Mariachi Chancellor Thinks Opt-Out is Extreme

I was pretty surprised to see that incoming NYC Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza deemed opt-out an extreme reaction to the standardized testing that has plagued and poisoned our educational system. First of all, this implies the parents who mounted a statewide protest to resist making widgets of their children are somehow taking the wrong approach.

Carranza probably doesn't remember when Reformy John King announced that very few New York children met his exacting standards, and almost immediately thereafter fewer than 20% NY children rang the big Common Core bell in Albany. He probably doesn't recall the statewide protests of these tests. He must not remember even the Great and Powerful Andrew Cuomo shrinking at the sight of Jeanette Deutermann and Beth Dimino. He probably doesn't remember that there is a moratorium on actually using any of these test scores for much of anything.

In a way, you can't blame the guy, He wasn't around when any of this was happening. On the other hand, if Carranza wants to be el rey, the king, he's gonna have to do a little bit of homework. Specifically, he's gonna have to educate himself on what opt-out is, who was in it, and exactly how powerful the tsunami of parent power was that accompanied it. Kings get to sit on a throne, but only so long as no one topples it. Andrew Cuomo was comfortably ensconced in his reformy castle until opt-out raised its formidable head. Now he acts like he's our good buddy, and he pretends to be a Democrat instead of going after unions.

A key rule in writing and teaching is know your audience. I can't give the same lesson to an AP English class as the one I present to a group of newcomers from El Salvador and China. I mean, I could, but it would fall on deaf ears a good portion of the time. Carranza, by talking off the top of his head, has failed to consider his audience. I hope he's a quick learner, but thus far he's shown no evidence he is.

This is not necessarily a fundamental or irreversible error. Here's a guy who's learned how to play a violin. That's not an easy process. You have to endure sounds no human ought to before you coax a sweet tone from this instrument. We have to hope the tortured sounds we're hearing now are only practice.

Still, if Bill de Blasio scoured the country for the best, it's hard to understand why he couldn't find someone who, you know, read a few articles about opt-out before venturing toward such an outlandish comment. It's possible that Carranza thinks, as el rey, that any questioning of his actions is beyond the pale. I certainly hope not.

Opt-out remains one of the great hopes for quality education, as opposed to the reformy slice-em, dice-em, rigor and grit crap that Broad, Gates and Walmart would impose on our children.

Which side are you on, Mr. Chancellor?

Think of What It Would Lead To If Teachers Spoke Up

I'm sorely disappointed to read this exchange with Mayor Bill de Blasio at a Staten Island event:

An IS 61 teacher asked de Blasio why teachers are under a "gag order" not to speak ill about state tests, when teachers elsewhere encourage their students to opt out of tests.

"Think of what it would lead to" if teachers openly criticized every education policy they disagreed with, de Blasio said.

I'm thinking about it right now, and I think it would lead to better education for each and every one of the students I serve. Opt-out is relatively inactive in NY City, and that's a shame. The discredited Common Core exams drag down the whole state in the nonsense that passes for data here. For my money, the only reason Andrew Cuomo has slowed down his vendetta against pubic education is the principled and outspoken parents, teachers, students, and residents who fought it.

Standardized tests are largely crap produced by overpaid corporations who take money we could use to build libraries, school seats, and joy into the work we do. What they excel at is letting us know what zip codes our kids live in. Rather than make all schools good ones, rather than empower teachers to do what we know works, we hand out these tests and sort out the winners and losers. Great Neck wins, the Bronx loses, and we all pretend to be surprised.

I can't tell whether the mayor is misinformed or whether he knows better, but the effect is the same. His statement is upsetting to those of us who support opt-out, and to those of us who are going to be rated on nonsense, but it goes beyond that. It's one thing to oppose opt-out, and perhaps you could make arguments against it (though I myself can't think of any). This reminds me of nothing more than John Kasich saying he would abolish all teacher lounges.

De Blasio is attacking more than opt out here. What he's attacking is our free speech. In fact I do not believe I ought to make overt political arguments in front of my students. It's my job to encourage them to think things through, not to bully them into believing what I do. I do not believe it's my job to tell students whether or not to take tests. I believe that's a discussion for a parent to have. So I would not address the students.

But hell, I would address the PTA, and I would speak up in whatever forum afforded me, and I would write here and elsewhere. While I don't believe that my classroom is the best forum for political speech, there is a First Amendment, this is still America, and I will criticize each and every crappy educational policy with which I disagree.

Not only that, Mr. Mayor, but I will actively encourage my colleagues to do the same. Four years ago, I refused repeated and insistent requests from UFT to make calls for Bill Thompson. I donated to Bill de Blasio. I went to his inauguration in the freezing cold. More recently, I voted with the UFT Executive Board to endorse him.

Maybe this is a slip of the tongue on the mayor's part. I certainly hope so. What would happen if every teacher stood up and criticized all the crap that infects our education system, Mr. Mayor? Every kid in your city would get a better education. We wouldn't spend our time worrying about tests that measured zip codes and we wouldn't have parasites like Eva Moskowitz vilifying us for teaching every kid, no matter which zip code, which disability, or which level of English.

Teachers are great advocates for children. It's nothing less than a disgrace that a progressive politician would utter word one about shutting us up.

Newsday Asks Opt-Out to Please Crawl Away and Die

When I was 12 years old, I think, my first job ever was delivering newspapers. I delivered Newsday for several years. I also sold a hell of a lot of subscriptions. Whenever anyone moved in, whenever a new house was built, and whenever anyone wasn't on my route I'd knock on the door and sell new subscriptions. It was easy. There was nothing like it and it was pretty much the best source of local news. I read it every day.

Now Newsday is a piece of drek owned by the would-be monopolists at Cablevision. It's written one of the stupidest editorials I've ever seen.  Newsday thinks the opt-out movement has done its job, and that now it's time to sit down and shut up. You see, the tests were "fine" because they were "vetted" by "at least 22 New York public school teachers."

It’s unfortunate that 20 percent of students statewide and more than 50 percent of those on Long Island opted out of those exams this past spring. So while the tests were fine, the broad results released by the state on July 29 are practically useless for evaluating classes, schools and districts on Long Island.

You see what they did there? Not only did they understate the percentage of students statewide who opted out, but they also failed to note that the tests were fundamentally different from those the year before. Even the state itself acknowledges that, sometimes. Newsday then attributes these changes to the "parent and teacher revolt against Common Core standards in recent years," the same revolt that it opposed tooth and nail, each and every step of the way. Newsday says opt-out has now achieved its goals and should therefore go away and leave it alone.

