colleagues, not cooperate. After all, it’s who ranks at the top that will get the lead teacher gig.


7. POSITIVE: is that if negations fail the old system remains in place, as would be expected with a contract.


8. POSITIVE: Growth model assessment seems to be the best model if you have to go with standardized testing.


9. POSITIVE: Teacher improvement plan looks like it will be specific and transparent. Again, depending upon what is negotiated.


These negotiations need to take place in full view of the membership in order to invite member feedback. Secret negotiations are only meant to keep the membership in the dark .

BOTTOM LINE: Teaching to the test will take on a new urgency. Gone will be creative pedagogy. Close the Teacher Centers, they’ll be a waste of money. We will all be in the test prep business.


John Elfrank-Dana
UFT Chapter Leader
Murry Bergtraum High School

Under Assault said...

NEGATIVE: No parity. Some teachers will be judged on tests, others not. (They'll use as yet unspecified other kinds of rubrics for them.)

NEGATIVE: What about people like Guidance Counsellors? Are they going to rate them on how well the kids keep their appointments? That's about a useful as any of these other criteria in difficult learning environments.

Leonie posted these thoughts:

After year one, all teachers in all grades will be subject to these value-added assessments; implying that there will have to be new state tests as well as new local tests in all subjects and all grades.

o Year one: 20 percent student growth on state assessments or comparable measures for teachers in the common branch subjects or ELA and Math in grades four to eight only, and 20 percent other locally selected measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms;

o Subsequent years before Regents approval of a value-added model: 20 percent student growth on state assessments or comparable measures for all teachers, and 20 percent other locally selected measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms;

Art, music anyone?

I would expect that all these new tests, as well as teacher time (or State time) scoring them, in every grade and subject, will cost far more than the $700 million that is the maximum amount that NY State could get from RTTT.

I also love the following:

. The regulations adopted pursuant to this section shall be developed in consultation with an advisory committee consisting of representatives of teachers, principals, superintendents of schools, school boards, school district and board of cooperative educational services officials and other interested parties.

Once again, parents are omitted from being mentioned among the key stakeholder groups to have any voice in this system.

After all, it’s only our kids.

Wonder if charter schools will be subject to the same regime.

And Leonie raises these questions the UFT should have raised, but didn't:

The Times article does not say whether the test score component will be based upon one year or several years value-added.

One year’s increases or decreases in test scores are statistically meaningless at the school level; as shown by the volatility of the NYC school grading system; and they are even more unreliable at the classroom level.

Not to mention the complexities of attempting to control for all the demographic and school factors outside a teacher’s control, such as peer group factors, class size, overcrowding, special needs population, and the student’s pre-determined course of learning, based on all their previous years’ educational experiences. (As the class size research shows, smaller classes in the early grades lead not only to greater gains in those years, but a whole different trajectory of learning in future years.)

All of which explains why the National Academy of Sciences has said emphatically that basing teacher evaluations on value-added test scores is not ready for prime time.


What is clear from the NY Times article is that NYC public school students will be subjected to yet an additional set of “local tests”; which will mean millions of dollars to develop these new tests, millions of student hours spent taking them, and millions of teacher hours in scoring them.

In addition, I predict that the DOE will want to give these new local tests both at the beginning of the school year and the end, to sharpen up their “value-added” per teacher component.

And most likely, more NY teachers will even more try to flee from classrooms and schools with high-needs students, the exact opposite of what the federal government, state and city say they are trying to achieve.

Wouldn’t you?

More testing, less learning.

Why Seniority?

I've been asked to write an article addressing the seniority issue. In various conversations I've had, it is a more complex issue than appears on the surface to hard and fast unionists. I am on deadline so if you have some ideas leave them in the comments section or email me.

A supposition: say we can show in some empirical way - that 10 and 20 year teachers similarly capable, knowledgeable, effective - we know that means test scores to the ed deformers - but we may define effective any way WE want. We gain nothing in teaching ability in choosing between these teachers. The NY Times seemed to be saying this a few weeks ago. Now I can honestly say that I can see little if any difference in all my years between 10 and 20 yr teachers. As a matter of fact, the 20 year person might be getting a bit tired or burnt or cynical. Both have tenure. But there is a big difference in salary. Use 22 years and we have a 100g teacher vs a - I'm not sure what a 10 yr teacher makes now - they have reached the top step but longevity raises havn't kicked in yet - but there is as big difference.

In the business world it is clear - you dump the 22 year old and keep the 10 year person.

Makes sense. "Yippee" goes the 10 year person. But then he begins to think. "What happens to me in 12 years?" Even in the business world is there a social cost for all the people knowing they will be kilt off as they age? Hmmm. Maybe it is not so good to earn so much more. Double hmmm. Maybe if we figured a way to close that gap instead of giving raises the way we do, we might address that issue. I'm not advocating anything, just thinking out loud.

Reminds me of that Twilight Zone episode where the planet was so crowded each person had only the spot they were standing on. Someone had to go whenever some younger person was ready to stand in their spot.

That may be the ultimate ed deform plan. When teachers reach 30, kill them off.


Some interesting questions:

To what extent does the private sector operate under seniority? More than people would think I expect.

What about the community control advocates who would want to balance teaching staffs in a way that may bump up against seniority rules?

What about the loss of teachers of color under the ed deform ("civil rights") onslaught? How do we redress that balance? We know that in NYC certainly that the bulk of newer teachers are white so that would not be an issue when it came to layoffs but say they recruited a mass of teachers of color and layoffs did come? Theoretical issue for now I know. Some of this touches on what happened in 1968 when the community demanded the ability to hire and fire teachers irregardless of seniority. The resisters battling the ed deformers comprise defenders of union work rules AND people calling for local control of schools. Some of these issues will need some in depth discussions to resolve.

How does the tenure issue affect the seniority question or can we separate them for this discussion?

Preliminary Election Results Show CORE to be in Runoff Election June 11th

Here is CORE's press release on the Chicago union elections, which win or lose in the runoff for CORE, is a cataclysmic event in teacher unionism with national implications - the AFT/UFT Weingarten/Mulgrew sellout policies have pushed teachers up against the wall. We'll be back later with some prelim analysis.

Read updates from George Schmidt at Substance:

Norm

_________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ CONTACT: Karen Lewis CORE CTU Presidential Candidate FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 22, 2010 CORE Media Relations Liz Brown Kenzo Shibata Preliminary Election Results Show CORE to be in Runoff Election June 11th In a five-way race for the leadership of the Chicago Teachers Union, a run-off on June 11, 2010 appears likely between the Caucus of Rank-and-file Educators (CORE), headed by CORE Presidential Candidate Karen Lewis and the incumbent party UPC. At the time of this release, the preliminary vote count stands at UPC 31.9%, CORE 30%, PACT 15.1%, CSDU 6.8% and SEA 5.6%. "What this election shows us is that teachers and PSRPs are fed up. CORE's success is we are a big-tent, grass-roots group led democratically from the bottom up. That was why CORE began in the first place - to activate and energize all members in running the Union. It also turned out to be a winning campaign strategy. I sincerely thank all of our supporters for their tireless work and dedication to our shared cause," said Karen Lewis. Throughout the campaign, CORE has called for an end to business as usual, transparency from both the CTU and Chicago Public Schools, and a unified effort to improve Chicago's public schools among its natural allies - teachers, students, parents and community members. "CORE invites all caucuses and Union members to join us to reinvigorate rank-and-file members and wake up the sleeping giant that is the Chicago Teachers Union. Now is the time to end UPC's decades long control of our Union that has been a disservice to members," said Lewis. This breakdown does not take in account the 35 ballot boxes that were not picked up from their respective schools. # # # CORE, the Caucus of Rank-and-file Educators, is a reform caucus of the Chicago Teachers Union that represents teachers and the students and families they serve. Meeting and Celebration Open to all those who support CORE in the June 11th Runoff Election CORE Slate 2010: Michael Brunson, Karen Lewis, Jesse Sharkey, and Kristine Mayle Monday, May 24th 2010 4:00-6:00 PM Letter Carriers Hall 3850 South Wabash Food will be provided. We will be raising funds, so please bring your checkbook.

