Mr. Bloomberg's Neighborhood

There's nothing quite like a good neighborhood school. The kids learn and play, the parents are happy the kids are there, and people all over want to move into that neighborhood. Why not?

Well, in Mayor Mike's New York, once people start moving in, these schools can get very crowded. So even though you've bought into a neighborhood, the value of which has risen due to the school, your kid may not get in.

...when Dr. Hsiung, a dermatologist, tried to register her son for kindergarten last month, she was shocked to hear that because of a surge in applications, he would be placed on a hold list, and could not be guaranteed a seat.

Oh well. Just because you've spent millions for a Manhattan condo, you think you can avail yourselves of the local public schools? Apparently, you don't grasp the concept of "Children First." You see, their children were firster than your children, so your children will just have to wait. Maybe in a few years, more people will move out, and then your children will be first. Then you can call them in their college dorms and let them know they qualify for PS 234.

The problem, apparently, is that Tweed can't figure out where to build schools. That's not their fault, of course. Under "Children First," it's the fault of the children, who invariably fail to notify the Tweedies before moving in. Doubtless, that's why 75% of high schools are overcrowded.

In my school, way, way over capacity, what they do is build walls in the middle of classrooms and declare the school capacity has increased. Or they take a closet, rename it a classroom, and declare it's increased even further.

One great thing is that, no matter how overcrowded it gets, Mr. Bloomberg takes more, more and more kids into this school. Once the kids hit high school, there's no such thing as too many kids. Just let them all in.

Best of all, when we don't build new high schools, we save valuable dollars for truly important projects.

It's Good to Be King

Short of that, it's good to be principal under Mayor Mike and Jolly Joel. There are so many things you can do--condemn veteran teachers to the purgatory of ATR (a joint production of Tweed and the UFT), make pedagogues jump when you say, or, even better, have them tutor your biological offspring as part of their daily routine. After all, you can only stretch 130K a year so far.

This is really cost-effective because when you live in Rockland County, as this principal does, tutoring fees can really get up there. So what, you ask, is the penalty for blatant personal corruption and getting city employees to neglect their work and do your personal bidding? Well, in Mayor Bloomberg's New York, it's only three thousand bucks. Can you beat that?

It's even more of a bargain when you consider that teachers fester in the rubber rooms for offenses as trivial as using DoE fax machines. Thanks to the 2005 contract, teachers can be not only sent to the rubber rooms, but suspended without pay or health insurance based on unsubstantiated accusations. But if you're principal, you can have a dozen corporal punishment complaints against you and just keep on doing that thing you do.

Apparently, though, teacher complaints are not taken as seriously as children's complaints here in Mr. Bloomberg's New York. Judge Judy says, "You know how you tell teenagers are lying? Their lips are moving." Mayor Bloomberg, however, assumes they speak absolute truth without exception, and will suspend teachers without pay on their say-so. The UFT, which signed off on the contract that permits it, seems to agree. In the US of A, you're innocent until proven guilty.

Unless you're a New York City teacher.

On the other hand, if you're a New York City principal, even being guilty means nothing more than a fine.

Thanks to Schoolgal

They Think We're Idiots

They do.

Michael Bloomberg and Joel Klein were able to get massive givebacks frpm us for less than cost of living. So it's not much of a surprise when New Teacher Project head Tim Daly writes a paper about "Mutual Benefits" and tells teachers, "We won't fire you. We'll just put you on unpaid leave."

In other words, teachers could have had no salary or benefits, but now they'll just have no salary or benefits. Despite Mr. Daly's incredible good will, even folks who adored the 2005 contract aren't buying that.

Nevertheless, thank goodness we have Tim Daly to offer us "mutual benefits." Mr. Daly also suggests that leaving veteran teachers up the creek without a paddle will put them in line with other American industries.

In case you haven't heard, people are losing their jobs and homes and living hand to mouth all over the country. And though Bill O'Reilly won't tell you this while he's "looking out for you," there's no better protection for working people than unions. Their demise has not helped most Americans.

Here's what Americans need---they need to get in line with us.

As for Chancellor Klein, in the preposterous thrall of trying to break a contract he himself created, the solution to the ATR problem is simple. Since you're paying these salaries anyway, offer to continue doing so. Let principals have them for free.

They'll all be working tomorrow.

Problem solved (if that's what you want).

Mr. Klein Closes One School...

...and manages to screw up another.

Thanks to Schoolgal

The UFT Responds

Over at Edwize, UFT President Randi Weingarten's internet mouthpiece is shocked, SHOCKED!, at the entirely predictable PR storm the Tweedies have kicked up over the Absent Teacher Reserves, or ATRs. It's true, of course, that the Tweedies are getting a lot of mileage complaining about these teachers. Also, most of the claims in the article appear entirely verifiable.