Newsday loves standardized tests:

Results of standardized tests are just about the only measure that equally compares student skills across classes, schools, districts and states. They can show teachers and schools what works, and highlight student strengths and weaknesses.

Why, then, would anyone opt-out in the first place? If it's inherently fair to give standardized tests, why did Andrew Cuomo agree to make any changes at all? Why do they have this "moratorium" on counting the results against students and teachers? After all, since the tests are so absolutely vital, we need them,  don't we? How are we gonna find out how much our kids, our schools, and our teachers suck if we don't have them take tests and then have the schools decide later exactly which scores pass and which don't?

My favorite part of the piece is this one:

Based on past results, the state Education Department says the majority of those who opted out this year were students who probably would have gotten a substandard score of 1 or 2 on the tests, rather than 3 (proficient) or 4 (excellent).

NY State has a long and consistent history of manipulating test results to show whatever the hell they wish to show. If billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg needs scores to go up so as to prove that reforminess works, voila!  They go up. Diane Ravitch cries foul because the NAEP scores contradict that rise. Bloomberg and his peeps call her a crank and pat themselves on the back. Two years later, papers like Newsday finally catch on to the story that test scores were, in fact, inflated and the test scores were meaningless.

The Island was built on great schools. No one is going to believe those schools are still great if parents won’t let children take the tests.

If the only thing that made those schools great was test scores, no one should have ever believed those schools were great. There is a direct correlation between income and test scores. The only thing test scores reliably indicate is which part of Long Island you live in. Seriously, do you think the state, revered as it is by Newsday, is gonna come in and take over Great Neck schools instead of Roosevelt schools?

It's pretty sad that a once great local paper has degenerated into a corporate-owned reformy rag that couldn't argue its way out of the birdcage it lines. Perhaps it wouldn't be in said birdcage if it reflected the community it ostensibly served rather than the cable moguls who own it.

UFT Unity's War on Logic

An interesting by-product of joining the Unity Caucus and signing the loyalty oath is you have to rationalize everything Unity Caucus does. OK, well not everyone has to. But if you want to move up and impress those who need impressing, you'll do any logical contortion necessary to make their actions appear rational.

A very good example of that was their attack on MORE at the last Delegate Assembly. When you're sworn to defend anything by any means necessary, you aren't restricted by things like truth, logic, or common decency. You say any damn thing and as long as it makes you look superficially good, that's good enough. Unfortunately for Unity there are people like Jeanette Deutermann, who actually think about things before accepting them, and they are liable to publicly call you out.

Even worse, there are entire organizations intent on facing reforminess with truth, and one is NY State Allies for Pubic Education, or NYSAPE. And boy, is it inconvenient to lead a teacher union and be called out by a grassroots education group:

In addition to providing your members with false information, you have demonized the brave and outspoken NYC educators who have encouraged opt out. You have inexplicably labeled these educators as “reckless and feckless”. This begs the question, why would an experienced educator and union leader dismiss and insult a historic act of civil disobedience? Surely, you are aware that the opt out movement has yielded the only successful means of resisting harmful “test and punish” policies that hurt not only your members, but all educators and students around the state.

It is no secret that you have failed to support efforts to reject the increased focus on test scores in the new teacher evaluation plan (3012-d), or that you have publicly vowed to defend the common core standards (standards that even the Governor’s skewed CC task force found to be flawed) with violence, if necessary. In addition to your disparaging comments aimed at those who support the opt out movement, your actions as president of the UFT would appear to reveal whose side you are really on.

When teachers, students, and unions were being abused, demonized, and demoralized, a call to action rang out from grassroots parent and educator organizations. Many teachers and local unions heeded the call. Progressive caucuses within the UFT such as MORE and the statewide caucus Stronger Together immediately stepped up and worked alongside parents to fight for the best interests of our children. Where were you? - See more at: http://www.nysape.org/nysape-mulgrew-response.html#sthash.oxAFE1tA.dpuf

In addition to providing your members with false information, you have demonized the brave and outspoken NYC educators who have encouraged opt out. You have inexplicably labeled these educators as “reckless and feckless”. This begs the question, why would an experienced educator and union leader dismiss and insult a historic act of civil disobedience? Surely, you are aware that the opt out movement has yielded the only successful means of resisting harmful “test and punish” policies that hurt not only your members, but all educators and students around the state.

It is no secret that you have failed to support efforts to reject the increased focus on test scores in the new teacher evaluation plan (3012-d), or that you have publicly vowed to defend the common core standards (standards that even the Governor’s skewed CC task force found to be flawed) with violence, if necessary. In addition to your disparaging comments aimed at those who support the opt out movement, your actions as president of the UFT would appear to reveal whose side you are really on.

When teachers, students, and unions were being abused, demonized, and demoralized, a call to action rang out from grassroots parent and educator organizations. Many teachers and local unions heeded the call. Progressive caucuses within the UFT such as MORE and the statewide caucus Stronger Together immediately stepped up and worked alongside parents to fight for the best interests of our children. Where were you?

Not particularly flattering, and a hell of a question for people whose jobs, ostensibly, entail representing those of us who work in public education. And that's not even an aberration. A recent Unity propaganda effort was a strawman, that is, because MORE opposes teachers being judged by junk science, they therefore must favor principals having 100% power. This, of course, ignores the fact that principals can sink evaluations in the current system anyway.

A worse factor of the new APPR is that the burden of proof is no longer on the DOE--they need not prove you are incompetent. Under the current system, if the UFT rat squad determines that the principal is right, burden of proof shifts to the teachers, who must prove they are not incompetent. Lawyer friends of mine tell me that proving a negative is very, very tough, and it isn't very hard for me to see why that's correct.

Of course if you're Unity, it's your job to rationalize everything Unity does. I know of several Unity folks who defended this saying it's better that we own it. This hasn't appeared in any official Unity publication yet because first, they don't publicly acknowledge the shifting of the burden, ever, and second, I suppose, because it's an incredibly stupid argument that even the idiots who write Unity propaganda can't bring themselves to use. Here's what Eric Severson, UFT Chapter Leader at Clara Barton, commented:

No it's better that I've been imprisoned without trial and presumed guilty, now I can own it!

Because, in fact, this makes teachers guilty until proven innocent. To me, that's fundamentally un-American. But to great minds of UFT Unity, intent on rationalizing absolutely anything leadership does, it's a gift!

It's remarkable that Unity propagandists are so inept at argument, though it explains a lot about why they negotiate contracts the way they do. I certainly hope they keep placing their collective feet so firmly in their mouths. It's fabulous for blog material. Better, though, would be for them to get off that high horse and work with us toward improving education for teachers, students and communities.

