Showing posts with label Ronald Reagan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ronald Reagan. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 11, 2015

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

For years I've felt the NYT has provided us with the very worst education reporting in NY. There have been exceptions, like Michael Winerip, but in general they seem way too highfalutin' to bother with what's actually happening in NY. I first noticed this years ago, when some genius reporter criticized us for the February break, saying the city didn't want it. Actually the city wanted non-attendance days for kids and us in school, and had the reporter bothered to speak with a single teacher to prepare his article, he'd have known that.

Occasionally, though, there's a ray of sunlight in the morass of nonsense and reforminess. In fact, this particular ray of sunlight focuses on a truth many teachers know--that it is income and not teacher quality that is a general predictor of standardized test scores. Not only that, but the gap has widened considerably since Ronald Reagan became union-buster in chief. In fact, this disparity affects not only test scores:

These widening disparities are not confined to academic outcomes: new research by the Harvard political scientist Robert D. Putnam and his colleagues shows that the rich-poor gaps in student participation in sports, extracurricular activities, volunteer work and church attendance have grown sharply as well.

So if we're really serious about helping kids, perhaps we ought to address poverty and income disparity. Maybe we should, you know, help struggling families rather than just spouting the same old reformy talking points. Maybe the fact that, after decades of reforminess, we still have all these so-called failing schools indicates that we ought to try something new. Instead, we hire MaryEllen Elia, who walks around pretending to listen to people and promises more of the same anyway.

On the other hand, there's this article marveling at the impending teacher shortage. They're looking everywhere, they're taking anyone, they're lowering standards and you don't even have to bother with credentials, you know, like a degree. Learn as you earn. Who cares?

It is mind-boggling to me that a reporter for the paper of record fails to account for the reforminess that's led to an unprecedented attack on teachers. I see this ignorance amplified over at Eduwonk. Nothing to see here, it's the economy. All this reformy stuff we're doing has no effect whatsoever.

They're wrong, of course. Teachers are being judged by test scores. There is no reliable research to suggest that standardized test scores reflect teacher quality. In fact, the American Statistical Association suggests teachers have precious little to do with these scores. But what's a reformy to do? Bill Gates has invested a gazillion dollars in a Measures of Effective Teaching study. UFT leadership supported it, told us how important our participation was, but its result was a nation of teachers judged by junk science.

There are few things I find more inspiring than seeing my former students become teachers. One of them is now teaching math in my school, and I could not be prouder. I love this job and it's brought me great gratification. I can't promise, though, that it will be the same for my students. We're on the third new evaluation program in three years, and I see no evidence of improvement. Teacher morale is the lowest I've seen in 30 years, bar none.

We are regularly trashed in the media. NYT's Frank Bruni likens us to pigs at a trough as his BFF Campbell Brown attacks our tenure. (In fairness, Bruni's job entails coming up with 800 words not once, but TWICE a week, so who can find time to do fundamental research?) SCOTUS is now looking to break our union.

We are standing against a wall with targets on our backs. The ignorance of professional reporters who don't know that is simply mind-boggling. If they're purposely wearing blinders, that's even worse. Either way, it is them, not us, who are incompetent.

Of course, it's easier to forget about the truth and blame teachers. Bill Gates said poverty was too tough to deal with, so he, along with the happy NYT reporter, ignores it and goes on his merry way. And you can't fire parents or children, so why not just blame the teachers and whistle a happy tune?

This is the new paradigm in education. We need to change it. And if leadership just keeps going along to get along, we need to change them too.

Sunday, August 09, 2015

Megyn Kelly Is Just Another Denizen of the Fox Sewer

All over the news, all over Facebook and Twitter, there's talk of Donald Trump and the much-maligned crusading reporter Megyn Kelly. Didn't she ask the tough questions? Didn't she challenge Donald Trump over his misogynistic rhetoric? Didn't she provoke him into spouting yet further offensive verbiage?

She did challenge him over his remarks about women, and she did get him to say whatever it was about her bleeding. And all over social media, there is outrage. How dare Donald Trump allude to menstruation? On the one hand, he's banned from some big GOP speaking occasion. On the other are people going after Megyn Kelly. How come she went after Donald Trump and went easy on the others? That's an interesting question, but absolutely none of the Fox talking heads asked the most interesting and obvious question. (I'll get to that.)

Another thing Trump said was that he gave to various and sundry candidates. He was challenged because he's donated to Hillary Clinton in the past. But at that point, Trump said something remarkable. He said he was a businessman, and when pols asked him for money, he gave. He said that a few years later he might ask them for a favor. Very Don Corleone, if you ask me. Except Don Corleone was portrayed as helping ordinary people, giving them power society may have unfairly denied them, in return for some unspecified favor in the future. Trump gave money to people who were already among the most powerful in the country.