However, the biggest difference between Mr. Klein and Ms. Weingarten is that Mr. Klein has a long-term vision of what he wants to do with the city school system. Obfuscate and delay on class size, decent facilities, and overcrowding, but full speed ahead with charter schools (With 75% of high schools overcrowded, there's always room for charter schools), privatization, no-bid contracts, and illegal anti-labor antics in the name of saving children. Who cares if we signed a contract? Who cares if we wrote the clause we're now protesting? We're SAVING THE CHILDREN, FOR GOD'S SAKE!

In any case, the United Federation of Teachers, after having endorsed mayoral control, agreed to a 3rd reorganization in which principals have to count teacher salaries as part of building budgets. And they are stunned, apparently, when principals overwhelmingly choose new teachers for less than half the price. The only surprise I see here is that they fail to recognize their own monumental lack of foresight.

The article is interesting in that it offers a laundry list of all the things Tweed won't do. They won't talk to us. They won't negotiate with us. They won't do this, they won't do that.

Well, of course they won't. But the UFT happens to be a signatory to the very document that displaced all these people. The writer protests:

When the Department of Education entered into the staffing choice system in the 2005 contract — which gave teachers the power to choose their school and school principals the power to choose their teachers — the UFT negotiation team clearly stated that such a system would result in a pool of unassigned teachers. The DoE agreed this would happen, but said it was prepared to bear that price.

That sounds like a pretty rough situation. It clearly indicates, though, that the UFT had no problem accepting a pool of unassigned teachers. This is something the very same writer chose to conspicuously ignore when writing in praise of the "Open Market System" that's left so many senior teachers out in the cold.

This situation, again, was entirely predictable. The DoE's unwillingness to negotiate is nothing new. The UFT aristocracy's policy of giving away the sun and the moon, then feigning shock when the city asks for the stars, is simply preposterous. Its response to Tweed's well-oiled PR machine (and why on earth haven't we got one?), despite having pimped the 2005 contract like the best thing since sliced bread, is typically ineffectual.

The most frightening thing about the clueless UFT leadership, though, is its chronic inability to see fault in itself. It staunchly refuses to learn anything, an odd position for a union of teachers.

Indeed, after months of proclaiming that they were concerned with attracting experienced, accomplished teachers to schools in poor communities with the greatest educational challenges, the DoE is now pursuing a policy which would ensure precisely the opposite.

Of course, if you had not agreed to mayoral control, this might not be the case. Perhaps if you had not agreed to support a reorganization that made principals consider salary, that might not be the case. And certainly, if we had not given away every single professional improvement we'd gained with zero percent salary increases (each one fully supported by the UFT leadership), that would not be the case.

What experienced teacher would take the risk of going to a school which might well be closed down, knowing that if they were unable to find another assignment the DoE would have the power to fire them.

And why would they need to worry about it if the UFT had not dumped the UFT transfer plan? Why would they need to worry about it if the UFT had not scuttled seniority privileges for less than cost of living?

It all comes down to the vision thing. Bloomberg has it.

Ms. Weingarten and her merry band of patronage employees do not.

Thanks to Schoolgal

Who Knows What Evil Lurks in the Hearts of Men?

Well, not just Lamont Cranston. Every ATR teacher knows what the Chancellor wants them to do (jump off a cliff), and the DoE is making noise about them yet again. If the Tweedies are to be believed, it's cost 81 million bucks to prop up their substitute teacher brigade. Now this was entirely predictable, and I've no doubt whatsoever that many (myself included) predicted it repeatedly.

Mr. Klein instituted this system along with UFT President Randi Weingarten, and made the additional decision to hire new teachers before he placed the displaced. To further ensure experienced teachers would never find employment, he instituted yet another reorganization in which he required principals to take salaries out of their budgets.

Now, of course, both Mr. Klein and Ms. Weingarten are shocked, SHOCKED!, to discover that principals choose to hire 45K newbies rather than 100K vets. Naturally, Mr. Klein wishes to renounce the contract he wrote and signed. After all, this is an emergency!

"We've got some teachers on our hands that are costing our city a lot of money [while not teaching]," Daly said. "This is not a sustainable system. ... It has to change."

Well, then, Mr. Daly, I've got a simple solution--why the hell don't you put these teachers to work? Why don't you reduce class sizes? Why don't you devote every single teacher to the task of teaching the children you very publicly claim to put first?

I'll tell you why--you'd lose a valuable scapegoat, and would have fewer targets at which to point your various fingers. You couldn't risk that, as "accountability" must be restricted to unionized workers, and must never, ever approach Tweed.

While we're on the subject of hypocrisy, note that the Tweedies, who purport to worry about fairness, adhere very strictly to the letter of agreements that lose money for others, like bus companies. They're feeling the pinch of huge rises in gas prices, and want to cut down on field trips. Oh, no, they say. Since they make no dent in our budget, why worry about yours?

Instead, the "Children First" crowd are cutting down the costs of school lunches, making them even worse, if such a thing is humanly possible.

I shudder to imagine the possibilities.