Only time will tell whether UFT Unity will risk its "seat at the table" to work with real activists like us and NYSAPE. But hope springeth eternal.  

In addition to providing your members with false information, you have demonized the brave and outspoken NYC educators who have encouraged opt out. You have inexplicably labeled these educators as “reckless and feckless”. This begs the question, why would an experienced educator and union leader dismiss and insult a historic act of civil disobedience? Surely, you are aware that the opt out movement has yielded the only successful means of resisting harmful “test and punish” policies that hurt not only your members, but all educators and students around the state.

It is no secret that you have failed to support efforts to reject the increased focus on test scores in the new teacher evaluation plan (3012-d), or that you have publicly vowed to defend the common core standards (standards that even the Governor’s skewed CC task force found to be flawed) with violence, if necessary. In addition to your disparaging comments aimed at those who support the opt out movement, your actions as president of the UFT would appear to reveal whose side you are really on.

When teachers, students, and unions were being abused, demonized, and demoralized, a call to action rang out from grassroots parent and educator organizations. Many teachers and local unions heeded the call. Progressive caucuses within the UFT such as MORE and the statewide caucus Stronger Together immediately stepped up and worked alongside parents to fight for the best interests of our children. Where were you? - See more at: http://www.nysape.org/nysape-mulgrew-response.html#sthash.oxAFE1tA.dpuf

Chalkbeat NY Stands Up for the Gates-Funded Little Guy

I was pretty surprised to read that the NY Regents are passing policy without the input of the public. I mean, that's a pretty serious breach of basic democracy, isn't it? On the other hand, I've been to a whole lot of public hearings about schools and school closings, and I've spoken at them too. Several were at Jamaica High School, closed based on false statistics, according to this piece in Chalkbeat.

The thing about public hearings is this--yes, members of the public get to speak. In fact, at Jamaica and several other school closing hearings, I don't remember a single person getting up to speak in favor of school closings. I've also been to multiple meetings of the PEP under Bloomberg where the public was roundly ignored. In fact, Bloomberg fired anyone who contemplated voting against doing whatever they were told. While he didn't make them sign loyalty oaths, the effect was precisely the same.

State hearings are different, of course. When former NY Education Commissioner Reformy John King decided to explain to NY that Common Core was the best thing since sliced bread, he planned a series of public forums. However, after the public said in no uncertain terms they disagreed, he canceled them, saying they'd been taken over by "special interests." The special interests, of course, were parents and teachers. He may have implied they were controlled by the unions, but of course the union leadership actually supported the same nonsense he was espousing.

In fact, the only meeting King went to where he found support actually was taken over by special interests, to wit, Students First NY. Only one non-special interest actually got to speak, and that was my friend Katie Lapham. Other than that it was a pro-high-stakes testing party. Doubtless this was King's view of a worthy public forum, and given that it's taken until now for Chalkbeat to stand up to the lack of forums, I have to question whether it's theirs too.

The big change Chalkbeat points to is a link claiming that the Regents "wiped out" main elements of the teacher evaluation law. If you bother to follow the link, you learn that this is a reference to the fake moratorium on high stakes testing, which the article itself later admits to be limited to the use of Common Core testing in grades 3-8. The fact that junk science rules absolutely everywhere else, and will in fact be increased in importance next year, is evidently of no relevance whatsoever.

While Chalkbeat acknowledges these changes were urged on by Governor Cuomo's task force, it fails utterly to make connections as to what forced Cuomo to start a task force, let alone pretend he gives a crap about education or public school teachers. This, of course, was a massive opt-out, in which over 20% of New York's parents told their children not to sit for tests that Cuomo himself referred to as meaningless. But rather than speak to any of its leaders, Chalkbeat seeks comment from a Gates-funded group I've never heard of called Committee on Open Government.

After all, why go to Jeanette Deutermann, or Leonie Haimson, or Jia Lee, or Beth Dimino, or Katie Lapham, when you can get someone who's taken Gates money? And just to round out the forum, Chalkbeat goes to Reformy John King's successor, MaryEllen Elia, who's taken boatloads of Gates money and is therefore an expert on pretty much whatever.

Chalkbeat also makes the preposterous assertion that the Regents allowing children of special needs a route to graduation should have been more gradual because schools were prepping them for tests they didn't need. While that may be true, this did not remove their option of taking those tests. Announcing the allowance this year and enabling it, say, next year, would've helped absolutely no one. You don't need to go to a Gates-funded expert to figure that out.

While it may have been nice to have public hearings, the fact is the public has gotten up and spoken, and without that, none of these changes would have occurred. It's remarkable that Chalkbeat NY doesn't know that.

Opt-out Answers UFT Unity

UFT Unity really managed to put its foot in its mouth with its Delegate Assembly handout. I kind of suspected some opt-out activists would not care for that particular message, laughable and poorly thought out though it  was. Here's one commenter, for example, who found little to love about it:

Oh Michael, Michael, Michael. Now you went and did it. You stayed in the closet for four long years, pretending that you were respectful of the work of 250,000 parents and educators to save your profession and protect public schools. Out of fear of your regime beginning to crumble, you have decided to come out and proclaim in all your glory that you despise the opt out movement and all it represents. Let me be the first to let out a sigh of relief that the pretense is over. Now you can come at us with fists flying in typical Mulgrew fashion. Thank you for being you.

~Jeanette Brunelle Deutermann, Opt-out parent activist 

Others are struck by the idiosyncracies in UFT Unity behavior:

What's actually funny is, the UFT UNITY delegates voted unanimously at last year's RA to support opt out. Leroy made a big production of going to the microphone with Beth Dimino. Wait, I'm sorry, it's not funny, it's sad.

~Michael Lillis, President, Lakeland Federation of Teachers

Evidently they were for it before they were against it. But not everyone is familiar with the Unity philosophy that everything they do is right, and it makes no difference whatsoever if what they say today contradicts what they did yesterday. Thus, whatever they do is right. Of course it sounds odd, but there are precedents for that sort of thinking.

Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal

~Richard Nixon

Alas, not everyone can accept the premise that just because Mulgrew, another President, says it's so, that it is. That notion has not gained wide acceptance outside the Unity bubble.   