What if they had a union and nobody joined?

Bringing Choice and Accountability to the UFT:
A Teacher Calls for End to Agency Shop


Generally people view the concept of an agency shop where everyone pays union dues whether they join the union or not as being a positive thing for union organizing and I've never been in favor of calling for its elimination. But there seems to be a level of frustration over the lack of accountability within the UFT where the top-down leadership controls just about every single aspect of the union, including the make believe opposition, New Action which owes the 8 Exec bd seats to Unity support. A hundred % of the members of the Ex bd were Unity endorsed in the recent election.

There was a thought that years ago when district reps were elected by chapter leaders in their districts there was a greater level of accountabilty. All DR's elected were Unity (except Manhattan HS rep Bruce Markens who had a lot of support from the Manhattan high school chapter leaders) because most chapter leaders were Unity. So I never thought that when Randi killed the elections in 2002 that it would make much difference. But it seems it has and more than a few chapter leaders have complained that the responsiveness of the union is worse than ever.

The recent letter circulating about dropping out of COPE (UNTIL WE GET A VOTE, SAY NO TO COPE!) is a sign of that frustration.

Other signs are the increasing calls for quitting the union, complaints about spending a thousand bucks a year in dues, calls to look for other unions to represent us. That is a big pipe dream since the most active opposition people in the UFT have rejected any moves in that direction.

This email from a long-time chapter leader, a strong union guy, made me sit up and take notice:

To move the education reforms, one simply has to allow teachers to not belong to the union --- in more than name only. ie not even agency fee payers. I can guarantee if that comes to pass, the leadership will be very much attuned to serving the membership as more than cannon fodder.

I don't see this coming to pass because the political forces want to keep the UFT strong at the top because it is an entity they can deal with them. The anarchy of a splintered union would not be a good thing for the ed deform crew either. Think about the former Soviet Union breakup and its aftermath. Do you feel safer today or back then? Same with the powers that be. They feel safer with a union they can not only deal with but that works to dampen and control militancy. In other words, the BloomKleins and the Daley/Duncans in Chicago need Unity and the UCP caucuses as much as they would like unions to give them a totally free hand. But these sell-out leaders must show the members something. Yet the BloomKleins keep taking and outraging the members.

Let's get this thing straight though. As long as the opposition can only pull 9% of the vote, there is no pressure on the leaders and all calls for accountability and internal union reform will be laughed at. It will take some action on the part of the people screaming about the how bad the union is. I keep telling them to stop moaning and organize. If they don't have an idea how to do that then start coming to GEM meetings. Just sitting back and waiting for someone else to do something will just leave them there sitting.

A prime example is the CORE group in Chicago which is just 2 years old and has done some wild organizing and can now contend for power in the union. I know these guys and they have thrown their lives into the effort. Any less than that here in NYC will leave Unity in power for a millenium, agency shop, COPE dues or not.


The future? One of the things I concentrated on over the last 3 years was working with younger teachers and for the first time I saw some early stages of interest and activism. No matter how bad things looked with the election, I found some hopeful signs of a CORE-like group forming here in NYC. I felt this was more important over the long run than the short term election results. These people will hopefully become the future leaders of the opposition as more and more people in the ICE crew (I can't speak for TJC) take a more supportive and mentoring role, sort of like what George Schmidt and Substance has done with CORE in Chicago.

Putting BloomKlein on the Couch

Here is a very interesting analysis by Dee Alpert on the NYCEd listserve.


You need to understand the Bloomberg/Klein mentality. And this is not a "hedge fund guys" thing - it long preceded their entry into the NYC public education system politics.

Bloomberg and Klein are into the "let managers manage and then hold them accountable for the results of their work" schtick. They believe that managers, to the fullest extent possible, should be given total (and I do mean total, including them backing up folks who ignore laws and the NYS and federal constitutions) authority and discretion to run their shops, period. Every principal the captain of his or her own ship. And wherever possible, this authority would extend to allowing the ship captain to hold a sailor (a/k/a teacher or other school employee) guilty of treason in a captain's kangaroo court trial, and then sentencing the traitor to being thrown overboard. Period. Modern version - breaking tenure; firing 'em.

They figure that the best captains will show their true colors and run ships that shine where all others have failed and that these will then be able to be used as models ("take up to scale") for other less creative or skilled principals. They assume that these principals will be able to hire the best people, given the model they want to operate, and train and supervise the ones they are forced to hire or retain, and come up with results in ... the top 10%, let's say, of all principals in the system who have students with the same overall "metrics" (translation - SES). And then they'll get these super-principals to train the better of the remainder in their models and skills. At the same time, they wish to be able to force the bottom 10% of principals out of the system.

Doesn't work given the very complex tangle of laws, regulations and union contracts which actually exist out there. And what's anathema to the Bloomberg/Klein "captain of the ship" model is that the captains - the principals - themselves belong to a union and thus have heavy, enforceable job retention rights.

Bloomberg and Klein want to turn the entire NYCDOE into a true "employment at will" system, which is what governs private business in NYS with a few anti-discrimination law restrictions, and then be able to fire the bottom 10% of administrators and teachers every few years until they hit nirvana and ... hey, presto! ALL the incompetents are gone and this is the best of all possible worlds.

I could give about 85 reasons (other than laws, regulations and the NYS and United States constitutions) why this absolutely cannot work in the NYC and NYS public school industries, but that doesn't matter because the guys are pretending that it can and it will. What they don't do, because it might undermine their pretty pie charts and graphs re outcomes of their new-fangled management systems, is insure that everyone involved understands that they better not fudge the numbers ... or else. There is no "or else." So they keep pushing for further and further iterations of their management model and look aside when principals (and others) game and manipulate the system and then ... well ... along comes NAEP, or the SATs, and their progress suddenly starts looking like crap. Which it is.

This has zero to do with hedge funds. To some extent, it's a desperate grasp at straws by folks who've looked around the country and decided that the regular American public education system is not, if left to its own devices and allowed to follow its own imperatives, actually capable of improving outcomes for the kids whom these folks proclaimedly care about the most - children of color, non-home English speakers and the poor. (Kids w/disabilities tend to be left out of this discussion ... and for all the wrong reasons, but that's just my schtick and I doubt anyone will ever care enough about these kids to attend.) They simply figure that since the system - the American public education industry - has been given gazillions of extra federal dollars since Lyndon Johnson's first antipoverty programs - and has accomplished precious little in terms of objective positive improvement - they'll have to try to set up some system outside the regular public education industry and see if that can either work in and of itself or spur the remainder of the public education system to improve its work and outcomes for the kids.