Thanks to Schoolgal

Freedom of the Press (and Zit Cream)

Personally, I'm all for it. In fact, I often wish reporters would wake up and take advantage of it.

For example, if you were visiting from another planet, and watched recent Democratic debates, you'd think that the biggest issue facing the voters was flag lapel pins. You'd think, like Charlie Gibson apparently does, that a typical middle class income was 200 thousand dollars a year. And of course, since inflation is apparently not an issue in this country (nor is health care, the mortgage crisis, the war in Iraq, or disappearing jobs), Charlie, out of touch as he is, may soon be right.

Closer to home, we see our local press napping rather than thinking. The coverage of the city's bombastic claims about tenure is a good example. Let's give an entirely hypothetical scenario and say we have three dermatological patients--Nassau, Suffolk, and Joel. Each of them suffers from zits. The dermatologist prescribes a zit cream that costs a hundred bucks. Nassau and Suffolk use the cream and the zits clear up. Joel says the price is too high and refuses to buy it. Six years later, his zit is bigger than his head.

Joel then calls a news conference to declare the zit cream, the one he's never used, is totally inadequate. The press prominently covers the news conference, and rails against the zit cream. Joel then demands untested surgery for any future zits he may get, and the local op-ed pages applaud him. They deplore the hypothetical governor, whom we'll call David Paterson, for opposing the untested surgery. And no one asks or wonders why Joel didn't or shouldn't try the zit cream.

Let's get out of our entirely hypothetical scenario, and take another look at a more recent event, to wit, the hugely hyped opening of Eva Moskowitz' new school. From what I can glean, 3,600 kids applied for 600 openings. It was a huge event, attended by Joel Klein and Governor David Paterson. The press, of course was there, and pronounced in articles and op-eds how wonderful and marvelous it was.

Now let's say, for the sake of argument, their apparent assumptions are correct--that the schools in Harlem are so awful that children need desperately to escape. Let's say that Ms. Moskowitz' school, which hasn't even opened yet, is a fantastic alternative.

This would clearly suggest that Chancellor Klein has failed over 80% of the applicants to the Moskowitz Academy. It also means he's failed all the other residents of the community, the ones who didn't apply. It also begs this question--what on earth has he done to fix those apparently awful schools he's stuck these folks with? Aside from cutting their budgets, it's tough to say.

And maybe NYC parents need consistently good schools, rather than a highly-rated PR game show in which the odds are strongly stacked against them.

Why do none of these things cross the minds of our crack press corps? Maybe it's too much Sominex.

Some People Look For the Quickest Way Out

Some don't read between the lines. Others just read very selectively.

I specifically told Kevin Carey of The Quick and the Ed that the city has been negligent in enforcing existing tenure rules for over thirty years, that neighboring districts do things much differently, and that it was entirely within the city's discretion to do as its neighbors. I'm disappointed he chose to ignore that, using my post on bad teachers to bolster the entirely hollow argument that Chancellor Klein needs more ammunition to enforce tenure.

Chancellor Klein can enforce existing rules today, and could have done so the day he walked in, but opted not to. In fact, despite all his bluster about tenure and quality teachers, Mr. Klein went to Albany where he successfully lobbied for the right to hire and retain thousands of teachers who'd failed a basic competency test, often dozens of times. For Mr. Klein to now try to place the onus on the UFT for the teachers he himself hired and granted tenure is the height of hypocrisy.

If he chooses not to do his job, it's on him. And the truth is both he and his predecessors have neglected it for decades. Shame on the chancellor for obfuscating by demanding new tools while pointedly ignoring those at his disposal. It's disappointing his defenders fail to see the obvious--that this city, its frequent finger-pointing notwithstanding, was and is indifferent to how it treats kids. Rampant and unconscionable overcrowding is just one little extra way Tweed expresses its priorities.

My kids and I work every day half in a vermin-infested closet and the other half in a dilapidated trailer. This would not happen in my home district, and not a single one of the teachers I described would be hired in my home district. Furthermore, where I live, if some blitheringly incompetent administrator were to neglect the Prozac and hire one of these people by mistake, the mistake would be corrected long, long before any discussions about tenure ensued (I'd refrain from placing any bets on that administrator's tenure either).

Those who accept Chancellor Klein's public position on tenure either don't know what goes on in Mr. Bloomberg's New York or don't care to find out.

They Should Be Shocked. Shocked!

It's funny to read in the UFT paper that they've filed a discrimination suit against the city. Apparently, the Absent Teacher Reserve is largely composed of senior teachers. Amazingly, principals, who now have to pay salaries out of their own school budgets, prefer to hire newer teachers for half the price.

Clearly no one in the UFT anticipated this when they agreed to Klein's third reorganization. This was the reorganization that made principals pay salary lines out of their own budgets. UFT bigshots are shocked that principals snap up newbies at half the price while senior teachers are left to rot in the ATR brigade.