Also, the logic of "we have to test 95% or more of our students to get grant money" is the same logic that led to "we have to adopt Common Core so we get Race to the Top money." Just administering all these tests every year costs far more than the grant money this flyer points to as the reward for testing our students

~Eric Severson, UFT Chapter Leader, Clara Barton High School

The grant money, of course, is up to $75,000 for 6% of applicants, who may or may not get the 75K, or way less, since we haven't got an "as little as" figure just yet. Of course others are outraged There is an opt-out movement out there, and they're tired of being talked down to. If they wanted that, they could go to John King, Andy Cuomo or Bill Gates rather than the people whose jobs, ostensibly, entail representing them. 

Disgraceful! Opting-out gives us power to change the system. No kid should take these tests. Shame on @UFT Unity. https://t.co/rtEba1pnW7

— CriticalClassrooms (@lapham_katie) June 16, 2016

Now this is how Unity hopes people will react:. 

How dare MORE fight for professional autonomy and against a corporate driven agenda! Who do you think you are?

~Leonie Haimson, Class Size Matters

OK, well not really. That's what's known as "irony." While Unity deems themselves clever to call us "feckless and reckless," and make puns about MORE, other people are actually thinking about this stuff. Unfortunately for UFT Unity, none of them have signed that loyalty oath. The thing about Unity folk is they hang around people who've signed oaths all the time and aren't very well-equipped to deal with those who have not. And some who haven't signed the oath get right to the point:

This letter is disgraceful. @beth_dimino @Refusethetests @JeanetteDeut @LIOptOut @teka21bat @zamekhta @sullio https://t.co/yNSBMXQBu7

— brian stpierre (@Sashammy) June 15, 2016

Unity leaders aren't used to having to listen to people like that. Maybe we need to forgive them. They know not what they do. Sadly, it's kind of their job to know what they do, and that places the UFT in a precarious situation. It's my inclination to work with them rather than against them. But I won't be silent when attacked. Neither I nor MORE/ New Action nor opt-out is stupid enough to accept strawman arguments and ad hominem nonsense. 

This propaganda piece by the UFT's re-elected Unity leadership is really a disgrace and seeks to undermine the teachers who have stood by NYC parents to support our choice to refuse to have our children be subjected to these inferior test and punish policies. This needs to be called out as the smear campaign that does not respect the decision those 240,000 children's parents across the state made on their child's behalf. So is Mulgrew saying we parents are reckless and feckless too?? Please share widely and support MORE Caucus teachers. The election may be over, but the movement is not!

~Janine Sopp, NYC Opt-out parent activist

UFT Unity now has a choice. They can climb down from that high horse and work with us to help students, teachers and communities. Or they can tell the idiots who write for them to get to work developing more pompous, disingenuous, logic-free nonsense. 

I hope they at least give it a little thought.

At George Washington Campus, I Learn Opt Out NYC Needs Help

Last night I went to George Washington "Campus." Now there was a big sign in front of the school, etched in stone no less, that said George Washington High School, but that wasn't what it was. It was a "campus," because that's what I read it was.

Now I'm a little naive, I guess, from years of working in one of the few high schools that wasn't destroyed by Michael Bloomberg, so I kind of wondered what the hell George Washington Campus was. Was it a college? Was it a place where students hung out and sat on the lawn? Who knew?

In fact, I asked one of my colleagues, who used to be a cab driver what and where it was. I was trying to decide whether to take the train there or drive. He assured me if I drove I would find a space, so that's what I did. By a small miracle, a car pulled out of a space a block away from the "campus" as I was driving around. A friend I met there came in a cab, and her cab driver had trouble finding the place even though he had it on GPS. So I'm guessing the campus is not that famous.

Why am I talking about this place in a piece with "opt out" in the title? Good question. Our friend Michael Bloomberg thought the best way he could help schools get better was by closing them. Actually that's not precisely what he did. What he did was break them up into smaller schools, hiring four principals instead of just one, and having four sets of rules instead of one. This was better because Bill Gates said it was, until he decided it wasn't. But having already imposed his will on the NYC district, it stayed imposed, as do so many ideas that emanated from Bill Gates' abundant hind quarters.

The effect, of course, was to downplay any notion of community schools (thus downplaying any notion of community, valued by neither Gates nor Bloomberg). Parents now had "choice." They could go to the Academy of Basket Weaving, the Academy of Coffee Drinking, or the Academy of Doing Really Good Stuff. Of course by the time they got there the principals who envisioned basket weaving, coffee drinking, or doing good stuff were often gone, and it was Just Another School, or more likely Just Another Floor of a School, as there were those three other schools to contend with. (Unless of course Moskowitz got in, in which case it was A Renovated Space Better Than Your Space.)

Last night I learned that middle schools in NYC also are Schools of Choice. I don't know exactly why I learned this last night, because my friend Paul Rubin told me this months ago. I think I need to hear things more than once before they register with me, though. Anyway last night I heard from someone who told me that one of the schools her daughter might attend required test scores as a prerequisite. So if her family had decided to send their kid there, opt-out may not have been a good option.

I live in a little town in Long Island. My daughter went to our middle school, as did every public school student in our town. We are a community, and our community's kids go to our community's schools. If I opt my kid out, she goes to that school. If she scores high, low, or anywhere in between, she goes to that school.

That's not the case in NYC. And by requiring test scores from tests that ought not to even exist, these schools effectively deny the right of many students to opt out. So the question becomes, if the tests are not appropriate, and if even bought-and-paid-for tinhorn politicians like Andrew Cuomo say these tests ought not to count, why the hell are we counting them?

And the next question is, is there anything we can do about it? Opt-out brought us these mild, but not insane, modifications from Andrew Cuomo, even though he happily takes suitcases full of cash from the reformies. It also brought us Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa, who I went to hear at George Washington Campus last night. Dr. Rosa impressed me by being consistently Not Insane, even in one instance where I disagreed with her.

If we can have an educational leader who is Not Insane, is it possible we can work toward a middle school admission policy that is also Not Insane? Because for me, and I freely acknowledge I may be in the minority here, I feel that Not Insane is the way to go with educational policy.

Why Not Opt Out of Midterms?

That's the question the Daily News asks. After all, the stakes are pretty low, as the state has agreed not to count the results for a few years. This is true for students and in many cases for teacher ratings as well. So what's the big hooplah, the News wants to know. Why don't these goshdarn kids just sit down and take their tests?

That's a much more reasoned approach than that taken over at the Post, where they concoct a ridiculous strawman argument suggesting that parents who opt out are simply petulant, over-privileged, self-serving lunatics who don't want their kids to fail. At the same time, they are helicopter parents making ridiculous demands for their pampered children. Patrick Walsh had a great piece on his blog in response: 

Its always a good sign when shills for those who are systemically attempting to undermine public education, the better to privatize it, are reduced to making public arguments that read like they are written by a person on a six day drunk.

