Statement of Purpose

There's something about the picture on the left that really touches me. When you think of all the kids who've driven you crazy over the years, especially the ones who were really good at it, it's sometimes hard to understand why. I always say it's their job.

For me, it's easy to forgive kids. The one who caused me the most trouble this year ended up with a 90 average. This kid was particularly perplexing because the behavior simply did not match the very high test average I kept seeing.

You have to remember, I guess, that as a high school teacher you see the kids for a short time, but whatever troubles them follows them home, and everywhere else. You hope that in some small way you've touched them, or relieved whatever troubles them. You can't always know. Unless of course, you're running your room like this:



Personally, I find that painful to watch. I suppose this is the logical conclusion of David Coleman's contention that no one gives a damn how you feel or what you have to say. I guess it's a lot cleaner to have routines like these and rapid-fire drills than it is to run a classroom like I do. I'm sure with my classroom style I could never prepare, say, the North Korean Army. On the other hand, I'd be horrified if my kid (or yours) were in a classroom like that in the video. And, of course, Barack Obama, Bill Gates, Andrew Cuomo, and John King don't put their kids in classrooms like that either.

I teach teenagers, who frequently complain about how much their lives suck. I try to tell them that their lives will only get better, and that being a teenager is likely the most painful part of life for everyone. I'm lucky to be teaching ESL, because I can promise them the quality of their lives will improve if they can learn what I have to offer. I aim to have maximum spontaneous participation without lapsing into absolute chaos, and that's a tough goal. Optimally, I'm kind of just on the edge.

I don't want my kids to be little memorizing martinets. I don't want them to clap and jump at prearranged intervals. I don't want them to spend my class like that, and I particularly don't want them to spend their lives like that.

I want them know that life is unpredictable, full of surprises, full of joy. I want them to know they have a shot at a happy life. I want them to know that whatever bothers them can pass and that they can fix it, bypass it, or overcome it.

It's just awful what these places, these tests, these fanatical ideologues want to do to our children. If we can stop it in any small way, it's well worth doing what we do.

Wayne Barrett Is Shocked, Shocked

It's important to Wayne Barrett that you know he is progressive.

I am a progressive, 

How can you argue with that? After all, that's clear. You are, therefore, supposed to take his argument against union that much more seriously. But that's not all:

...have been one since the 1960s, when I became a New York City public school teacher for a few years and learned that my union, the United Federation of Teachers, was much better at representing my interests than those of the kids I taught. It shouldn't have come as such a surprise.

Wait a minute. Is Barrett stating that the United Federation of Teachers represents the interests of (gasp!) teachers? Now I'm shocked too! But what Barrett also does here is advance the meme that the interests of teachers are counter to those of students. Why aren't we out rallying for more work for less pay? After all, isn't that what the children of America need?

Despite Barrett's boast of how amazingly progressive he is, teacher v. student is precisely the argument you'll hear from Michelle Rhee, Scott Walker, Jeb Bush, Bill Gates, Chris Christie, and virtually all other supporters of corporate reform. Are we to determine, then, that there is no possibility they could be wrong? That appears to be the conclusion. Were Barrett to oppose abortion, gay rights, or a woman's right to choose, I can only suppose there'd be universal opposition to those issues as well. Barrett continues:

Seen through a progressive lens, all that should matter in these school skirmishes is whether a charter, a contract or an employment rule benefits students. Whenever progressive Democrats instead choose teacher power over the futures of minority kids, they are putting a big bucks lobby ahead of a core but comparatively powerless constituency.

It's pretty remarkable that Barrett forgets all the money billionaires Gates, Broad, and the Walmart family have invested in charters. Does he seriously expect us to entertain the outlandish notion that they are powerless? Does he expect us not to realize all the power and money they put behind charters? Does Barrett expect us to ignore the fact that their money dwarfs that of unions, or that Gates' has basically imposed his agenda on the nation, with the full cooperation of President Barack Obama?

Does he expect we don't know the attrition rates of charters? For example, the fabled Eva Moskowitz Academy just graduated its first class. Over half of its students not only disappeared, but were not even replaced. Are we to ignore that, as uber-progressive Barrett did?