Naturally I'm shocked too. While I and many others repeatedly predicted this would happen, Edwize writers insisted this was the best of all possible worlds and that everything was beautiful. In fact, they praised the "hold harmless" clause, assuming that principals would opt to hire senior teachers rather than grabbing two for the price of one.

Apparently, what with their utter lack of vision and all, UFT bigshots underestimated the bargain-hunting abilities of administrators. Perhaps they simply hadn't noticed that the city has been paying the lowest wage in the area for over thirty years. Or perhaps they did, but attributed it to coincidence. Or maybe they believed Ms. Weingarten's repeated lies about our having caught up to the suburbs.

In any case, in retrospect, perhaps it was indeed an error to agree to this ATR thing. Senior teachers used to be guaranteed placement, and now they're just another financial liability for principals to worry about. Perhaps it wasn't a good idea to have placed them in this demoralizing position without even getting a cost of living increase in return. But what with the UFT's complete lack of vision, I suppose that's too much to ask.

And even with the administration's newfound right to condemn teachers to the purgatory of ATR, the city is still short of qualified science, art, and foreign language teachers. And there are many qualified teachers rotting in the ATR brigade. I know some of them.

But due to the devil's bargain between Ms. Weingarten and Mr. Klein, NYC kids still learn Spanish from gym teachers and science from social studies teachers. The rate is now 9% overall, though it runs up to 25 if you want to study earth science.

In nearby suburban schools, with unions, without merit pay, and without "reforms," the figure hovers around zero--as it has for as long as I've been following education. What can Mr. Klein and Ms. Weingarten learn from this? And is there any evidence to suggest either bothers to learn anything? Or that they have any incentive to do so?

Let me know if you can come up with any answers.

Doin' the Bloomberg Shuffle

There you are, teaching some class, when a bunch of highly-efficient suits come in to measure the room. Obviously, it has to be improved before a gaggle of Mr. Bloomberg's incredible small schools takes it over. I mean, who could possibly learn in such a dismal environment? That's why they're going to give Mr. Bloomberg's new small school advantages that you and your lowlife kids couldn't possibly appreciate.

They'll just close your school, send the undesirables to some other overcrowded school, and when that school gets as bad as your school was, they'll close that one too. That way they always appear to be doing something. More importantly, they'll always have so many things in flux that "accountability" will never touch their gilded doorsteps.

At Jamaica High School, teachers have taken matters into their own hands, and have now made Chancellor Klein actually look in the eyes of those who'll be displaced by his next big reshuffle of "accountability." Of course, the chancellor tends to be fumfering around with his Blackberry at times like these, displaying his utter contempt for any dissent whatsoever at these meetings and ignoring any unpleasant realities that intrude upon his "reforms."

I have great respect for James Eterno, the thoughtful and active chapter leader at Jamaica High School. It's admirable that he's taking a stand for working teachers. Unfortunately, Chancellor Klein's puppetmaster has already declared it's "Children First" in NYC. To show how much regard he has for children, he dumps them into trailers, onto toxic waste sites, and into unconscionably overcrowded and decrepit facilities. Furthermore, he's repeatedly announced that the needs of non-billionaire adults come last (which is ironic, since the overwhelming majority of the children he places first will grow up and become non-billionaire adults).

Now if he treats the children he places first in this fashion, I can only imagine how much regard he holds for Mr. Eterno and his colleagues, none of whom (to my knowledge) qualify as billionaires. But I wish the Jamaica teachers all the luck in the world. It's certainly not their fault that the current administration indulges in "reforms" rather than good teachers, reasonable class sizes, and decent facilities for public schools.

And it's just another day in Mr. Bloomberg's New York.

Get Tough! But Pass Everyone

That's how Joanne Jacobs characterized a piece I wrote about the thrust of our faculty meetings, and the line has stuck in my mind somehow. Apparently, though, this line of thought is far from unique to my building. A New York Times story exposes some of Chancellor Klein's favorite methods of juking the stats.

Did you fail your English class? Don't worry. Write a few papers, and it'll be as good as new. Who cares if you slept through the entire semester? Will the AP even notice you've plagiarized the entire paper? Perhaps. Or perhaps not.

I once happened upon a "makeup class" paper from an ESL student of mine that was clearly plagiarized. But Ms. History, the head of the social studies department, had given it an "A." I found the kid in her classroom, pulled her out, and told her privately I knew she didn't write it.

"You're not going to tell Ms. History, are you?" begged the kid.

I told her I wasn't, since she'd already gotten away with it. But I let her know that I would've failed her, and if I could see it, another teacher might see it too. Did Ms. History let her pass knowing she plagiarized, or was she just incapable of differentiating between the work of a professional writer and that of an ESL student? It's a question for the ages, I suppose.

But now that principals are "accountable," they need to get those graduation stats up. And while Mr. Bloomberg can simply ignore dropouts, "accountable" principals don't have that luxury. They have to get those stats up or they're fired. Still, Chancellor Klein says things are just fine:

Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein, in a statement, called credit recovery “a legitimate and important strategy for working with high school students.” He said there was “no indication” that the practice “has been abused more in recent years.”