Read the whole piece.  I'll just address the piece at the News, which makes a more reasonable argument. There's actually a pretty reasonable answer, too.

Midterms are usually written by teachers. They’re usually graded and returned to the students, so the students can see how they did and what they may have done wrong. That’s not the case with these tests, whatever the stakes. And if the stakes are so ridiculously low anyway, a better argument might be that they ought to simply be canceled.

A lot of us are labeled as anti-testing, when that's not precisely the case. We are against high-stakes tests that don't really help our children. And while it's true that there is a temporary reduction in the stakes, the tests still don't help our children. I don't know much about these tests, but from what I'm reading, even disregarding the fact that our kids will never get them back or learn anything from them, they don't appear to be of very good quality.

They don't necessarily test what kids need. They aren't necessarily developmentally appropriate. And the notion of kids sitting indefinitely to take these tests appears not so much a concession as an implement of torture. 

But even more important is the fact that we won't be fooled. You can't just tell us, hey, we won't count it for a few years. Please drop your organizing and go away. Maybe that's not what the Daily News editorial board had in mind. But it certainly appears to be what Cuomo had in mind.

And to Governor Cuomo, I have just this to say. We did not just fall off the tomato truck from New Jersey.

And we are not going away.

Can Opt-Out Become a Thing in NYC?

It's refreshing to at least read about opt-out in NYC. While the Chancellor grants it lip service, it's pretty clear she portrays the cosmetic changes as significant. Being unable to look into her soul, I can only assume she actually believes it. Sadly, that doesn't speak all that well of either her judgment or how well-informed she is.

Governor Cuomo pretends to be a student lobbyist while pretty much being at war with public education. He vilifies teachers, supports hedge-fund backed charters, and only makes superficial changes in response to public outcry. Sadly almost none of that outcry emanates from my union, undoubtedly the most powerful in the state, the United Federation of Teachers.

All over Long Island, parents get letters from teacher unions not only advising them to opt out their kids, but also including forms making it easy to do so. UFT stalls, hems and haws, and can't decide whether they support the activist opt-out position or Arne Duncan's threat to withhold money from districts that don't sufficiently subject their kids to tests that are developmentally inappropriate, tests that may or may not be used to rate teachers on junk science.

It's very significant that MORE/ New Action is running a presidential candidate who's an opt-out activist, a candidate who travels all around the state speaking to opt-out. UFT Unity tried to buy her off when she went to DC to address the House, but failed. They did manage to get a UFT-Unity rep to voice their watered down, wishy-washy message, but they couldn't buy Jia Lee.

There's still time for the UFT to get on the right side of history. I only worry that it may be too late. Now I'm stunned to hear Mulgrew speak against Common Core, even after he offered to punch our faces if we didn't support it. But he only did that after Cuomo made some new commission to study the standards, change the name, and pretend it isn't the same old crap it always was.

It's gonna be an uphill battle to popularize opt-out as long as our leadership insists on remaining years behind the times. I hope there are whispers in the Unity monopoly that actually see what's going on and what's yet to happen. But given their ardent support of charter schools, high stakes testing, junk science teacher ratings, mayoral control, the ATR, the current APPR, the future worse APPR, pay eleven years late with no interest, higher copays, and more, I'm less than optimistic.

With new leadership, everything can and will change.

Sit While You Wait

I, for one, am pretty happy to see NYC Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña acknowledging instances in which she might opt out her own kids. One is if the kid were a special education student who couldn't possibly keep up with the test requirements. Of course such a kid ought not to be taking a high stakes test, and indeed I've read reports of such kids taking them for many hours. Here's an anonymous complaint that was sent to opt-out activist Jeanette Deutermann:

I am a NYC teacher and I support the opt-out movement and will opt my own children out when the time comes. I proctored a practice ELA exam on Tuesday for the first time since it became untimed. One of my 3rd grade students with Special Needs sat with a 9 question test (6 multiple choice 3 short answer) for 4 hours and 50 minutes. From 9 am-1:50 pm she "worked productively" and continued to say she wasn't done. Lunch was brought to her in the testing room. It was child abuse, plain and simple. I am writing you for fear of retaliation in my workplace since this story pertains to my job and I imagine Ms. Fariña would not approve of me sharing it on social media. I don't know what else to say as there really isn't anything more to say other than repeat what I stated earlier. It's child abuse. The passages and questions were ridiculously inappropriate. Most adults would have had difficulty answering the questions.

 Consider not only the story, but also the fact that the teacher is too fearful to be identified. And this is where we are in NYC in 2016, even as the monopoly Unity Caucus celebrates our evaluation system. No child should have to go through such abuse, and Unity Caucus has repeatedly failed to support our cause, choosing to exercise talking points about how we could lose money if too many kids like the one above were to opt out.

The other category Fariña mentioned was newly arrived immigrants. That touched me a little as those are the kids I see every day of my working life. Of course they shouldn't be taking standardized tests until they acquire English. But that's a long process, and it's severely hindered by NY State's Part 154, which has reduced direct English instruction to high school students by a factor of 33-100%, depending on just how indifferent principals are to these students and their unique needs. It is also dependent on budget, and NY principals are not precisely rolling in cash these days.

I would love to see Carmen Fariña really stand up for these kids, but unfortunately that's yet to happen. I remain hopeful, of course. (I'm on a secret mission to get the UFT to oppose Part 154, and should anything come of it, I'll let you know. Again, I'm hopeful.)

But here's the thing. I think more students should opt-out than just those two groups. I'd use another two groups if I were to identify them. Specifically, I would opt-out male and female students. For anyone who doesn't fall into one of those categories, opting out could be optional. I'm very broad-minded, so I'm OK with that.

There's one more factor I'd like to bring up though. Parents don't need my OK, and with all due respect, they don't need the OK of Carmen Fariña either. It's up to them to opt out their kids or not. There are factors in NYC that make it a little more difficult. A big one is the lack of UFT support. In districts that have union presidents who support opt-out, they tend to work with parents and organize. Sadly, that's lacking here, but you'll soon have a chance to do something about it.

My hope is that both Carmen Fariña and Mike Mulgrew come to their senses and support opt-out wholeheartedly, as Regents Commissioner Betty A. Rosa just did. I hope you won't label me cynical when I tell you I shall certainly sit while I wait for that to happen.

The Choice to Do Nothing

Blogger Sean Crowley asks why more Buffalo students don't opt out, and I have the same question about NYC students. For one thing, UFT leadership has not exactly supported opt-out. I've watched Michael Mulgrew make the same funding threats as our reformy friends in Albany and DC. Leadership pays lip service to parental choice, but doesn't promote it in any way, shape, or form.