You may, for example, have gotten the impression, when the WFP appeared poised last month to nominate charter foe Diane Ravitch to oppose Gov. Cuomo, a charter champion, in his reelection bid, that these nonprofit-run public schools are a Republican hedge-fund conspiracy. That's what the WFP, a sometimes-blunt instrument exploited by the interests that bankroll it, and 75-year-old Ravitch, the adopted guru of the UFT and de Blasio administration, would have us believe.

I wonder why Ravitch's age is of any relevance to Barrett's argument. Nonetheless, it's one of the most preposterous arguments I've ever seen, particularly if Barrett is as progressive as he claims. There's no evidence whatsoever that Ravitch was poised to win the nomination, and if that's not clear to you, you can ask Zephyr Teachout. Teachout lost the nomination, and it's pretty clear the teacher union did not support her.

As if that's not enough, the fact is the UFT, far from labeling them a "Republican hedge-fund conspiracy" not only supports charter schools, but has opened and co-sponsored them. AFT made Bill Gates the keynote at its convention. UFT and Ravitch differ on not only issues like charters, but also mayoral control, Common Core, and VAM ratings, all of which UFT has supported and Ravitch has opposed.

It's remarkable that someone as "progressive" as Barrett fails to comprehend the corporate influence on the modern Democratic party.

Even Zephyr Teachout, the Fordham professor who ran unsuccessfully against Cuomo for the WFP designation after Ravitch dropped out and now plans to challenge him in a Democratic primary partly because of his "support of corporate school reform," is the protégé of new charter school backer Howard Dean.

This is classic guilt by association. Barrett, despite acknowledging her opposition to Cuomo's corporate reform, sees fit to extrapolate Teachout's positions from those with whom she's acquainted rather than her actual words criticizing Cuomo's education positions or the obvious act of her opposing him.

Aside from the pyrotechnics involved in constructing Barrett's arguments, it's pretty disappointing that the self-styled progressive appears to oppose higher wages for those of us who, unlike him, have chosen to continue to educate all of New York's children, whether or not they meet the selective standards of Eva Moskowitz. I'd say one bottom line for anyone progressive is supporting working people. And lest Barrett shed further crocodile tears for the children he sees as well-served by charters, they will grow up and need jobs too.

It's my hope that we can offer our children something better than what Walmart has spent millions and millions creating for them. And like many of my colleagues, I'm poised to support real progressives to counter the Walmart message.

Alert: $1,000 Signing Bonuses and Delays in Teacher Taste-Testing of Rotten Common-Core Pie

I received two e-mails from UFT President Mulgrew yesterday.  I'm sure he's pretty much trying to allay our fears that we're "totally screwed" before we leave for summer break.  First, in an early morning e-mail sent on behalf of President Mulgrew and Chancellor Farina, I learned that the $1,000 signing bribe bonus will hit our direct deposit before the end of the month.

I know for many, money goes a long way towards buying loyalty.  In my mind, it doesn't come close to making up for the second-class due-process rights of ATRs or the inclusion of merit pay to divide membership.  But, then, call me #151.  After many years of waiting, I wouldn't have minded waiting for something more worthwhile.  I voted, "No."  So, morally, I may not be entitled to that money:  It's "not that I loved the Idea of Working Under a New Contract less, but that I loved True Union Solidarity more."

I received a second Mulgrew e-mail later in the day.  Here's an excerpt:

Dear Arwen,

Governor Cuomo and the State Legislature heard our concerns and have agreed to a two-year pause in attaching high-stakes consequences for teachers to student performance on Common Core-aligned state tests. Everyone recognizes that the Common Core, while the right direction for education, had a terrible rollout. Students aren’t being judged on the Common Core tests and state lawmakers made the smart decision not to judge teachers on those tests either.

Off hand, the news is good.  I was horrified to read Mulgrew's implicit assumption, however.  "Everyone recognizes that the Common Core" is "the right direction for education."  How can he make this claim?  I guess everything to the contrary goes in one ear and out the other.  Does he not know how states are pulling out like it's the plague?  Louisiana pulled out just recently.  I believe only 36 states are still with the CC program.

I don't care how much PD is provided and how many CC-aligned lesson plans are sent along, I don't want the Common Core.  I don't want test companies and data companies profiting off of the misery of little kids.  I don't want to teach to someone's test today, tomorrow or ever, to save myself from professional annihilation--when I already know students living in poverty with language deficiencies and many special needs will never on average surpass the scores of children in wealthy suburbia.