“If credit recovery is not conducted properly, just as with any other required course, we will take appropriate action,” he added. “We do students no favors by giving them credit they haven’t earned.”

But city officials acknowledged that credit recovery programs are neither centrally monitored nor tracked.

So as usual, we should simply take the word of the administration. Though they don't actually monitor or track the programs, they will abide no nonsense. Fortunately, if any nonsense occurs, they won't ever find out about it. That way, they don't have to worry about "accountability," which, like taxes, is for the little people.

So kids, don't worry about failing those classes. There appear to be few consequences for cutting the entire semester:

At Franklin K. Lane, a large high school in Brooklyn, an advertisement for credit recovery programs offered last year urged students: “If you failed a class, don’t despair ... turnaround your 55 into a 65 in 6 weeks!!! Ask your teacher for details!!!”

Adam Bergstein, a teacher who is head of the school’s union chapter, said the six-week program, which consisted of six classes, had troubled teachers.

“A 55 could be indicative of anything from a 1 to literally a 55 average,” he said. “It’s not a mere nudge ahead; it could be an astronomical leap.”

“It undermines the whole concept of teaching and grading,” Mr. Bergstein continued.

It does indeed. But if you live and die by statistics, people need to cheat. It's regrettable that people are living and dying by statistics, but it's even more regrettable that Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein, who advocate credit for the nebulous concept of "seat-time," talk so tough while enabling and even encouraging rampant cheating.

Related: Eduwonkette, Inside Schools, The Chancellor's New Clothes, Joanne Jacobs

Thanks to Rhoda and Schoolgal

Mike and Joel Spin and Lose

Fresh on the heels of his congestion-pricing plan defeat, the State Legislature has handed Mayor Moneybags a rejection of his plan to award tenure based on test scores. The Mayor's educational mouthpiece, Chancellor Joel Klein, had this to say:

"I am dismayed that the state Legislature would even consider tying the hands of principals and school districts as they decide who gets lifetime job security," Klein said.

It's odd that this Chancellor, who regularly U-rates tenured teachers and brings them to 3020 hearings, considers tenure "lifetime job security." It's certainly better than nothing, which is what most working people get in the US of A. Still, even without using test scores, neighboring districts deny tenure as a matter of course. While Mayor Moneybags and his faithful chancellor can harumph and complain, it's certainly not the UFT's fault that this city has chosen to grant tenure to anyone with a pulse, up to and including this administration.

While it's an ingrained habit of Mike "Accountability" Bloomberg to blame working teachers for everything up to and including the weather, it's the job of administration to select and hire teachers. It's their job to determine who does and does not get tenure, and it's hard for anyone to deny they've been remiss for over thirty years.

Bloomberg talks a big game on teacher quality. But with all his talk about "accountability," he ought to step up and take some responsibility. The UFT neither hires teachers nor grants tenure. It's their job to protect those selected by the city.

And it's not our fault if the mayor has failed to do his job.

Thanks to Sol Bellel for the picture

I'll Get You, My Pretty. And Your Little School, Too

Prominent teacher-basher/ charter school operator Eva Moskowitz wants more space. And whatever Eva wants, Eva gets. But PS 123 wants to keep its building the way it is. Apparently, its students like being in a building that hasn't yet surpassed 100% capacity, and don't fancy sharing the facilities with Eva's new project.

Though parents and community organizers have gotten together to oppose Ms. Eva's new school, she promised to bring hundreds of people to confound the will of the community.

Naturally, with 75% of the city's high schools overcrowded and even more budget cuts looming, Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein have deemed it a good time to open more charter schools. As they need space, the children in those often horribly overcrowded buildings are the first to get screwed.

And that's what "Children First" means today in Mayor Bloomberg's New York.

Thanks to Schoolgal

Planned Pauperhood

As regular readers of this blog know, I think the 2005 UFT contract was a disaster. One reason why is the short-sighted absent-teacher reserve, or ATR plan. Mr. Klein and Ms. Weingarten agreed that teachers who were displaced would no longer be guaranteed employment in the city. Both were well-aware of the city policy to close schools on a fairly regular basis.

A further agreement between Ms. Weingarten and Mr. Klein allowed schools, rather than Tweed, to be responsible for teacher salaries. Therefore, the price of one experienced teacher can buy principals two new ones (or they could get one new teacher and 10 sessions with a high-priced call-girl).

In our school, a colleague came in on a UFT transfer a few years back. He tells me we have a top-notch science teacher who came from his now-closed (or renamed) school. This guy subs day after day, and gets paid maximum salary to do so. From a teacher's or student's standpoint, it's awful to waste his talents like this.

From an administration standpoint, it's awful to waste money like this. Ms. Weingarten may have thought the chancellor wouldn't hire new teachers before full-salaried veteran teachers were placed. Mr. Klein may have thought (as did I) that Ms. Weingarten would simply fold and allow these teachers to be fired, particularly after he snookered her into reorganization 3, which, through effective financial penalties, discourages principals from hiring experienced teachers.

