Time On, Time Off

There's an interesting discussion about how much time kids should spend in school over at the Atlantic. Various viewpoints are elicited, notably including that of NPE director Carol Burris. Burris, unlike a whole lot of other people who write and talk education, looks at and considers research before forming opinions.

The myth that American students spend less time learning than students in other industrialized nations is not true. It is also clear from studies that increasing school time is very expensive and there is little return in achievement. Reductions in class size and peer tutoring, for example, have been found to be far more effective.

This will be surprising to people who read op-ed pages, which spout baseless nonsense and rely on astroturf groups like so-called Families for Excellent Schools for information. A lot of people attack the summer break, saying it causes some sort of learning loss. You'd think kids contracted Alzheimer's for two months a year. But Burris says affluent kids continue to learn in the summer while poorer kids may experience a loss.

And this, once again, points to our core problem--allowing so many of our children to live in poverty. In fact, it appears the majority of our students suffer from poverty. Meanwhile, we're sitting around debating the summer vacation. The NY Post is trashing the mayor for not closing enough unionized schools and opening more charters. Of course, charters cherry-pick their students, target those who've got to go, and send them back to public schools. We are then vilified for their test scores, as they must be our fault.

Some schools, like mine, give kids summer assignments. We then pat ourselves on the back for having dealt with the learning loss that supposedly takes place. My daughter has had teachers who'd give her assignments over school vacations. I hated those teachers. I'd help her with projects and wonder why the hell they couldn't just give her a week off.

Learning is 24/7, 365 days a year. If we do our job right, we won't need to put guns to our kids' heads to make them learn. We won't need to make up crap for them to do in the summer, or make them answer stupid questions, or make them write reports to prove they read the assignment. If we do our job right, kids will form interests and follow them.

Unfortunately, as long as we place our heads in the sand and pretend we can place some kind of band aid on poverty, that's not gonna happen. Giving kids nonsense to waste time during the summer isn't gonna change anything. At best kids will comply and hate our guts for wasting their time. At worst they won't comply and will still hate our guts for trying to waste their time. Or maybe it's vice-versa. The result is not substantially differeent.

In France, there's a 35-hour work week and everyone, not just teachers, gets 5 weeks off a year. Oh, and no one goes bankrupt paying medical bills, because like in most of the developed world, they have single payer health care. In American, we're obsessed with filling time. God forbid anyone should get a day off. Maybe the kid will select B instead of C on the multiple choice test.

Meanwhile, we're spinning our wheels solving the wrong problems.

Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is MaryEllen Elia

 I was pretty shocked when NY State Regents unanimously nominated MaryEllen Elia to be NY State Commissioner of Education. For one thing, I had heard Michael Mulgrew speak of the great hope he had in the Regents to modify the new and draconian APPR law. Given that, I was surprised they'd select someone with such enthusiasm for testing, junk science, and all things reformy. It makes me really wonder exactly how much interest (if any) the Regents have in doing the right thing.

It's true Elia gave lip service to being a teacher, and to seeing herself as a teacher. But every teacher I know abhors the new system that judges us, now even moreso, on student tests. It's not even a secret anymore that the state takes these tests and manipulates the cut scores so they show whatever it is the state feels like proving that week. The only teachers I know of who support this stuff at all are those in Educators 4 Excellence, you know, the ones who take Gates money just like Elia did in Florida. And while their leaders, Evan Stone and Whoever the Other One Is, were briefly teachers, they aren't anymore.

And that's exactly who Elia went to speak to yesterday. And let's be clear--that is a political statement. If Elia wanted to speak to teachers, she could have tried for an audience with NYSUT or UFT. There's certainly precedent for reformies getting audiences with unions, like Gates addressing the AFT. (When that happened, Randi Weingarten seemed to encourage the troops in ridiculing the protesters. Gates thanked AFT by trashing teacher pensions just days later.)

.@MaryEllenElia says she is a commissioner who will never bash teachers #e4eNY

— Ben Chapman (@NYDNBenChapman) August 20, 2015

That's great to hear. I hate it when politicians, op-eds and editorial boards bash teachers. I'm acutely aware of it because it happens almost every single day. Teachers don't want to be accountable because they object to having their jobs dependent on junk science. Teachers shouldn't talk to one another in teacher lounges. Teacher unions should be punched in the face.