Lately we've been getting victory messages from leadership, which is nothing new. UFT Unity smells victory everywhere. When we are judged by all components of Danielson, we win. When we are judged by fewer, we win. When we get a transfer plan that allows teachers to choose schools, we win. When we lose that plan and make displaced teachers wandering gypsies, we win. When we negotiate second-tier due process, when we get money eleven years after most of our union brothers and sisters, when we make a terrible evaluation system even worse, when our health benefits become more costly with no end in sight, we win again.

Personally, I think leadership is hard of smelling. One of the most recent victories it's smelled was that of Cuomo's moratorium on testing, which professional reporters interpret as an end to junk science ratings. Of course it's nothing of the sort, but rather a temporary delay in counting selected elementary tests. In any case, other junk science will take its place, as per state law. The other victory, of course, is a revision of the Common Core standards. Those of us who follow such things, like Professor Nicholas Tampio, strongly suspect it will result in superficial changes, a new name, and the same old close reading crap for our children and students.

As you see, I am not nearly as impressed by these changes as leadership. I think this is a snow job perpetrated by Governor Andrew Cuomo, who is wholly owned by reformy privatizers who donate millions to his campaign. Cuomo has no moral center, and frankly, I have to wonder whether or not our leadership has one either. Of course they can claim credit for these inconsequential changes, and paint them as a victory, but I'm not fooled.

The fact is these changes were inspired by the opt-out movement, and believe me, they aren't fooled either. Jeanette Deutermann, Beth Dimino, and Jia Lee, among many others, are not giving up anytime soon. UFT leadership, having never been on board, has nothing to give up anyway. I suppose it's pretty easy for them to declare victory based on shallow gestures they had no part in, a lot easier than taking a stand for working teachers and the children they serve.

The title of this piece refers to a new and fraudulent movement the reformies are pushing, one mentioned in Sean's piece. There's new "opt-in" talk, designed to diminish the good work of advocates for students and reasonable education. Their argument is that 80% of our kids opted in to testing.

That argument is absurd. Sitting for the status quo is not a choice unless you know there is an alternative. I'd bet dimes to dollars that most families in NYC send their kids to school and have no idea they have a right to opt out of anything. It's different in communities on Long Island, pretty much the epicenter of opt-out, Long Island unionists and parents are keyed into this a whole lot more than those in NYC. That's a direct factor of the UFT leadership keeping its collective head purposely in the sand.

I hope they pull it out. I will send them positive vibes, but just in case that doesn't work out, I'm running against them with MORE/ New Action. Vote for us and it will be just that much harder for them to keep pretending we don't exist.

You Can Fool Some of the People Some of the Time, but You Can't Fool Opt-Out NY

Even as UFT leadership breaks out the champagne over NY State's largely meaningless Common Core recommendations, Governor Cuomo ought to keep worrying. Because the fact is UFT leadership has played virtually no part in opt-out. They've delayed and prevented meaningful resolutions, and backed up reformy claims that aid would be withheld if not enough kids took tests that Cuomo himself called meaningless, except for rating teachers.

Even if these tests are temporarily decoupled from rating teachers, and even if they change the name of Common Core, opt-out activists will not simply fold their tents and agree to Governor Cuomo's sleight of hand. Not everyone is willing to declare victory every time a demagogue offers lip service. I have no idea why UFT leadership is so anxious to do so, but their need to label absolutely everything and anything as a Great Victory limits their repertoire of responses.

While UFT is willfully and chronically out of touch, our brothers and sisters in PJSTA keep their eyes open all the time and offer a much different interpretation of the task force recommendations. Their President, Beth Dimino, is a tireless advocate for children. She's been an active participant in opt-out, and had no problem whatsoever speaking truth to John King, even as myopic UFT leadership scrambled for that ever-elusive "seat at the table."

You'd better believe, if Cuomo hasn't fooled Beth Dimino, he hasn't fooled parent leaders of opt-out either. Opt-out claimed 20% of New York's children last year, is spreading by leaps and bounds, and aims to get closer to 50% next year. The fact is Cuomo's committee recommended that state test-based junk science be placed on hold for a few years, but allowed the testing to continue anyway. There's not a whole lot of motivation for parents to allow their kids to sit for tests that have no meaning for anyone whatsoever.

A big argument UFT leadership trots out as to why we need this testing is that civil rights groups endorse it. If that is the case (and I'm not completely persuaded it is), then the remedy is to educate said groups as to what these tests actually do. If we wish to correct societal inequality, we certainly won't do so by ignoring poverty and scapegoating teachers and schools. As long as UFT leadership accepts this preposterous assumption, we are part of the problem. We need to stop buying into false  reformy assumptions so that Andy Pallotta can buy tables at Cuomo fundraisers.

We need to take a stand with the opt-out movement, a true grassroots movement fueled by truth, passion and a desire to do what's right for our children. If Michael Mulgrew and his loyalty-oath signing sycophants are unwilling or unable to do the right thing, they should move over and endorse opt-out activist Jia Lee for UFT President.

Merryl Draws a Line in the Sand

Merryl Tisch, who maybe taught in a religious school sometime, or something, is more or less in charge of education for our state. This is particularly true since Reformy John King got promoted and is now spreading reforminess for the whole country. Ms. Tisch supports Common Core wholeheartedly, and toured the state with Reformy John to pretend to listen to public school parents and teachers. Of course, she didn't, because they are special interests.

Tisch opposes opt-out, because tests are part of life. It doesn't matter whether the tests cover what kids learned, and it doesn't matter if neither teachers nor students know what's on the tests. It doesn't matter that teachers are sworn to secrecy about the contents of the tests and risk their jobs if they breathe a word to anyone. It doesn't matter that the tests are never returned to the students and they never find out what they get wrong or learn how they can get it right. It doesn't matter that they set cut scores after the tests are returned to produce whatever results they damn please.

However, when the feds talk about taking money away from NY State, Tisch gets serious.

“I would say to everyone who wants to punish the school districts: hold them to standards, set high expectations, hold them accountable, but punishing them? Really, are you kidding me?” said Board of Regents Chancellor Meryl Tisch.