If you think hedge fund guys (let's get real - you mean profit-making capitalists; hedge funds are a very small corner of that world) are trying to make a fortune off charter schools, I suggest you take a long hard look at the huge profit making corporations - textbook publishers; program publishers; consulting firms of all colors and stripes) who already make a goddamn fortune off the public school industry right now. What are you arguing about - that it's not the same old-same old crowd looking to make money off American children's educations? That new boys are pushing their way in and trying to get a share of the old buck that public school districts and state ed. depts. have previously distributed to their pals in the "regular" profit-off-public-education crowd?

Fact is, most of the folks you're complaining about used to donate to programs which supported regular public schools. What happened was that they looked at what their donations did and ... realized that they didn't do very much good for the children, and thus they decided to change their paradigm for donating.

What you're dealing with re the Bloomberg/Klein "principal-as-captain-of-his-ship" schtick is a pure fantasy-ridden desire to return to 19th century capitalism, before unions were legalized, and that's about it. It's a nice fantasy, closed in half-witted modern management garb, but ... it's just plain old pre-union rugged-individualism capitalism.

What are you going to do? They don't like the 21st century and weren't really happy about the 20th, either. Their mantra is fantasy. You don't kill this kind of nonsense by screaming "hedge fund bad boys" at them (and it's not accurate, anyway). You kill them, figuratively, by taking down their reputations in public - and often - by getting the real numbers showing that their schtick is just that ... and that their mantra does not work. Make it so that when someone says "Bloomberg" or "Klein" and "competent management" in the same paragraph, everyone around the table starts to snicker and one guy over at the other end of the table mutters "you've GOT to be kidding" not so quietly under his breath.

Dee Alpert

Let's Discuss Teacher Union Response to Ed Deform

I often get asked about the motivation and behavior of the UFT/AFT and even the NEA, which comes off as as a bit more in opposition to the assault on teachers, their unions and public education.

It may seem funny to those who know of him, but I had a bit of this conversation with NYC Charter honcho Jim Merriman when I ran into him at the Duncan fest in Brownsville the other day. (If I get a chance I'll get into more of this conversation where the two of us seem to agree on a bunch of surprising things.)

The answer is complex, requiring historical context and a deep political analysis. The simple answer is that union leaders' main mantra is to hold onto power at all costs. But it does go deeper. My other simple answer is that fighting back is just not part of their DNA. But then we have to drill down to find out why.

People in ICE and GEM have been talking about a forum that will drill, baby, drill into this issue. Maybe sometime in June. In the meantime, here is a section of a long article by LA teacher Gillian Russom (who I met in LA this past summer.) The article, Obama’s neoliberal agenda for education, is from the International Socialist Review. (You can read it in full here: http://isreview.org/issues/71/feat-neoliberaleducation.shtml)

Gillian covers a lot of ground. I extracted a section on the behavior of the teachers unions vis a vis the attack on public ed. She concludes with:

in the absence of our own grassroots, democratic vision of school transformation (that also protects and extends union rights), these union leaders just end up picking and choosing which aspects of the top-down reform agenda to get on board with.

This is a start but I still feel we need to drill deeper.


Responses by teachers’ unions

National leaders of the AFT and NEA have accepted many of the assumptions of the neoliberal attack. “We finally have an education president,” said AFT President Randi Weingarten, following Obama’s first education speech that stressed “performance pay” and charter schools. “We really embrace the fact that he’s talked about both shared responsibility and making sure there is a voice for teachers, something that was totally lacking in the last eight years.” 39

In response to the same speech, NEA President Dennis Van Roekel said, “President Obama always says he will do it with educators, not to them. That is a wonderful feeling, for the president of the United States to acknowledge and respect the professional knowledge and skills that those educators bring to every job in the school.”40

Both unions initially voiced their support of RTTT. Weingarten said of the program, “The Department of Education worked hard to strike the right balance between what it takes to get system-wide improvement for schools and kids, and how to measure that improvement.”41 And Van Roekel said, “While NEA disagrees with some of the details surrounding the RTTT initiative, this is an unprecedented opportunity to make a lasting impact on student achievement, the teaching profession, and public education.”42

Weingarten has been supporting forms of merit pay and charter schools for years. When she was president of New York City’s United Federation of Teachers (UFT) from 1998 to 2009, the UFT opened two of its own charter schools and partnered with Green Dot to run a third where teachers are under separate contracts from the rest of the UFT. In October 2007, the UFT implemented “performance” bonuses for teachers at schools that improved their test scores.

Now, Weingarten is touting the new contract for New Haven teachers as “a model or a template” for the rest of the country. The contract implements performance bonuses for schools that improve their test scores; gives the school district the right to shut down and reconstitute low-performing schools as charters; and makes it easier for the district to fire teachers after a 120-day “improvement period.” New Haven teachers approved the contract by an overwhelming vote of 842 to 39.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the AFT “recently issued a batch of innovation grants to districts that are tying teacher pay to performance,” and the NEA “is taking similar steps to encourage tougher evaluations and to loosen seniority systems, moves that Mr. Duncan called ‘monumental breakthroughs.’”43

The NEA, which had largely refrained from criticizing Obama, did issue a critical statement after the release of the Blueprint:

We were expecting to see a much broader effort to truly transform public education for kids. Instead, the accountability system… still relies on standardized tests to identify winners and losers. We were expecting more funding stability to enable states to meet higher expectations. Instead, the “blueprint” requires states to compete for critical resources, setting up another winners-and-losers scenario. We were expecting school turnaround efforts to be research-based and fully collaborative. Instead, we see too much top-down scapegoating of teachers and not enough collaboration.

Nevertheless, the NEA has not put forward a clear strategy on how to shift education policy.

For the AFT, Weingarten has issued a strategy piece entitled, “A New Path Forward.”44 Her proposal for fixing public education contains four elements: 1) a new, more fair, and “expedient” process of teacher evaluation and for dealing with ineffective teachers; 2) a new fair and faster system of due process for teachers accused of misconduct; 3) giving teachers the “tools, time, and trust” to succeed; and 4) creating a trusting partnership between labor and management.

Although the document purports to challenge teacher scapegoating, Weingarten’s first two recommendations accept the logic that individual classroom teachers are what’s standing in the way of quality education. The piece makes no mention of the decimation of school funding nationwide. Most importantly, “A New Path Forward” stresses collaboration with politicians and school districts at a time when we need to be mounting a serious fight against them for funding and democracy.

Why aren’t the national unions taking a more aggressive approach to fight Obama’s anti-union agenda? Obviously, their close ties with Obama and the Democrats are a major factor. Moreover, it has been a long time since teachers’ unions in the U.S. waged any large-scale struggle for our rights, and there is the perception that the Obama agenda has such broad support that it would be impossible to challenge—so if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.

In addition, the national unions’ approach is based on an underlying recognition that people are fed up with our public schools. Yet in the absence of our own grassroots, democratic vision of school transformation (that also protects and extends union rights), these union leaders just end up picking and choosing which aspects of the top-down reform agenda to get on board with.
--------------

In this section Gillian offers some ideas for the future which dovetails with some of the concepts we have been talking about here in NYC. Her point about the unease between left activists who ignore radical school reform movements and the distrust by radical/progressive reformers of union activists has been echoed here at times where ICE and TJC represent the former and NYCORE the latter. One of the ideas behind the formation of Teachers Unite was Sally Lee's attempt to bring these 2 movements closer. Some members of ICE and TJC worked with Sally over the past few years on various projects. GEM over the past year has turned out to be the place where some fusion with NYCORE and other groups has taken place. Lately we have started looking at joint projects with the Coalition for Public Education, a broad based group has roots in some communities.