So far it's a stalemate. But it's a terrible waste of talent and money. If the city chooses to close schools and displace teachers, it ought to find them jobs teaching. The ATR system, while it maintains employment for some who've lost jobs through no fault of their own, ultimately serves no one.

Mr. Gorbachev tore down that wall, in the end. And Mr. Klein ought to put these teachers to work right now.

Photo by Sol Belell

The Tenure Question

I recently wrote about a colleague who told me a change in venue brought his Regents passing rate from about 30% to a much more respectable 90%. He claims he did not at all change his teaching methods, but his new audience was simply much more receptive. Was he a bad teacher at the previous locale? You could perhaps conclude that, but his 32% passing rate was the highest in his old school.

Do his new passing rates make him a great teacher? Not according to him. He claims to be the same teacher he was then, albeit a little older.

Now NYC Schools Chancellor Joel Klein is fighting tooth and nail for the right to be able to grant or deny tenure on the basis of test scores. How do you do that fairly when a simple relocation produces such a radical change in results?

Shall we trust in the good graces of this chancellor? Isn't he the same guy who unilaterally violated the contract via blanket denial of sabbaticals (till the UFT dragged him to court and won)? Isn't he the same guy who's failed to deliver any substantive class size reduction? Isn't he the same guy who went to Albany in order to preserve his right to hire and retain thousands of teachers who'd failed basic competency tests? Is that the sort of person you want to judge teacher quality?

Isn't this the same guy who instituted three separate reorganizations and failed to make any significant improvement in scores he couldn't manipulate? And he now wishes to judge others on a standard he himself has abjectly failed?

Let's simply forget about Chancellor Klein's various double-standards for a moment and examine the situation. According to the DoE, only 1 percent of teachers are denied tenure after three years (and who knows how many get it after its extended?). Whose fault is that?

The overwhelming majority of teachers I know are competent, at the very least. But I've seen some teachers who'd never have landed a Burger King gig, due to the more rigorous interview process. Such teachers would never have been hired in Long Island schools. Whose fault is that?

Tenure can and should be enforced. If the city fails to identify those who don't deserve it, that's plainly the city's fault. If the city chooses to hire based on college credits, or the ability to meet whatever reduced standard it's negotiated with Albany, that's the city's fault too. If the city chooses to hire through bus ads, 800 numbers, intergalactic recruitment schemes, or the capacity to draw breath, that's on them as well.

There was a time when city requirements were higher than those of the state. In fact, I had to take city tests and face the Board of Examiners to get two different city licenses, and that was no walk in the park. Want to "experiment" with "reforms?" Why not try paying the highest salary in the area, rather than the lowest, and utilizing the highest standards, rather than the lowest? Maybe that would work. Who knows? After all, it's just an experiment.

I'm not UFT President Randi Weingarten's biggest fan, not by any means. But tenure issues are not her fault--they're strictly the city's own doing. Tenure laws are enforced in Long Island--I know many teachers who've failed to get it, and every one of them now works for New York City. I can't really attest to their quality, or lack thereof. The obviously bad teachers I know would never have been hired on the island (let alone Taco Bell).

Personally, I think Chancellor Klein would be lost without bad teachers, and despite all his posturing and bluster, will keep them on forever, sending random others to the rubber room as long as possible. After all, without bad teachers, who in the world would he and the mayor blame for their chronic inability to substantively improve this system?

Thanks to Schoolgal

Why Bother?

Here's an interesting article in City Limits by teacher J.B. McGeever, who hails from Jamaca High School. McGreever teaches the "transitional" class, which apparently indicates he caters exclusively to kids who've failed the English Regents exam. But only 30% of the kids are expected to pass, so why would any teacher want that job?

It's particularly unattractive because this year, NYC is secretly monitoring passing scores of certain teachers. Who knows who they may be? Is it fair to measure McGeever against a teacher in Stuyvesant? Could a kid in Stuyvesant possibly fail this test? And if 100% of the Stuyvesant kids pass, does that alone mean they have great teachers?

A teacher is certainly part of the equation. A good one can clarify the requirements, and explain simply how to pass. In fact, this semester I got several classes of ESL kids, all of whom failed the Regents in January. Some have been in the US for a matter of months. Some have been here longer, but against the odds, have managed not to acquire English as most have by now. I think I'll beat 30%, but I wouldn't bet the farm on 60.

The notion that newcomers should take a test designed for people who've been here their entire lives is preposterous. So I tell my kids that anyone who scores 65 or over will get a hundred as a final grade from me. That motivates a few of them, as they sit scribbling furiously in the forced labor camp that is my writing class. But I know it will take more than 11 weeks for some to acquire sufficient English to write coherently.