How dare the feds threaten to deny us money? It's one thing to fire teachers, one thing to test kids to death, but money is money.
— Fake Merryl Tisch (@FakeMerrylTisch) April 22, 2015

While Tisch may know little or nothing about public education, she certainly knows about money. For one thing, she's got a whole lot of it. She's been around money all her life. When there's no money to hire help for the Regents, she hired some, and as they aren't state employees they aren't subject to all those nasty regulations about ethics and stuff. And why should they be? They're only making decisions for millions of public school children, and Tisch wouldn't place her own kids in a public school on a bet. Just not done in her circles. Our circles are the ones on standardized tests for our kids, not hers or Andrew Cuomo's or John King's.

Of course, Merryl Tisch may appear to be standing up for our kids in defending funds. That is likely her motivation for opposing financial disincentives. Tisch has seen the passion that fuels public school parents who stand up for their children, and may well be wary of further invoking or intensifying their already considerable wrath. If she is behind blocking funding to our kids, there are likely torches and pitchforks headed for her castle. If, on the other hand, she makes Arne Duncan the villain, she can not only pass the buck but also feign outrage. It's a reformy win-win.

It's unfortunate that our ostensible representative, the one none of us got to vote for or against, values appearances so much and public education so little. How did we get into a situation where people who know little or nothing about what we do have so much influence? How is it that we don't voice opposition to elected officials until after they're elected? How is it that we don't oppose anti-teacher, anti-public education bills until after we thank people for passing them?

Sometimes I think Merryl Tisch is exactly what we deserve. Please tell me I'm wrong.

No Magic School Bus for You

Since the advent of Common Core, well before Mike Mulgrew offered to punch us in the face for opposing it, I've been getting complaints about it. They don't just come from the teachers, but from the supervisors and pretty much any parent who catches my ear.

I've heard stories of people surreptitiously sneaking into classrooms to photograph textbooks, and people with very young children who had to read about genocide. Not precisely sure 7 is the optimal age to introduce such concepts, but there you go.

The other day I was in earshot of someone whose kid was bringing Magic School Bus books into school, but the school found them unacceptable. Why? Because they weren't non-fiction. Too bad for the kids who love those books, because loving books is no longer rigorous or gritty enough. If you want them to be full of grit, second graders should be reading The History of Cement, from ancient Babylonian times right up to Roosevelt Island. That's the only way they'll be college ready, and Arne Duncan says we need to look second graders right in the eye and tell them whether or not they're college ready.

Most parents who are not insane don't worry much about whether or not their second graders are college ready. Of course Arne Duncan doesn't represent them, but rather Bill Gates and whatever education programs he's able to produce from his abundant and fertile hind quarters. That's why we're racing to the top, common coring, judging teachers by junk science, and Danielsoning our blues away. And not to put too fine a point on it, but who among us has ever seen Arne speak while Bill Gates drank a glass of water?

We are teaching children to hate reading, doing precisely the opposite of what we should be. We are relying on standardized tests and training our kids to pass them rather than to think. Thinking children choose their own books. Discouraging that at a young age is borderline criminal. What is the message we give children when we tell them what they love is prohibited? What will happen to kids who are told to read things in which they have no interest? 

Is that how we reach the proverbial Top we're Racing to? Or will it produce a bumper crop of disenchanted, disinterested, unimaginative drones ready to populate Walmart as associates? I'm grateful my daughter graduated last year, avoiding quite a bit of this stuff. I'd certainly be opting her out if she were still in high school. 

Just for laughs, here's a list of the groups that have passed the I Refuse resolution, as opposed to the watered down nonsense from UFT that endorses "multiple measures," meaning junk science, to evaluate working teachers.

Amityville Teachers' Association
Associated Teachers of Huntington
Baldwin Teachers Association
Bay Shore Classroom Teachers Association
Bellmore-Merrick United Secondary Teachers
Bellport Teachers Association
Bethpage Congress of Teachers
Brentwood Teachers Association
Brockport Teachers Association
Camden Teachers Association
Carmel Teachers' Association
Center Moriches Teachers' Association
Central Islip Teachers Association
Clarkstown Teachers Association
Commack Teachers Association
Connetquot Teachers Association
Deer Park Teachers' Association
Farmingdale Federation of Teachers
Freeport Teachers Association
Fulton Teachers Association
Garden City Teachers' Association
Glen Cove Teachers' Association
Half Hollow Hills Teachers' Association
Hamburg Teachers Association
Hastings Teachers Association
Hewlett-Woodmere Faculty Association
Ichabod Crane Teachers Association
Islip Teachers Association
Kingston Teachers Federation
Lancaster Central Teachers Association
Lake Shore Central Teachers' Association
Lakeland Federation of Teachers
Lawrence Teachers' Association
Levittown Teachers Union
Lindenhurst Teachers Association
Little Flower Teachers Association
Locust Valley School Employees Association
Lynbrook Teachers Association
Merrick Faculty Association
Middle Country Teachers Association
Miller Place Teachers Association
MORE Caucus (NYC)
New Hartford Teachers Association
New Paltz United Teachers
New Rochelle Federation of United School Employees
New York Mills Teachers' Association
North Babylon Teachers' Organization
North Bellmore Teachers Association
North Rockland Teachers Association
North Shore Schools Federated Employees
North Syracuse Education Association
Oneonta Teachers' Association
Orchard Park Teachers Association
Patchogue-Medford Congress of Teachers
Plainedge Federation of Teachers
Plainview-Old Beth Page Congress of Teachers
Port Jefferson Teachers Association
Port Jefferson Station Teachers Association
Ramapo Teachers Association
Rocky Point Teachers Association
Rockville Centre Teachers' Association
Rome Teachers Association
Sherburne-Earlville Teachers' Association
Smithtown Teachers Association
Spencerport Teachers Association
Springville Faculty Association
Shoreham Wading River Teachers Association

I'm grateful for all the union leaders who stand up for public school teachers, parents and children. One day I, too, hope to have one.

Andrew Cuomo—Deadbeat Dad in Chief

There’s an odd drama being played out in New York State this year. Andrew Cuomo, who awards himself the mantle of student lobbyist, has quite publicly refused to support our children. And we’re not talking chicken feed here. Under the CFE lawsuit, Andy Cuomo owes our kids 5.5 billion dollars. In fact, he owes the city alone 2.5 billion. Of course, there was a crisis, and he couldn’t pay for a while, but now that it’s over, where’s the money?

Not only won’t Cuomo pay what he owes, but he’s set preconditions for giving kids even a sliver. In fact, he wants to take power away from the communities he owes and award it to himself. I shudder to imagine what Judge Judy would say to someone who failed to pay child support for years and demanded not only primary custody, but also the right to dictate parenting techniques.