Grassroots, democratic reform versus top-down, corporate reform

We also need to be deeply involved in putting forward our own vision and concrete plans for transforming our own schools. The left within the teachers’ unions has always fought back against cuts, but for the most part has been hesitant to get involved in reform projects to transform individual schools. We have been clear about what we are against, but much less clear about what we are for.

At the same time, radical education reformers whose focus is creating alternative school models have mostly been working at a distance from the teachers’ unions, which they see as uninterested in questions of school transformation.

If our goal is to build a mass movement for public education, radicals in the teachers’ unions need to reclaim the terrain of education visionaries and combine it with our struggle for school funding and stronger union rights. We need to be part of the small struggles to improve schools in the here and now, because these will help build the community coalitions and power to fight for the massive increase in resources that we need. Of course, meaningful, progressive school reform is unsustainable without adequate funding—and that struggle must continue. But developing a vision for the changes we want to see at each school can bring more teachers, students, and parents into our struggle and lend urgency to the fight for more resources.

In other words, we need a dual strategy to confront the dual attack of budget cuts and top-down reform. Progressive teachers in several cities have formed organizations to take on this challenge: The Caucus of Rank-and-File Educators in Chicago, the Grassroots Education Movement in New York City, Educators for a Democratic Union in San Francisco, and Progressive Educators for Action in Los Angeles.

Chicago union election today with potentially shocking results

UPDATE: Sat, May 22: Report from Sharon Schmidt indicated that Marilyn Stewart's UCP Will make the runoff along with CORE.

"At midnight, George reported from the AAA vote count that it looks like there will be a run-off between CORE and UPC. At 5:10 a.m. we are still waiting for final results."

Now we're down to the nitty gritty. If it turns out this way - UPC vs. CORE. All the forces from the AFT, the mayor, the Board of Education, the city and state labor feds, politicians, etc will do what they can to stop CORE. More updates later.

-----------------
Sources report the astounding possibility that CTU president Marilyn Stewart's caucus stands an excellent chance to not be one of the final two caucuses to make the runoff when the votes are counted tonight. This is bad news for Randi Weingarten and NYC's total dominance of the AFT, especially if CORE and Debbie Lynch's caucus make the finals.

Lynch supposedly despises Randi. Lynch was president of the CTU when Stewart's Caucus lost 9 years ago but Randi eventually stabbed her in the back to help Stewart take over. CORE is the more radical wing and if they win and join the 20 delegates from Detroit and if Randi fails in stealing the election from Nathan Saunders in DC, watch the fur fly in Seattle at the AFT convention in July. Not that there can be much of a challenge with the 800 Unity Caucus slugs conventionning on our dime, but I may be forced to pack up my trusty video camera and book a ticket to join the fun.

If Stewart gets knocked off it is also bad news for the Mayor Daley/Duncan and successor crowd because they clearly favor a sell-out union. Imagine if you will where BloomKlein would stand if an opposition ever threatened Unity. Squarely with Mulgrew. And it would be fun to see the NY Post jump on the Mulgrew bandwagon if there ever was such a threat.

Chicago is a weather vane for what is going to happen here. Stewart held a big fundraiser with a lot of politico bigwigs showing up and putting some cash on the table. They seem pretty nervous too, as do the other suck-up union leaders around the state. Read this article as Substance for more.

The Chicago union election is run by the AAA like here in NYC, but teachers can only vote today in their schools. AAA couriers come by to pick up the ballot boxes. There is no double envelope to protect the vote, but then again this is Chicago where elections are known to be stolen.

George Schmidt is at the count and will be reporting at Substance all night.

Friday, May 21, 2010, the Chicago Teachers Union will hold the election that may determine who runs the 30,000-member union for the next three years. I say "may" because according to CTU rules, a candidate has to get more than 50 percent of the vote to win. With five slates running on May 21, that is highly unlikely, if not mathematically impossible.

Substance will try to release the first vote count after the votes are tallied Friday night or Saturday, and then provide our readers with the schedule for the runoff election if one is necessary. We have devoted an enormous amount of time and space to the Chicago election because Chicago's version of corporate "school reform" — including the corporate version of "school reform unionism" practiced by the leadership of the Chicago Teachers Union under Marilyn Stewart — is the model for much of what is destroying public education in the USA today.

Thanks for tuning in,

George N. Schmidt
Editor, Substance

Charter School Cap About to Come Tumbling Down

We predicted that if Mulgrew won big, the dominoes would start falling. First the rubber rooms. Then the agreement on teacher evaluations. Next, the charter school cap. Today's Daily News tells us (City and teachers union nearly reach deal on charter schools, only for it to fall apart later on) they almost got there yesterday but the deal fell apart. Temporarily I would bet. Watch the UFT blink but dress up the big in a fancy new dress and claim a big victory.

UFT/Unity Caucus shill Peter Goodman is often a bellwether of where the union is heading.

"Teacher unions are on the defensive. The Obama-Duncan symphony blares, states hunger for dollars, and legislatures rapidly fold, state after state is caving and changing laws to make themselves eligible for the Washington “pieces of silver.” Crafty union leaders can use this crisis to extract something, an “apples for oranges” deal. Would a deal for raising the cap justify a teacher retirement incentive? or, abolishing the ATR pool? or, increasing teacher voice on School Leadership Teams?

Sure, crafty union leaders. Have any of you seen a crafty union leader around? Increasing teacher voice on school leadership teams in exchange for lifting the cap? Give me a break. Apples for oranges? More like grapes for prunes!

Evaluate Your Principal

Miss Eyre did at Life at the Morton School. And gave him/her a grade of "developing."

I used to ask my principal friends (yes, I had some) that if their teachers (and parents) could choose, would they choose you? It made them think. Now I have always maintained a key to school reform would be to have principals chosen that way but we will never see that happen.
(Believe it or not, the UFT actually once had that position but abandoned it very early on- the leadership never trusted the rank and file.)

I've maintained from personal observation and 40 years of stories that the percentage of lousy school administrators is way higher than that of lousy teachers, the focus of so much angst among the ed deform crowd. If people are serious about rooting out bad teachers, they must first give priority to rooting out the terrible level of administrators who go after teachers for just about any reason. Or those who are just plain incompetent.


Doesn't anyone scratch their heads as to why the very best teachers in the system are so fierce in defending teacher rights even if it means keeping a few bad apples? That's because they all know so many stories like the current Peter Lamphere tale at Bronx High School of Science.

Peter announced at the Delegate Assembly to stunned silence last week that he has been U-rated. Twice. Now Peter is a math teacher. One of the very best. How do I know? I met another young math teacher who was forced out at Bronx High and now has a job at one of the most prestigious gifted and talented schools in the city. Peter was her mentor (he looks like he's a kid himself - though at my age, everyone looks like a kid). She said he was the best of the best and that she learned more about teaching from him than any training she got.

So how does someone who is the "best of the best" face losing his job for "incompetence" and face potential rubber room isolation?

I told Joel Klein to his face at PEP meetings that allowing these political vendettas against teachers would so muddy the waters that he will have a terrible time getting rid of teachers who might deserve their fate because every single attack on teachers would be suspect.

And so it goes.