In the clip I saw, Trump said he gave money to most of the people on the stage. One of them said no, while a few of the others asked him to give them money. They probably couldn't help it. Politicians in the United States spend so much time asking for campaign money it's a wonder they have time to do their jobs at all. And it's no wonder that so little gets done in the name of We, the People.

Then Trump said something truly remarkable. He said the system was broken. Sure, it's pay for play. Sure, he plays the game. Sure, he uses the rules as they are laid out. But Trump's utterance, and others like that, are the real reason GOP bigshots don't like having him around. He isn't supposed to say things like that. None of the other hopefuls wander around telling the truth. They all pretend to represent us, while Trump's right out there, in front of God and everybody, saying the system is for sale to the highest bidder.

So why am I attacking poor Megyn Kelly? It's because neither she nor any of her allegedly pro colleagues, as far as I know, followed up on that statement. Wouldn't it be appropriate to say, "If the system is broken, how can we fix it?" Wouldn't it be appropriate to ask that of not only Trump, but of every person standing on that stage? Isn't basic fundamental democracy something worth protecting?

Not to the talking heads of Fox News, and not anyone in MSM of whom I'm aware. As far as I know, the only candidate talking about Citizens United, which empowers the Koch Brothers to create and empower anti-union slime like Scott Walker, is Bernie Sanders. As far as I can tell, the great minds at Fox don't even think it merits a second thought.

The larger problem is that the rest of the media, like the NY Times, which is supposed to be better than Fox, is still harping on Trump and Kelly and whether this will be the thing that finally stops Trump's momentum. So far, just about every odious thing he says gives him a bump in the polls. Can Fox stop Trump from wandering around telling saying his unedited opinions, which sometimes turn out to be true?

Time will tell. Thus far, they've been pretty good about steering the national conversation to places that continually move working people backward. Thank goodness Ronald Reagan got rid of that inconvenient fairness doctrine that said issues actually had to be discussed from both sides. I remember the club owner in the Blues Brothers saying, "We have both kinds of music, country and western."

Sometimes, in these United States, I feel like we get both sides of the issue--right and ultra right. Make no mistake, I like Donald Trump about as much as I'd like some loathsome reptile I found crawling under my bed. But Fox likes him even less, because they simply can't afford to have him running around telling the truth, and focusing on issues that We, the People are simply supposed to ignore.

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Governor Andy's Thumbs Are Up for Working People (And Also Down)

Governor Cuomo has a new TV commercial, praising himself for supporting the $15 minimum wage. Make no mistake, this is a good thing. But it's not an accurate thing. In fact, NYC workers will not have that wage until the end of 2018, and workers in the rest of the state won't see it until July 1, 2021.

The restaurant industry has chafed at these decisions. “We continue to say that we think it’s unfair that they singled out a single segment of our industry,” Melissa Fleischut, the executive director of the New York State Restaurant Association, said.

They have a point, actually. The raise applies only to fast food workers in chains with 30 or more outlets.  So if the Donald opens 29 Trumpburger outlets, too bad for the folks who work there. And if you're working at Target, well, too bad for you. Perhaps this will cause more competition, or perhaps the best people will be working at burger joints. No more will you ask for extra pickles and find olives instead.

But Cuomo is disingenuous as always. He isn't getting $15 anywhere for years, and he isn't getting it for everyone. Worse, Cuomo is a miserable representative of working people. If he cared about us, he would not be at war with teachers and taking millions of dollars from enemies of public education. He would not be talking about taking control of schools away from communities, particularly poorer communities whose children earn low test scores for the apparently unforgivable offense of being impoverished.

In fact, if Cuomo were to be a champion for working people, he wouldn't have mustered the audacity to compare himself to his dad--Mario Cuomo took a principled stand against capital punishment, a stance that likely cost him his job, while Andrew took one against the millionaire's tax. While it's a pretty nice thing Andy did for his wealthy contributors, it hardly helped working people, who would have to cover the difference. In fact, the same Andy Cuomo who boldly fought for the 15 bucks an hour some people may get in a few years, if this thing stands,  came into office as a Democrat wanting to go after unions.

For those of you unfamiliar with history, and for all the flaws in UFT, NYSUT, and AFT leadership, unions negotiate better wages for working people. The more this happens, the more other employers have to compete. Union membership has been declining since Saint Ronald Reagan came into office and broke PATCO, the only union that supported him. And if you don't think Andy Cuomo has a knife as big as Ronald Reagan's to stick in our collective back, you haven't been paying attention.

This is Andy Cuomo's big liberal calling card, his attempt to present himself as a champion for working people. The only working person Andy Cuomo is concerned with is Andy Cuomo, and the only reason he does any work at all is for the advancement and preservation of Andy Cuomo.

Sadly, this commercial may persuade some New Yorkers of his good intentions. And should that happen, it will only go to show that there's a sucker born every minute.