Instead of paying his debts, Andrew Cuomo demands more state testing to rate teachers. This is odd, because studies show that school grades, not standardized test grades, are a better predictor of student success. That doesn’t work for Cuomo, because he can’t control school grades. When the state sets cut scores, it can make it look like 90% of our kids are geniuses or 70% are failing. The governor can either say he’s doing a fabulous job and take credit, or that we’re in crisis and assign blame. Its a win-win as far as he’s concerned.

Cuomo also wants to take control of negotiating contracts away from local school boards and offer some kind of merit pay system, basing teacher pay on the very test scores he will be manipulating. Merit pay has been kicking around for a hundred years and has never worked anywhere. It’s even more absurd when we base it on test scores based on the druthers of Andrew M. Cuomo. Personally, I’d argue that any teacher holding back the good stuff waiting on merit pay merits immediate dismissal, with prejudice.

The governor further demands that communities relinquish almost all local decision making regarding teacher ratings. Under his proposal, 50% of a teacher’s rating will be based on classroom observation. But the people communities choose to run their schools will only get input on 15 out of those 50 points. Thus, Deadbeat Andy will have control over 85% of teacher ratings, while communities are left with largely irrelevant scraps.

Perhaps worst of all, Cuomo wants to place troubled schools into receivership, taking control over schools he determines to be failing. Would they be doing better if the governor paid them the millions he owes them? Could that money be used to address the special needs of these children? Governor Cuomo doesn’t care. He knows better.  Yet those of us who’ve watched NY state work its magic in Roosevelt have abundant reason for skepticism.

Cuomo attacks our Long Island schools, largely regarded as excellent, because it’s the epicenter of the opt-out movement, loudly questioning his beloved tests. But the fact is all schools could do better if Governor Cuomo lived up to his obligations. Suburban communities face the triple whammy of the Gap Elimination Adjustment, Cuomo’s punitive tax cap, and his stubborn unwillingness to fork over what he owes us.

It’s time for this deadbeat to pay up or shut up. If Governor Cuomo can’t be bothered following court orders to support our kids, he’s no student lobbyist. In this country, in 2015, deadbeat dads don’t get to make the rules. 

Opt-Out Rally---Where's the UFT?

Here are some of the presenters at the opt-out forum that took place yesterday in Comsewogue. I got to meet and speak to a few of them. Second from the right is Beth Dimino, the intrepid President of the Port Jefferson Station Teachers Association. All the way to the left is Mercedes Schneider. In the center is Comsewogue Superintendent Joe Rella.

GOP gubernatorial hopeful Rob Astorino was in attendance. Astorino spoke of his opposition to Common Core. He somehow forgot to mention his opposition to gay marriage or legal abortion, or his fondness for charter schools, and still mustered the audacity to accuse Cuomo of dancing around the issues. I certainly hope there is opposition to Cuomo, but I won't be casting votes for the likes of Astorino on this astral plane.

Rella spoke of a tribe in which the overarching question is, "How are the children?" This, to them, reflected on the community. In our state, according to Common Core testing, 70% of our children are failing. This, of course, is an unacceptable and invalid portrait of our State's kids. Rella, when I met him, likened himself to the conductor of an orchestra. He said the teachers were his musicians, that he didn't actually know how to play their instruments, and that couldn't do his job without them. For someone accustomed to the likes of Joel Klein, talking to him was revelatory.

I've read Mercedes Schneider's blog, and noticed her impeccable research. She told us she opposed Common Core standards because she had personal standards, and then called Common Core toxic for its failure to create a knowledge base. Then she told stories of how she'd give her high school kids said knowledge base via telling them stories, and it was very easy to believe. She's got a soft Louisiana accent, and I do believe I could listen raptly while she read a telephone book. But she's also ridiculously intelligent, and that's apparent to any and all who speak to her for more than one minute.

Beth Dimino is rapidly becoming one of my personal heroes, as she is a woman of action. She does not let the grass grow around her feet, and when NYSUT leadership was challenged for the offense of exercising their collective conscience, she made sure to stand up and help. Not the least of this included recruiting me to run against coup leader Andy Pallotta. As UFT was entrenched in supporting those who'd bend to the will of leadership, she found and recruited members from MORE, the UFT opposition caucus, to oppose those who favored the status quo.

And yet, at this event full of brilliant and moving speakers, the sole representative of the UF of T appeared to be me. No one from leadership showed up. I sat in front of NYSUT President Richard Iannuzzi, and two seats to the right of NYSUT Secretary Treasurer Lee Cutler. Two seats to my right was head Badass Teacher Mark Naison. I didn't see anyone from the so-called Revive NYSUT either, now that I think of it.

But even more disturbing than the UFT leadership's absence on this event, and relative silence on opting out was their incredible lack of reaction leading up to the awful budget deal hammered out in Albany yesterday.  Certainly it's important to raise the threshold for estate taxes, because Bloomberg and Cuomo always tell us incredibly rich people are so delicate they'd likely break if you were to touch them. But what was really disturbing were things like this:

...the budget also provided a major victory for charter schools, many aspects of which the mayor has long criticized.

Most significantly, the legislation would require the city to find space for charter schools inside public school buildings or pay much of the cost to house them in private space. The legislation would also prohibit the city from charging rent to charter schools, an idea Mr. de Blasio had championed as a candidate for mayor.

Let's take a look at that. Mayor Bill de Blasio actually ran on the plank of charging rent to charters that could afford it, and won overwhelmingly. Yet that didn't stop Moskowitz and her BFFs from giving at least $800K to Governor Andrew Cuomo. And though they couldn't afford to pay rent, they managed to scrape up millions of dollars to air misleading commercials to drum up sympathy for corporate-backed charters.

Now, it's whatever Eva wants, Eva gets. If de Blasio denies her space in your school or mine, she can simply find whatever space she sees fit and charge taxpayers rent. You see, under Andrew Cuomo, mayoral control is fine as long as it favors his well-heeled BFFs. When NYC elects a mayor who didn't buy the election with 100 million from his own pocket, all bets are off.

I got the chapter leader newsletter last Friday night and it contained not one word about it. Though it was parent teacher conference day, I found the time to call several legislators and urge them not to approve the budget. Though Mulgrew spoke against it after the deal was in place, I find it hard to believe that Shelley Silver was able to approve it without at least his passive consent.

UFT leadership has got a massive email bank and made no effort whatsoever to have members contact legislators. It's certainly done so in the past. There was no call to phone banks, and no significant pushback, if indeed any, to the Moskowitz budget.

And it's likely many teachers and students will suffer its after-effects for years to come. Personally, I'm outraged my kids have to sit in a trailer while Moskowitz can just go out and rent the Taj Mahal for hers, if she sees fit.