Anyone want to send me an evaluation of their principal? But play nice boys and girls. Let's not make it all negative. If you love your principal let us know too.

------------
Add-ons
Miss Eyre hears so many stories of awful principals that she will live with her current admin even with all the flaws. Also see Miss Eyre's superb post at her other beat at NYC Educator

"Stop Listening to the Teachers' Union! Listen to Parents!": Miss Eyre Agrees

------------
I had an interesting conversation with a leader of the pro-charter movement the other day and he actually agreed with me - in theory I guess because I don't see any signs that charter school principals would be chosen that way.

Did Joel Klein Tell Principals to Violate Contract and State Law?

We've seen for years that BloomKlein will run rings around just about any loophole they can find. But teachers have felt that layoff by seniority and tenure protections would be fairly sacrosanct unless the UFT blinked - which we know they are perfectly capable of doing. But we've always felt that Tweed has violated so many laws without penalty, why not go here too? Read and weep. Oh, and check out Winnie Hu's piece in today's NY Times Teachers Facing Weakest Market in Years. There are hundreds of people looking for very job available.


From a Chapter Leader, elementary school:
My principal said that she has been directed to lay-off U rated teachers first and then ATR's. I said that my understanding is that it is by seniority. She said, read the Principals' Weekly...it directs principals to lay-off U rated teachers and then ATR's. I said the UFT would file a law suit if they tried to do that and she said that a law suit would take a long time and the DOE would do basically what they want. She said the UFT is silent on this matter as far as she knows. I have heard in a few places that the "memorandum on ATR's allows them only two years for a guaranteed job.

Joel Klein in Principals' Weekly, May 11, 2010

We may be forced to lay off thousands of teachers for the upcoming school year, and State law mandates that we let these teachers go in the reverse order of their seniority. The law does not allow us to consider an individual teacher’s merit, nor does it grant you the authority to make these decisions based on who best meets the needs of your school. This could have a disastrous impact in our schools.

Nobody wants to lay off teachers, but if we are forced to, I believe we must do so in a way that keeps our most effective teachers in the classroom. Rather than letting teachers go in reverse order of seniority, we would first let go the teachers with “unsatisfactory” ratings and those who have been in the ATR pool for a year. Then, I would give you the authority to make decisions about your school’s staffing, using clear, transparent criteria: teacher attendance, student progress, and quality of teaching. Superintendents would review all decisions to make sure they were supported by evidence. This common-sense approach would protect the interests of our students more than the nonsensical seniority-based approach to which we are currently bound.

Responses on ICE-mail:
1. While Klein wants to layoff u rated and ATRs he knows he can't (at least for now). I can't see how a principal can layoff anyone. Perhaps excess, but layoff must be done centrally. It is amazing how the conversation has changed. We were always on the defensive but we are going into new territory.

2. Is there a pattern here? there are rules. there is a contract. there are laws. they don't follow any. they do whatever they want. severe damage is done. the uft shouts into a wilderness. then goes to court or not. we win - but really lose. things are never again the same.


3. Remember how adamant people were about ATR's and selling them down the river - well the city is not even bothering to wait,


Also from PW
Liberal Leave of Absence Policy for 2010-11 Academic Year

The Division of Human Resources is continuing a "liberal leave" policy for the 2010-11 academic year. UFT employees whose leaves are terminating can extend their leaves of absence for child care, for adjustment of personal affairs, or to work in a charter school until September 2011 with the approval of their principals. The employee must still submit a complete application, signed by his or her principal, with supporting documentation to the HR Connect Leaves Administration Office. Please contact HR Connect at (718) 935-4000 if you have any questions.

Charter School Scandals

Our buddy in Oakland, Sharon Higgins, has started a new blog. Check it out. And send her your stories. http://charterschoolscandals.blogspot.com/

UFT Sending in the Clowns

When I received two phone calls from major non-tabloid press within 15 minutes of each other last week asking if the rank and file were restless over the Mulgrew deal on teacher ed evals I responded it was hard to tell but a sign would be a massive invasion of schools by UFT officials to try to spin straw into gold, something they usually succeed in doing.

DAMAGE CONTROL USING THE BUDGET CRISIS AS AN EXCUSE

I received this from a chapter leader who got a message from the District Rep, the overseers of the plantation.

Hi Norm, what did you say about the unity crew coming into the schools? Well here they come. This came from my district rep:

I MUST schedule visits to ALL District xx schools in the next 5 weeks to discuss and get feedback from the membership regarding this budget crisis, starting next week, Monday, May 24th. I will have to do some morning (before school) meetings as well as regular lunch time meetings and afters school meetings. I would like to know your preference of time. If I do not hear from you by the close of business tomorrow), then I will make the schedule and let you know when you MUST have your membership ready for my visit. I will be coming with someone from the [Borough] Office or Central. Already scheduled visits might need to be changed to be able to get to everyone. I need everyone to respond to this email immediately.

Do you detect a tone of desperation? They certainly don't trust the District Reps to handle this on their own. In fact the budget crisis is a way for the UFT leadership to deflect anger over the lack of a union response to the attacks on teachers as the cause of all educational ills. And as part of that attack, the UFT deal on teacher evaluations. And add the double speak that there is too much testing while at the same time continuing to support Joel Klein's cash bonus for test score system. (See Sol Stern's push for the end to these bonus as a way to save teacher jobs.)

A visit to a school by a UFT district rep this week exposed the duplicity of the UFT. Remember Mulgrew telling people at the DA to go to last night's PEP meeting to protest the $5 million being spent in new teacher recruitment in the midst of budget cuts?

I got this email from the CL:

He told us that they didn't want the PEP presence to be "too big" and intimated furloughs to hold off layoffs.

Now that is an interesting direction we are heading. Send in the clowns to soften up the chumps with word that the sky is falling - and follow up with a "plan" to save jobs that means giving up not only potential raises that everyone else has gotten, but possibly much more.

I am thinking that BloomKlein are as desperate to avoid layoffs as the UFT because unless they get seniority killed, they will lose all their recent Teach for America people. So behind the scenes they and the UFT leadership are playing good cop, bad cop with the rank and file to see how far they can push them into giving back enough to save the BloomKlein babies.

Intrigue
By the way, a friend had an intriguing response to those 2 phone calls from reporters who represent two of the most prestigious papers in the nation. "Someone up top must be asking some questions," she said. "People above the level of reporters want to know if Mulgrew is vulnerable to rank and file unrest and are digging around to root it out." I protested that she is going too far into conspiracy theories for me. "The reporters are basically low-level innocents," she said. "But for you to get these calls so close together is not just coincidence."

Obama Admin Connected to Anti-Teacher Union Ads?

I got a call from a retired teacher yesterday asking for ICE. He said he had done some research on the anti-UFT ads and traced them to some Obama administration operatives. Here is the email he sent me as a follow-up.

Re: keepgreatteachers.org. ads against seniority.

It appears the Obama administration or its operatives are behind these ads.

1. The phone# 212 561-8730 for this org. belongs according to the White pages Dunn Squier and Knapp Squier(home phone).

2. A google search of Dunn Squier results in Squier Knapp Dunn Communications info on its merge with Knickerbocker SKD to form SKDKnickerbocker.

3. Management includes William Knapp, Anita Dunn and Stefan Friedman.

4. Anita Dunn was Obama's communications director for his Presidential campaign.

5. According to Wikipedia, Anita Dunn is married to Robert Bauer who is Obama's personal attorney.

6. The home page of the communications firm is: WWW.skdknick.com. Check out the management info to verify info above.


Who will you support for president in 2012?