Of course, the clever politicians who bash us often differentiate between teachers and teacher unions. "I would never bash teachers. I love teachers. My mother was a teacher. Yes, I had a mother." They blather on as though only Satanists are in teacher unions, and they only hate Satan. I suppose someone should inform those pols that teachers are in teacher unions, and that when they punch unions in the face they punch us in the face. Of course Elia hasn't yet broadcasted her intention to punch teacher unions in the face. Instead, she came up with this little gem:

.@MaryEllenElia says any teacher who encourages opt-out is unethical #e4eNY

— Ben Chapman (@NYDNBenChapman) August 20, 2015

Now, here's the thing about stereotypes--they are always hurtful, and they are always wrong. It doesn't even matter if they're positive. And make no mistake, Elia's statement is not positive at all. She's calling me and thousands of my brothers and sisters unethical. She's saying Diane Ravitch, Leonie Haimson, Carol Burris, Jeanette Deuterman, Beth Dimino and Jia Lee are promoting evil. And yet it's Elia herself who takes a salary several times that of any working teacher to carry out an agenda based on junk science.

It's Elia who supports giving every child in New York the same test. It doesn't matter to Elia if that results in a developmentally inappropriate curriculum. If the kids have learning disabilities, if they don't speak English, if they're malnourished, if their parents both work 200 hours a week, if they live in rotating shelters, too bad for them. The State has spoken.

Just because you're selective about the group of teachers you bash, you're still a teacher-basher. And with all due respect, I've seen absolutely no evidence that MaryEllen Elia is in any position whatsoever to lecture anyone about ethics.

Victory, NYSUT and UFT Style

One of the great things about being a teacher union leader is you always win. You win when there are 22 components in Danielson and you fight back Bloomberg's call for only seven. You win again when there are 22 and you negotiate it down to 8 (almost exactly what Bloomberg wanted).

You win when there's a transfer plan that allows teachers to go where they wish. You also win when you give up that plan and teachers can go nowhere without the OK of a principal. You not only win when you get a junk science evaluation system, but you also get to dump the sitting President of NYSUT because he helped you win that.

This year Governor Cuomo, whose popularity is at an all-time low, pushed through a revision of the APPR, expressly designed because too few teachers were getting low ratings. UFT President Michael Mulgrew sent an email thanking the Assembly for that. Why? Because, of course, it was a victory. Everything is a victory. We always win. Those who criticize junk science, like me, like Carol Burris and a large percentage of NY principals, like Diane Ravitch, are cranks, Chicken Little, shouting the sky is falling. Why?

Because this year fewer people were rated poorly than under the old system. Of course, under the old system, you were not necessarily bound for 3020a after two years of crap ratings. Furthermore, under the old system, it was on the DOE to prove you were unfit. Under the new system, if a member of the UFT rat squad says so, the burden of proof is on you, the teacher.

Now that UFT has dumped the former President of NYSUT, the new one has adopted the UFT good news policy. Here's an excerpt from a Karen Magee email:

We beat back the education tax credit that would have been a giveaway to rich supporters of private schools, stopped the push to make the tax cap permanent, and made progress on testing and transparency.

Now this isn't the first time we "beat back" the tax credit. It likely will not be the last time it rears its ugly head, and it's far from time to rest on our laurels. And Ms. Magee omits the fact that we're sending private schools 250 million bucks. And while the tax cap isn't permanent, it isn't gone either.

Note that this is not about what we achieved. It's about what we didn't lose yet. It's like when your friend tells you about all the things he's done for you. Remember when you were walking down the stairs and I didn't push you? Remember when we went out for coffee and I didn't put poison in your latte? Remember when we were walking by that semi-frozen lake and I didn't toss you in?

Just forget about all the broken promises in the leaflet above. So what if they utterly failed to oppose Cuomo when he was actually running for election? Who cares if Karen Magee and her Unity BFFs have not only failed to oppose Common Core, but spoken forcefully for it at AFT?  What does it matter if they not only failed to do anything against APPR, but also labeled its new steroid-laced draconian iteration a legislative victory? They still haven't joined that Fort Orange Club. Maybe next week they won't join it again. 

It will be another grand victory.

Related: A local union leader stands up to the nonsense. 

DA Takeaway

The DA last week was fairly unremarkable. One thing I found unusual was that I voted with Unity, I think, every time. All of the resolutions were fairly Mom and Apple Pie, both of which I support. Nonetheless, some things are notable.