It's really unfortunate that these kids are deprived of language instruction (which I could certainly provide) so that they can prepare for this test. But as long as Albany deems it wise to require it for graduation, I'll do the best I can for these kids. And if they're monitoring me, I say this--you guys go to Korea, and I'll give you one year to pass the test in Korean.

If you can pull it off, I'll eat my laptop. And it's a pretty heavy one too.

But honestly, why should crazy teachers like McGeever (and me) volunteer to take on these uphill battles when the powers that be choose to surreptitiously spy on us, and quite possibly hold scores against us in the future? Why shouldn't we just battle the APs for the honors classes, grab some great statistics, and forget about the kids who need our help the very most?

Maybe we're just not smart enough.

Education Next Looks at Mr. Bloomberg

On the left, apparently, is what they see. Despite Mayor Bloomberg's well-documented failure to raise test scores he couldn't manipulate, and despite having included an illustration of basically flat results in NAEP, they offer a contrary view:

“Shame, shame!” scolded Whitney Tilson. Tilson, a hedge fund manager and founding member of Teach For America who issues a regular e-mail newsletter about Bloomberg’s education reforms, called the Times story “lousy” and argued that the NAEP scores showed noteworthy improvements in three of the four measures.

Clearly, hedge fund managers are far more knowledgeable than expert historians like Diane Ravitch, or papers like The New York Times, and they, therefore, deserve equal billing, if not the last word (In Education Next, that honor is left to the mayor). Nonetheless, Mr. Tilson's concern for working people is well-documented. That's why he invests so heavily in Wal-Mart and McDonald's. Mr. Tilson states he's made more on McDonald's than on any stock in his investment career (Perhaps Mr. Tilson could offer Chancellor Klein advice on how to remedy his bad investments).

Clearly, those awful unions prevent schools from being run like McDonald's or Wal-Mart. Therefore, they must be stopped, After all, how could McDonald's or Wal-Mart treat working people the way they do if there were unions to contend with? Mr. Tilson now runs a group called "Democrats for Educational Reform." It's clever in a way--with anti-labor, anti-union, pro-Wal-Mart Democrats, who needs Republicans?

Still, when our kids grow up, they will have to work. Personally, I wouldn't trust the good graces of these "Democrats" to protect them. And I doubt they'll want their kids working in Mickey D's either. But really, what are the chances of that when Daddy's a hedge fund manager?

As for the supposedly evil union bosses, what are they concerned about? Well, UFT President Randi Weingarten was interviewed for this article, and upon learning about Mr. Bloomberg's breakfast preferences, inquired:

“I have breakfast with the mayor. Did he tell you that?”

It's a relief to know Ms. Weingarten is concerned, but somewhat of a disappointment to see what she's concerned about. I'm concerned about working people, as I'm fairly certain my child and my students will grow up to join our ranks.

If Mr. Bloomberg cared about schools, he'd make sure that kids in NYC had good teachers, reasonably sized classes, and decent facilities. Unfortunately, Mr. Bloomberg opts for band-aids, shortcuts, "reforms," the highest class sizes in the state (which somehow eluded Education Next), and shoveling children into schools like mine whether or not they can be accommodated.

When I first started, oversized schools were given annexes, or extra buildings to accommodate those who couldn't fit into buildings. Now Mr. Bloomberg's people can build walls in classrooms that house 34 and Voila! These same classrooms now house 68. It's brilliant! Never mind that the sheetrock wall has no soundproofing whatsoever.

Imagine trying to get 6 South American kids to speak English while the teacher next door has her class chorally repeating "Come esta usted?" Imagine clearly hearing every single word uttered in that classroom. Imagine people playing music, dancing and shouting outside your classroom. Imagine a classroom you wouldn't board your dog in. If you can do that, you have an idea of what public school education is like in Mr. Bloomberg's New York.

Over at Education Next, they don't bother visiting classrooms. Why should they? They have "experts" to rely on. As they have no apparent need to examine what actually goes on as Mr. Bloomberg places "Children First," it's no wonder Diane Ravitch quit their ranks.

Leadership

I listened to Chancellor Klein yesterday on NPR. When Brian Lehrer asked him whose fault the budget cuts were, he pointed to the state, but would not say one cross word against his boss, Mayor Bloomberg. Apparently, the state has an obligation to follow the mandate of the CFE lawsuit, but when the city cuts budgets, it's just one of those minor inconveniences you have to put up with.

One problem with mayoral control is that there are no checks and balances. Of course Chancellor Klein can't speak against the mayor, because his job depends on total agreement and capitulation. They can proclaim "Children First" from now until doomsday, but the fact is this chancellor, whose job is ostensibly to represent these children, cannot do so if it displeases Mayor Mike.

He is, therefore, ultimately of little use to the 1.1 million kids who attend city schools.

Or perhaps he's simply forgotten that the CFE award was reduced by more that half as a result of Mayor Mike's refusal to agree to pay dime one toward it. The judge said the city could be forced to pay a reasonable perentage, Governor Pataki offered to fund 60% of it, and CFE, if I recall correctly, suggested the state ought to pay 75%. Mayor Bloomberg's rep told the New York Times they'd say, "No, thank you," to the funds if they had to pay anything whatsoever.