Click pics to enlarge

Taking Down Steve Brill and Sunday Times Mag

The upcoming Steve Brill hit job on the UFT in the upcoming Sunday Times Mag is causing a stir minutes after being passed around.

One of the amazing things about Leonie Haimson is that she can take a sleazy character like Steve Brill and pull his piece apart just minutes after publication.

Now an interesting thing about Brill was that he met with Brian Jones from GEM (Grassroots Education Movement) and ISO (International Socialist Org). Brian teaches at PS 30 in Harlem which is an Harlem Success Academy invaded school and certainly he has a point of view that is counter to what Brill is pushing. Brill wanted to go to the school but they were smart enough not to let him in to do his hatchet job despite the fact that the DOE tried to lobby for him.

But you will never see a balanced view in a Brill piece. Another badge of shame for the Times.

And by the way, the UFT flails around helplessly while parents like Leonie show some spine. Take this point from the Brill piece:

Next to Mulgrew was his press aide, Richard Riley. “Suppose you decide that Riley is lazy or incompetent,” I asked Mulgrew. “Should you be able to fire him?” “He’s not a teacher,” Mulgrew responded. “And I need to be able to pick my own person for a job like that.” Then he grinned, adding: “I know where you’re going, but you don’t understand. Teachers are just different.”

Why Mulgrew would talk to a hack like Brill is beyond me. Did Mulgrew say more and have Brill leave the rest out? Possibly. Then let's see the UFT be more articulate in defense of the kinds of protections we have and need. By the way, Riley has had numerous stints as UFT press aide in what seems like a revolving door.

Leonie takes down Meryl Tisch: Tisch says the bill was a product of the UFT’s “poison pills” against the charter school industry, which is ridiculous.

God. You just had to see how Mulgrew waxed poetic about how wonderful Tisch was at the Delegate Assembly. Pathetic pandering. He doesn't tell the delegates that Tisch is Bloomberg's next door neighbor and spends Passover with Joel Klein.


Here is Leonie's email to her listserve (and make sure to follow her advice to leave a comment at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/magazine/23Race-t.html?hp


The Sunday Times magazine has posted blatant propaganda in the Sunday NY Times magazine section, in the form of one of the most inaccurate and biased articles I have ever seen. It is written by Steve Brill, who did an unfair piece for the New Yorker on the rubber rooms. It seems as though one can make a pretty decent career now in hack journalism, as long as you attack the UFT.

The article blames all our educational problems on the union (as usual); doesn’t mention any of the controversial charter co-locations that are squeezing space from our regular public schools; doesn’t mention any of the charter school financial scandals, or their abuse of student and parent rights, the opposition of the charter school industry to audits, or the hedge fund guys who are driving these policies.

Except for the exception of Michael Mulgrew, he managed to interview only members of the pro-privatization crowd.

He quotes Merryl Tisch who squeals about how awful the Assembly bill that would require parent input into co-locations and would allow the Comptroller to audit the use of public funds at these schools. Tisch says the bill was a product of the UFT’s “poison pills” against the charter school industry, which is ridiculous.

Most blatantly, Brill claims that the students at PS 149 are exactly the same students at the co-located Harlem Success Academy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/magazine/23Race-t.html?hp

Excerpt:

P.S. 149 is rated by the city as doing comparatively well in terms of student achievement and has improved since Mayor Michael Bloomberg took over the city’s schools in 2002 and appointed Joel Klein as chancellor. Nonetheless, its students are performing significantly behind the charter kids on the other side of the wall. To take one representative example, 51 percent of the third-grade students in the public school last year were reading at grade level, 49 percent were reading below grade level and none were reading above. In the charter, 72 percent were at grade level, 5 percent were reading below level and 23 percent were reading above level. In math, the charter third graders tied for top performing school in the state, surpassing such high-end public school districts as Scarsdale. Same building. Same community. Sometimes even the same parents.

Here Brill is parroting Eva Moskowitz, who in NY Magazine claimed that “The children in proximate zoned schools, she insists, “are the same kids we have.”

Really? 20% of the kids at PS 149 are special education students; and 40% of these are the most severely disabled, in self-contained classes. 81% are poor enough to receive free lunch, and 13% are English Language Learners. In 2008 (the latest available data) more than 10% were homeless.

Instead of 81% free lunch, 49% of the students at Harlem Success Academy are poor, a difference of 32 percentage points.

There are only 2% English Language Learners at the charter school; compared to 13% at PS 149 --more than six times as many.

HSA claims to have 16.9% special education students, compared to 20% at PS 149, and of these, few if any are the most severely disabled.

And I can find no mention of how many are homeless, but according to state data, few if any of the 50,000 homeless kids in NYC public schools are enrolled in charters.

The article also ignores the rampant counseling out of high needs students out of the HSA schools; so common as to be widely reported in the press, including in the NY Magazine, which reported the following;

http://nymag.com/news/features/65614/index4.html

At her school alone, the Harlem Success teacher says, at least half a dozen lower-grade children who were eligible for IEPs have been withdrawn this school year. If this account were to reflect a pattern, Moskowitz’s network would be effectively winnowing students before third grade, the year state testing begins. “The easiest and fastest way to improve your test scores,” observes a DoE principal in Brooklyn, “is to get higher-performing students into your school.” And to get the lower-performing students out.

English Language Learners (ELLs) are another group that scores poorly on the state tests—and is grossly underrepresented at Success. The network’s flagship has only ten ELLs, or less than 2 percent of its population, compared to 13 percent at its co-located zoned school. The network enrolls 51 ELLs in all, yet, as of last fall, provided no certified ESL teacher to support them.

This New York magazine article received over 240 comments, many of them by former teachers and parents at HSA, writing about the overwhelming predominance of test prep and the high number of students pushed out or counseled out of the school. The fact that Steven Brill and his editors at the Times didn’t see the need to provide accurate data or a less biased depiction of this issue is not just shocking; it represents journalistic malpractice.

The rapid expansion of charter schools is leading to our public schools becoming more concentrated with high needs students, while taking away valuable funds and space from our public school system, at a time when already their budgets have been slashed to the bone. Do we need more privatization and more profit making off our students? Should the guys who brought our financial system to the ground also be allowed to bring our public education system to the ground?

Go leave a comment now here: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/magazine/23Race-t.html?hp

CORE In Chicago Sued Duncan Over Loss of Black Teachers

His claim he wants to recruit more black teachers wears thin in light of his history in Chi-town.

CORE is running in the Chicago Teacher Union election this Friday. I was with a group of them in LA this past summer. The fact they filed this suit may be a factor in the election.

Here is a link to their blog items on the suit.

http://coreteachers.com/category/legal-action/

By the way, BloomKlein have also presided over the loss of black teachers in NYC. A cup of civil rights, anyone?

From PURE in Chicago…

Subject: Despite CORE EEOC complaint, Duncan claims he wants more black teachers

I just ran across an article that once again proves that Arne Duncan is the worst hypocrite in DC - and that's quite an achievement for someone who's only been there for a couple of years.

http://pureparents.org/index.php?blog/show/Duncans_campaign_to_recruit_black_teachers_

It ranks right up there in gall with Arne's "Dr. King would want you to compete and win" speech to students at Ebenezer Baptist Church last year (http://pureparents.org/index.php?blog/show/Since_when_does_nonviolence_mean_compete_and_win)

Duncan's "campaign to recruit black teachers"

In weeding out some older e-mails, I came across this report out of New Orleans in which I learned that that Fed Ed Head Arne Duncan claims he wants more black teachers in our schools.