Both Lauren Cohen and Megan Moskop of MORE were treated civilly, and managed to pass their motion and amendment. This is a great improvement over last year, when the Unity faithful shouted Lauren down for daring to mention their loyalty oath in public.

It's a great idea to let schools hire ATR teachers regardless of salaries, but if I'm not mistaken, Unity didn't do squat to oppose student funding a few years back. Anyone who pointed out the danger of that was a crank, a lunatic, and had failed to sign the aforementioned loyalty oath that proved you were reasonable. Thus, you were subject to abuse, personal insults, or being cut off by impartial Chair of the DA, Punchy Mike Mulgrew. I once watched him tell a chapter leader who questioned the endorsement of Bill Thompson that he didn't believe in democracy.

Punchy Mike was notably toned down this month. Perhaps someone spoke to him, or perhaps his shortened report didn't give him enough time. He didn't outright insult anyone, and he didn't appear as dripping with sarcasm as he often is. The Mulgrew I saw last week was somewhat of an improvement. Of course, he couldn't help himself from repeating his ridicule of critics of the APPR system. Those critics include Diane Ravitch, Carol Burris, yours truly, and virtually every working teacher with whom I speak. Mulgrew characterized us as saying every teacher was going to get fired.

Of course not every teacher is going to get fired. But some are, and I assure you they are not particularly thankful about it. It's outrageous that Mulgrew can cite fewer negative ratings while ignoring the high stakes attached to them.

Mulgrew now suggests the coming matrix is an improvement on this system, which he touted as wonderful when it came out. But once again, the optimal measure of junk science in teacher evaluation is precisely zero percent, whether you label it VAM, growth model, or John King's Awesome Adventure. I'm chapter leader of the largest school in Queens and Mulgrew doesn't answer my email. Given that, I'm fairly certain he hasn't got time to spend with some inconsequential teacher being fired because of The Bestest Rating System Since Sliced Bread.

I'm also a little put off that Mulgrew needs to repeat how smart the UFT is so frequently. Last month, he labeled himself a "ferocious" reader, though I'm pretty sure he was reaching for "voracious." Of course, maybe he is ferocious, and for all I know he throws books in the air and punches them, pretending they are Common Core opponents. Regardless, I'm put off by people who call themselves smart. It's really more impressive to me when others say people are smart. I tend to judge intelligence by what people do, and if I'm not mistaken, Mike Mulgrew, our leader, just thanked the Heavy Hearts for passing the most anti-teacher bill I've seen in this state.

Mulgrew also cited the social media campaign that resulted in that anti-teacher bill as a success. If we have many more victories like that we'll all be working at Walmart. And again, while Mulgrew urges us all to be on social media, he is not there himself. In what universe is that considered leadership?

There was also a discussion provoked by Mary Ahern's question, why would UFT want independent evaluators to count for 25% when NYSUT wanted it maxed out at 5%? Mulgrew gave a long, rambling response. When on topic, he suggested it was smart to have a wider range, as that gave us more freedom to negotiate. Of course, the optimal rating percentage of rank strangers who know nothing about you or your students, who may or may not be teachers, is zero. I'd argue the NYSUT number is much closer to zero and therefore preferable. But I'm not "smart," like whoever is making decisions for us, so what do I know?

Here's Your Big Chance

Now, from time to time in this space, I may kid the UFT President a little. He seems to think, in the wake of the budget agreement and its preposterous statewide evaluation plan, that we've won a battle against Governor Cuomo. Given that, I shudder to think what it will look like when we lose one.

In addition, his caucus, with absolute power over union decisions, has a record that's abysmal at best. It's supported mayoral control, school closings, charter schools, co-locations, the Absent Teacher Reserve, Common Core, junk science evaluations, substandard contracts, and a whole lot of things I could perhaps remember if I gave it another five minutes. But it's not all bad. There's a chance to do something here. 

Now that Merryl Tisch has insisted we delay the awful evaluation system, the one for which Michael Mulgrew thanked the Heavy Hearts club, there is a whole extra year to renegotiate it, including a budget vote. This might be a good time to let the heavy hearts know that union leadership will not support a nonsensical and hurtful evaluation scheme after all, and that communities have got the right to rate their own teachers in their own way, even if it means they may spend a few millions less on Pearson's Pineapples.

It might be a good time for the folks at 52 Broadway to show how smart they are, rather than simply waiting for Mulgrew to report it to the DA. I am unpersuaded by the argument that, since a teacher rated ineffective on test scores could be rated developing overall, tests don't count for 50%. First of all, it is ludicrous to say that a teacher rated effective or highly effective via observation is developing overall. What exactly is that teacher supposed to develop? Test prep skills?