And the problem doesn't end at this level. What if your school, like mine, is at 250% capacity? Can the principal go to the press and say, "This is outrageous and unconscionable," without the very real possibility of becoming an ex-principal? It doesn't seem a viable possibility these days.

Who will stand up for kids? Well, what about the UFT leadership? You'd think they'd oppose this administration, which regularly vilifies educators, which violates the contract with impunity unless courts compel it to do otherwise, which follows every fresh concession by the union with a slap in the face to working teachers. You'd think they'd have had enough of mayoral control (even though they supported it to begin with).

Unfortunately, the policy of the UFT is to never, ever admit mistakes. And despite their many words in the past devoted to mayoral control, it appears they're already flying the white flag of surrender. This week, UFT bigshot Peter Goodman suggested on Edwize that anyone who wanted mayoral control to expire was "cynical."

"Cynical" denotes having no faith in human nature. It's hard to understand why favoring checks and balances over mayoral control is cynical. It's fairly easy, though, to think of words for those who fail to learn from past mistakes, and "cynical," I'm afraid, is not among them.

Expect no meaningful opposition to mayoral control from the UFT. It's clearly more important to have a quiet coronation for Ms. Weingarten, who's already stated her plans to concurrently reign over both the UFT and the AFT. After all, being president of the largest teacher union in the country is, apparently, just a part time job.

Clean Up this Mess (But Not Too Much)!

Yesterday the Panel for Education Policy, mostly rubber stamps for Bloomberg and Klein, decided that 8th graders would have to pass tests and classes, or they wouldn't become 9th graders. A large group of parents protested, and I saw a news report ths morning stating they had to clear the room. In the end, of course, they ignored the parents and did what they wanted. The sole holdout, Manhattan rep Patrick Sullivan, faced 10 votes of approval.

Oddly, this is the same administration that's floated the idea of giving kids credit for "seat time," and the same administration that's been pressuring teachers to pass as many students as possible. It's a strange message, and I saw it acted out at a meeting I attended yesterday.

At first, we were told to get tough on latecomers. Fail them, and tell them you're failing them because they were late to class. It was a surprising message.

But then, it was followed by a brainstorming session on how to pass as many kids as possible. One teacher suggested allowing the students to make up their own cheat sheets. From this teacher's experience, making up the cheat sheets was an alternate mode of note-taking. And there was no doubt that students tended to get higher scores when they brought their sanctioned cheat sheets with them.

Another teacher suggested pairing up low-performing students with high-performing students during tests. This teacher found that when the students were paired up in such a fashion, the formerly low-performing students tended to get grades exactly as high as the high-performing students.

The last teacher offered a plan to give half-credit for corrected answers on tests. For example, if you get a 50 on a test, you correct it in class, hand it to the teacher, and your 50 automatically becomes a 75. This teacher was able to pass many more students with higher grades via this method.

There was talk about intervisitation so that backwards traditional-style teachers who simply taught the material, gave tests and graded them could learn the new way. At the next meeting, I'm going to suggest that I team up with the principal and that we halve our pooled salaries. I have no desire to do his job or put in the hours he does, but I want to see how far exactly this new paradigm will take us.

Another Great Reform

Chancellor Klein, in yet another revolutionary improvement to our troubled school system, has banned "Pizza Day" at PS 193 in Queens. Apparently, young students were exchanging money for a dangerous product that consisted of several habit-forming substances including, but not limited to, bread, tomato sauce, and a cheese product described only as "mozzarella."

Furthermore, the proceeds of this nefarious act were being utilized by its perpetrators for highly questionable purposes:

Proceeds from the pizza parties pumped $200 a month into the PTA's budget - meaning thousands of dollars a year for teacher grants, supplies and funding for the yearbook, graduation festivities and school dances. The extra cash is crucial in the face of citywide budget cuts.

How dare this "PTA" attempt to circumvent vital and necessary school budget cuts? If Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein feel the best route toward improving schools entails leaving them crumbling and overcrowded with less money to function, that must be the way to go. Besides, he had several great reasons for this important act, and offered them one after the other:

Parents said they were first told that it was a nutrition issue, then that the fund-raiser violated a chancellor's regulation that bars for-sale food from competing against and replacing school-provided lunch.

Well, there you go. You see? Now how on earth are city school cafeterias supposed to sell their dry overcooked cardboard pizza-like product when real professionally-baked pizza is being imported for illicit consumption? We're lucky to have Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein keeping "Children First" and devoting their time to important issues, rather than wasting it on costly non-starters like class size, overcrowding, or decrepit facilities. After all, if we were to reduce class sizes and relieve overcrowding, we could lose much-needed funds for sports stadiums, not to mention space for new charter schools.

Along with "reformers" everywhere, I once again applaud their vision and courage.