According to nola.com, it's become a "theme" for Duncan this year:

In February, Duncan told leaders of historically black colleges and universities that "we have far too few teachers of color. Only 2 percent, one in 50 teachers today are African-American males. Something is fundamentally wrong with that picture."

Although he didn't spell it out on Friday, Duncan's campaign to recruit more black teachers may be driven by research that found improved test scores for black students who spend at least a year with a black teacher. In past speeches he's mentioned that black teachers are more likely than their white peers to want to work in high-poverty, high-needs schools, the front line for closing what he calls the nation's "insidious achievement gap" between white and black students.

Well, I have a "theme " for you, Arne - why don't you look for some of those black teachers in your own #%&*! back yard, where you buried them?

During his time as CEO of CPS, Duncan oversaw the loss of nearly 2500 African-American teachers, while the numbers of CPS teachers in all other racial groups increased. Take a look at this PURE chart from 2009.

The situation Duncan created became so egregious that CORE filed a federal discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which will decide any day now if they will send the case to the Justice Department for prosecution.

CHARTER SCHOOL PARENTS PROTEST DUNCAN’S VISIT TO NYC CHARTER SCHOOL

UPDATED May 19, 9am

"Now I understand how it is that Secretary Duncan says there is zero opposition to his charter school proposals. Today, Secretary Duncan deemed me a zero.”

Leslie-Ann Byfield, charter school parent

"Uncommon Schools does not allow Parent Associations of any kind. We have been helping a parent at the Kings Collegiate School for several months. We need far more transparency and a voice for parents at all charter schools, to stop their abusive practices. Secretary Duncan should explain what he is going to do to ensure that corporate chicanery, corruption and financial mismanagement does not happen at charter schools, and should have addressed the plight of the parents at Kings Collegiate when he visited that school. That would show he truly cares about our children!"

Mona Davids, President of the NY Charter Parents Association

May 18, 4pm

Arne was in town today to visit his Chicago school gangsterism on 3 schools in Brooklyn. Interesting story in the Daily News on Randi Weingarten's involvement in forcing Duncan to change his schedule - which gives you pause as to who is running the UFT. One would have thought Mulgrew would take the lead on that. But Randi may have been feeling that she was no longer loved in NYC and had to jump in to get a little local pub.

Now it is interesting how the Daily News article mentions a parent who loves the harsh discipline at KC. Just the kind of thing Arne and Barack love for children – that are not their own. I can imagine the Obamas' reaction if their children were subjected to zero tolerance. And imagine how they would love not having to waste time having a PA at their school.

I got there at 12:40 to meet Leonie and some parents just as the press was being allowed in and I decided to join them as a reporter for the Wave. I mean, it was raining pretty hard and it doesn't take much to move me from activist protester to reporter. Bloomberg, Klein, Duncan, political hangers on like Malcolm Smith, etc. were all present. Duncan is tall and Bloomberg is short. Klein is - well - you know. Numbnuts.

I saw my favorite Tweed press crew who vouched for me since I left my Wave press pass home. I had a nice conversation, as I always have, with James Merriman who heads the NYC Charter School Center. We agree on so much. And so little. But I'll delve into that some other time.

The public school in the building is Somers MS, but that part of the building didn't get visited. Maybe next life. As the charter school grows Michael Kay will be brought in from the Yankee games to say "See ya" to Somers.

Leonie Haimson, Khem Irby and Leslie-Ann Byfield did get there and came up but were told this was only for press and went down to wait. I was trailing the pack and missed Khem and Leslie confronting Duncan but I do have some other video which I will cut and post on you tube later with a link to this post.

See the updated press release from Leonie and her account of the day at the NYCParent Blog:

Waiting in the rain for Arne: my day with charter parents

And check out NYC Educator's take on Duncan:

Duncan Doesn't Think Anyone Opposes Charter Schools

The Skeleton in Arne Duncan's Closet
Bracey is gone but his words live on through Substance from Susan Ohanian

http://susanohanian.org/outrage_fetch.php?id=616

Thanks to David Bellel for the graphic.

Peoples Education Tribunal

An interesting idea from Sam Anderson:

In the not too distant future (Fall 2010?), I suggest that we NYC progressive educators, parents, students, community activists and our organizations need to COLLECTIVELY organize a Peoples Education Tribunal that lays out the crimes being committed in the name of public education by these privateers. This Peoples Education Tribunal would also outline viable solutions to help retain and enhance public education for all.

We would document this historic event and help publicize it throughout our neighborhoods and across the nation.

I know that this suggestion adds an extra layer of work tonnage upon all of us who are already overworked with our current Movement Multitasking. But, we need to show in popular ways that what is being passed as "advance education reform" is actually "criminal education deform." From the White House to City Hall, we are bombarded with daily dis-information/mis-information and outright lies about the education crisis and its solution to such an extent that for many folks dis-information/mis-information and outright lies become TRUTHS.

This education tribunal would be grounded in the foundation that "Education is a Human Right"... and would be structured in such a way that we would include national and international judges whose expertise in education and Human Rights Law would be renown.

In Struggle,

Sam Anderson

---------------------------------------
s. e. anderson is author of "The Black Holocaust for Beginners"
Social Activism is not a hobby: it's a Lifelong Commitment.
www.blackeducator.org

The UFT is now soliciting opinions on Teacher Eval Agreement....

...and chapter leader John Elfrank responds

1. NEGATIVE: It’s a foot in the door for using Standardized Tests and Merit Pay.


2. NEGATIVE: The new system claims to eliminate what the UFT describes as a totally subjective system. Yet, seven of the eight criteria are the same. The UFT says the addition of an eighth criterion (test scores) changes everything. Can’t we find less subjective criteria other than standardized test scores? It’s gonna count for 40%! The UFT says it “limits the influence of state tests on teacher performance evaluations”, it actually INTRODUCES state tests into teacher performance evaluation. Anything less than 100% is a “limit”.


3. NEGATIVE: Since there’s still much that has to be “negotiated” the agreement will only lose some of what appeal it does have. For example, 40 of the eval will be test scores% for starters.


4. NEGATIVE: There are no specifics about how peer review would work, how test scores will be used.


5. NEGATIVE: The contract is NOT enforced now regarding Art. 8, so why should we assume the UFT will enforce what is in our best interests regarding this agreement? For example, if the UFT doesn’t want a “gotcha” system, why doesn’t it challenge the informal observations put in our files and used to U rate us? Read Teaching for the 21st Century… You’d never know it was meant to apply to our members. It was supposed to eliminate the “gotcha” observation.


6. NEGATIVE: Lead Teacher wannabes will compete with their colleagues, not cooperate. After all, it’s who ranks at the top that will get the lead teacher gig.


7. POSITIVE: is that if negations fail the old system remains in place, as would be expected with a contract.


8. POSITIVE: Growth model assessment seems to be the best model if you have to go with standardized testing.


9. POSITIVE: Teacher improvement plan looks like it will be specific and transparent. Again, depending upon what is negotiated.


These negotiations need to take place in full view of the membership in order to invite member feedback. Secret negotiations are only meant to keep the membership in the dark .