Furthermore, the system the "matrix" is replacing was the best thing since sliced bread according to UFT, which took pains to slam brilliant activist principal Carol Burris in the process. Since UFT contended that the old system was the bestest thing ever, and since UFT contends that the new system is the bestest thing ever, since getting 22 components of Danielson instead of 7 was a victory, since getting 8 instead of 22 was a victory, since getting the UFT transfer plan (which I used) was a victory, and since losing it and creating ATRs instead was a victory, since everything that happens is a victory no matter what, it's tough to take them seriously.

I teach beginners. They know little or no English, and will score poorly on standardized Common Core tests. It takes maybe 3 years to acquire a language, maybe 5 to 7 to acquire the academic language on which they'll be tested, and this varies wildly by individual. What with independent evaluators who know nothing about my kids and ridiculous test scores, I figured I had two good years before Cuomo fired me. With the delay I figure I have three.

I'm in a position where being fired will not cause me to live in a tree or eat cat food. I worry about many of my colleagues, about my students, and about my own kid, any or all of whom could wish to follow in my footsteps and become a teacher.

While I think teaching is one of the most important and rewarding careers there is, I can't in good conscience ask anyone to pursue a career in "gotcha." Leadership owes it to us, and more so to those who follow us, to vigorously pursue something better. Cute though they may be, hashtags aren't gonna cut it this time.

Punchy Mike Explains It All

Watch out teachers, it's me again, "Punchy" Mike Mulgrew, and I'm swingin' wild! You'll take my Common Core out of my cold dead arms, baby! But I'm not here today to punch your face out. I'm here to explain the new legislation, and why we told legislators it was okay if they voted for it.

First of all, there's been a lot of bitching about the expedited 3020a process. Why should there be only one arbitrator instead of three? The fact is it's been that way in New York City for a while, so why shouldn't the rest of the state have that too? You see, this way, while other people may have lost something, we haven't lost anything. So that's a win for us. Well, anyway, it's not a loss for us. Why should we worry about everyone else? Not our job, man.

And fer cryin' out loud, while there may be one or two items that suck in the budget, we got more money, and more money is always a good thing. Sure, you won't get any of it, and your class sizes won't be reduced, but you don't think outside evaluators grow on trees, do you? Someone has to pay for supervisors to drive back and forth to schools and observe classes about which they know nothing whatsoever. It's always good to get a fresh perspective on why you suck how you can better deliver instruction.

And hey, we have a very friendly chancellor. Sure she talks about getting rid of teachers, but I'm sure she doesn't have you in mind when she says stuff like that. She's talking about those other teachers, you know, the ones who are not you, so you don't have to worry.  A lot of people don't understand the importance of union. Union means we stand together and do whatever I tell you to do. That's why we have a loyalty oath, and that's why every single person who represents you in NYSUT and AFT votes any damn way I tell them. That's democracy. Let me tell you, it isn't easy to get an organization this large to not oppose the likes of Andrew Cuomo when he runs for re-election.

We also trust that our friendly chancellor will make fair deals with us on receivership, so that if your school gets taken over and you have to reapply for your job it won't be so bad. We've got a great record with school closings. Just ask any ATR how they like traveling school to school week to week, fighting for bathroom keys. And make no mistake, we support your right to have a bathroom key. 

And don't worry if you get an ineffective rating or two. Sure they can end your career and all, but we've arranged it so that 13% of you can actually get a fair hearing. In fact we've already won one of those hearings, and what's better than that? You only have to worry if you're one of the 87% who faces a kangaroo court and doesn't get a fair hearing, so chin up and all that. Remember, in union we stand together, and we the leadership will decide which 13% of you get a fair hearing. What could be better than that? You trust us, don't you?

Please don't go reading stuff like this that says the mayor did indeed get his 50%. I mean, that's just simple math. I'm just a regular guy, an ex-carpenter. It's all I can do to not spout a stream of obscenities right now for no reason. And don't get all in a lather over Merryl Tisch talking about exempting high performing districts. There's no way New York will be included, and a fundamental facet of unionism is that we care only about ourselves.

In fact, it's a good thing if Tisch is trying to shut up those yammering Long Island parents always going on about opting out. Maybe if their districts aren't affected they will stop screaming. After all, the highest body in the UFT, the delegate assembly, just killed two opt-out resolutions, and failed even to bring up our own watered down and meaningless resolution, the one that reaffirmed our faith in teachers being evaluated with junk science. As a UFT member, you should be happy that there's a possibility these folks will stop making me look bad.

So, in summary, trust us, don't read the blogs, don't listen to Carol Burris or Diane Ravitch or any of those other loudmouths out there, a thousand points of light, and ask yourself this--under my leadership, are you better off than you were a year ago? If the answer is no, ask yourself this--under my leadership, is Mike Mulgrew any better than he was a year ago?

Whatever the answers are, remember, as a unionist, it's your duty to sit down, shut up, and do whatever I say. And if I say things don't suck, that should be good enough for anyone.

On Unrepresentative Leadership

I read with interest Principal Carol Burris' column on whether education groups are really listening to their members. It's interesting that the statewide PTA is deaf to the concerns of regional PTAs. When parents see their kids suffering from overtesting and preposterous high stakes, they tend to object. This is something Reformy John King learned when he actually went around the state and heard from people not contained in his particular cone of silence.

Unfortunately, the state PTA leaders appear to be precisely the sort of people Reformy John hangs with, the ones who tell him that everything is wonderful and he is unconditionally a prince. And while it's clear he believes that, I'm not at all certain readers of this blog will concur. So what do you do when you have a leadership that doesn't represent you? According to Carol Burris, you vote the bastards out.

That makes sense to me. Of course, for those of us in the UFT, it's another story. So few of us deem it worth our time to vote that it's very tough to compete with avid patronage recipients. To make things worse, more than half of all voting is done by retirees, who have limited skin in the game. But the very worst aspect of our voting is it's winner take all, and all dissenters, bar none, are shut out. Were that not the case, you certainly wouldn't have a UFT President not only supporting Common Core, but also publicly threatening to beat the crap out of anyone who doesn't.

And whenever it appears there's some slim chance opposition may break a little sunshine into the monopolistic one-sided regime, action is taken. When Mike Shulman won UFT HS VP, they waited until he was out of office and changed the rules so those meddlesome high school teachers couldn't elect anyone who actually represented them. Now the elementary and middle school teachers help us, which ensures a Unity VP even if we choose otherwise.

But that wasn't enough. Randi Weingarten reached out to Shulman's party, New Action, and struck a deal. If New Action would only endorse her, she'd let several seats on the UFT Executive Board go unopposed. At that time, when New Action members like James Eterno refused to buy into the deal, they formed ICE, contested the seats and won them. As opposition voices were completely unacceptable, Unity then cross-endorsed the New Action candidates and made sure that no one they didn't have a deal with got any voice whatsoever.

More recently upstart caucus MORE has gotten a little traction, and that apparently could not be tolerated. So Randi Weingarten met with a teacher who's now formed yet another caucus, a teacher who's already running a campaign for UFT President in 2016. So just in case MORE should catch on enough to threaten even the high school seats New Action now holds, Weingarten and this teacher have made it just that much more difficult. In my opinion, buying out New Action was one of the most effective steps our union has ever taken against democracy. Perhaps this new caucus will prove the second best.

Since absolutely everyone who represents us has either signed a loyalty oath or struck a deal with the UFT Unity Caucus, there is not one single person who represents us at a significant decision-making level. Sure, we can bring things up at the DA, but we're overwhelmed by people who need to vote as told at risk of being ejected from not only their patronage jobs, but also the glitzy free trips to conventions where they reliably say nothing and represent no one.

And then, of course, there is NYSUT and AFT, where we also have no representation whatsoever. I keep hearing ostensible leaders claim teachers support this and that, but they never ask me or anyone I represent. Their bad decision-making and short-sightedness threaten our very survival as union. We all hope our enemies won't kill tenure, but we have to know that whether or not that happens it's far from the end game.

Leadership, in the vain hope that appeasement will keep our enemies at bay, has given in to major reformy initiatives, including mayoral control (which apparently exists only for reformy mayors), charter schools, value-added junk science, and deterioration of seniority rights and due process. Evidently, this leadership is up for just about anything. Personally I don't know one single teacher who supports any of this stuff.

Carol Burris offers a great closing line:

I suppose it is always nice to have a seat at the table. It is important, however, to be sure that those you represent are not the main course.

The question remains--with leadership like we have, and a blatantly rigged election process, how do we go about changing it? How do we achieve a real representative union?