BOTTOM LINE: Teaching to the test will take on a new urgency. Gone will be creative pedagogy. Close the Teacher Centers, they’ll be a waste of money. We will all be in the test prep business.


John Elfrank-Dana
UFT Chapter Leader
Murry Bergtraum High School

The Future of Teacher Unionism in the United States: Striving to be Like Mexico

Looking at the local and national picture I see the future of the UFT/AFT as a company union – like the national teachers union in Mexico which serves to control the members by deflecting militancy, attacking people within who oppose them and government policies and co-opting any movement that seeks to challenge their control. Of course there would be some dissident movements arising, with Oaxaca being the epicenter a few years ago.

In places like Mexico and Honduras, teacher activists are murdered (five teachers have been murdered since June 28.) In NYC we're far from there yet, but people like Chapter Leader Peter Lamphere at Bronx Science get U ratings - a career death. (See below for a piece from our DA report.*)

There has been some debate going on internally amongst progressive oppositionists in the UFT over whether the UFT is a company union.

There are 2 strands of thought.

One is that no matter how bad the leadership is, it is still our union and we have to function within it - at delegate assemblies and other union bodies to try to get the Unity leadership to move, even if a little. That we have to keep fighting to change the union. Teachers for a Just Contract and the International Socialist -ISO- though I hate to speak for them, seem to represent this point of view. ICE I would say is split on the issue.

The other POV is that the UFT functions like a company union and should be viewed as part of the enemy camp. They say a parallel union should be built within. Some even call for eventual desertification of the UFT and start anew. (I can't see how that is even possible. The anti-COPE - UNTIL WE GET A VOTE, SAY NO TO COPE!- scenario I published this weekend is indicative of that movement.) No matter how much the proud 9% dissenter vote grows, Unity will never give up power even if they have to use illegal means (as you will see below with the situation in DC).

Accountable Talk has a very potent diatribe - I Want Out. But where does that leave us standing? He calls for finding another union. But until we can grow an opposition to Unity beyond the 9 percenters, we have nothing to work with. Besides, what union in this country do you like? The NEA? Joe Hill's defiant "Don't mourn, organize," is still valid a century later. Nothing will happen until people start organizing. And it starts at the school level. The UFT says it wants to do that too, but they want to control and manage and channel these efforts where they want it to go. Like if the teachers in your school want to organize over the UFT sellout on teacher evals, that's a no-no. (See the previous post on the June 4th picket - significant in that it is organizing at the grassroots level and not controlled by the UFT, though expect some attempt to coopt.)

There is much more to say about these 2 positions (both of which I straddle) but right now I'll leave it there. We are in the early stages of planning a forum to discuss the role of the UFT/AFT vis a vis the ed deform movement (by the way, I'm taking official credit for coining the "ed deform" phrase during an interview I did on WBAI last year. Please out it on my tombstone,)

One reason I report so much on what is happening on the national scene (and international scene), and the role the AFT led by Randi Weingarten plays, is that there are so many implications for us here. (I can't get to it here but there has been a lot of action in Detroit and Cleveland.) With two local union leadership races going on right now in Chicago and Washington DC, watching how the AFT deals with these elections is instructive for us.

Candi Peterson reports from her blog on this astounding fact: the president of the Washington Teachers Union, George Parker, did not submit petitions to run for re-election, figuring he didn't have to follow the rules of his own union. I guess he figured Randi would bail him out. And so she will. Here is a section from Candi's report:

WTU rank and file members believe that AFT's national president Randi Weingarten will resort to illegal means to keep George Parker in power at any cost even if it means over ruling a WTU constitutional requirement that states that petitions for the election of union officers be submitted on the last working day in April. Even though Randi Weingarten stated in our May 10 meeting that she only wants to 'get in and out' in order to assist the WTU with the elections committee process, let's watch what Randi does in the days ahead. I believe Randi will do whatever it takes to undermine the ability of the other presidential candidates likelihood of success, particularly Nathan Saunders because she fears opposition from him to the WTU Tentative Agreement. With WTU George 'sell out' Parker at the helm, there is a greater probability that the WTU T.A. will be ratified.

Imagine if Randi didn't bail out Parker, who should not be allowed to run. Her deal with Rhee on the contract would be dead in the water. There were reports that Randi was even looking to stuff the contract vote ballot into the same envelope as the election ballot.

Here is a cogent comment from Lindsey on Candi's blog:

We have got to be able to sue the American Federation of Teachers if they try to get away with this scam. How dare them! How dare Ms. Weingarten, who rides in after negotiating a debacle in New York City, to help Parker carry his water at the WTU. If GP is allowed on the ballot, then what good are the rules? How is it that he is the only one who couldn't get his petitions in on time? Or is it that he couldn't get enough people to sign his candidate's petition or be on his slate after the mess he has created at the WTU. Let' just stop this craziness. GP, if you have an ounce of dignity left, why don't you recall yourself - before you sacrifice the rest of us at the slaughterhouse. I am ashamed of you and Ms. Weingarten.

The election in Chicago is Friday. George Schmidt's Substance has been covering the race. Not surprisingly, union president Marilyn Stewart was charged by former CTU president and current candidate Deborah Lynch:

Stewart colluded with the CBOE to ban campaigning in schools.

“Much to our amazement, in the board’s response they said they issued the ban at the demand of CTU leadership, and to support their response they included a whole bunch of e-mails congratulating the board for issuing the ban and ratting myself and other candidates out for going to schools trying to get petitions signed and literature passed out,” Lynch said. “That was appalling in itself.”

Stewart asked CPS officials to shut down e-mail in November because “some [union] members and former members are abusing the system with political garbage. Enough is enough,” she wrote in an email obtained by Lynch’s lawyers.

You see, they will try use any means necessary. Just watch where BloomKlein and even the NY Post comes down if an anti-Unity movement ever gets going that promises to be more militant.

Our friends in CORE are actively campaigning. There are 6 caucuses running. If CORE (or even Lynch) gets into the runoff against the Unity-like leadership, watch Randi and the AFT jump in to make sure they don't win because if they do it has national implications as a sign that after 15 years of mayoral control in Chicago teachers will have had it with sellout union leadership.

Gee, only 8 more years of BloomKlein-like policies and UFT sellouts and we might see a threat to Unity here. Imagine 700 charter schools by then and UFT membership cut by 40% and members having to pay $2000 a year in dues to keep the Unity machine well-oiled. My guess is the UFT will give away whatever is left of the store if they are allowed to organize true-company charter school unions as a way to keep up their membership and dues sources. You know, sending 800 Unity slugs to Seattle isn't cheap.

If we see a CORE-like movement start up here in NYC, Unity goons will be given the right to bear arms.


*Peter Lamphere, Bronx HS of Science Chapter leader spoke very effectively. "There is not one rubric my principal can't figure out how to get around." There was a hush in the room when Peter, one of the best math teachers there is (students and other teachers rave about him,) said he had gotten 2 U ratings. If there was one statement that put the whole thing in context, that was it. The UFT can't even protect their chapter leaders from the vicious attacks. Chapter leaders who are renowned teachers. In some unions, the orchestrated attack on shop stewards, the glue of the union, would be a strikeable offense. The Peter Lamphere context is what makes this agreement a joke, no matter what it says on paper. A good chunk of the rank and file is living in fear of principals from hell. And that is what will inform their reaction [to the teacher eval system] over time.