As I think about it, I am sure that America has not so much bought the Common Core as been handsomely paid to adopt it.  As states begin to realize the federal morass in which they are now mired, I am sure many more will agitate for withdrawal.

I have often wondered if all of Bill Gates' money (and all his horses and all his men) had not propped up the Common Core, how far it might have reached.  Bill Gates money has gone every which way, including to the AFT and NEA.  This year, at about the time of the NPE conference in Texas, due to rank-and-file pressure, Weingarten announced the AFT would end its five-year relationship with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.  The states, as well, jumped on board when offered money.  They stood to gain handsome RttT grants.  They are now realizing that the money will run out and they will be left to foot the big bills for implementation.

I have always believed education should be a reserved power, as the Founders intended.  The states must be in the driver's seat.  I believe the closer education comes to the grassroots, the better it will serve community needs and our larger democracy.  Our federal government already has enough business and thorny issues to keep it occupied.  And, I am very worried about much of that business.  Why would I want our federal government taking on even more?  We are not communist and we are not a dictatorship.  We do not need federal hands in every pie.  In my mind, the Common Core is a recipe for one rotten pie and we would all do well to keep our hands and those of our children clear of it!

School Rule--Teachers May Not Talk to Parents

By special guest blogger Nouveaux Pauvres


I am now working at an after school/college prep/tutoring company in a Very Expensive Town in Long Island. To give you an idea of what kind of kids these are, one day I said to one boy, “Pack up, your mom is going to be here soon to pick you up.” The boy said replied, “My mom doesn’t pick me up. Our driver picks me up.” Well excuse me, I didn’t know you had a driver.

Anyway, the place is pretty disorganized. And expensive (for the parents). I guess the parents feel that since they’re paying, their kids get to do whatever they want. This was made abundantly clear to me when on my first day a 7 year old boy was repeatedly throwing himself on the floor and saying “I want to break a bone!" I tried to stop him but he said “You can’t tell me what to do.” Soon thereafter the mom arrived, very swank looking lady. I was so relieved. I rushed up to the mother to try to tell her about her son’s disturbing habit of throwing himself on the floor. To my shock the owner of the place grabbed me and led me away. “Teachers are not allowed to talk to parents!”

“Huh?”

“These parents are very wealthy, and I know how to talk to them, because I am like them. But teachers are not diplomatic enough … just trust me.”

I was gobsmacked. I’ve never had anyone imply that I was too low class to talk to a parent.

Sure enough the kid went home with some chafing on his arms that resulted from him repeatedly throwing himself on the floor. The mom called, irate. The owner wanted to know why this happened. I pointed out to her that I tried to tell the mom exactly how it happened: he was repeatedly hurling himself on the floor. “Hmm, but we can’t tell her that,” she said. Okay then. What would we tell her? “I don’t know,” she said, with a ponderous expression.

The boy is very troubled. He’s 7, but he’s made comments about how much he wants to kill everyone, and then proceeded to tell me in graphic detail how everyone would die. He also told me “I’m going to whip out my weiner and pee in your drink.” I talked to the other teachers about this, they said “oh at least he didn’t say that he wanted to slit your throat, which is what he told me.” But we’re not allowed to tell the parents about this. We’re not allowed to tell the parents anything. No wonder turnover is so high — no one at the company has been working there more than a few months.

Most of the kids are pretty inoffensive. They talk casually about attending country club parties with their parents, and how they have butlers at home who clean up after them. But they’re okay, I can talk to them. Country club parties and Lexus models aren’t my favorite topic of conversation, but whatever. It’s the owner who has decided that apparently, I’m too low class to talk to the parents.

I’m reminded of that conversation between F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway. “The rich are very different from you and me.” “Yes, they have more money.” Well now this needs an addendum: “And they don’t have to talk to teachers."

Little? Or Nothing?--On Cuomo's Common Core Deal

There's a deal in place with Governor Cuomo to shield some teachers from Common Core junk science ratings. This is positive for those who are rated ineffective or developing due to Common Core junk science. Regrettably, those who are rated ineffective or developing due to non-Common Core junk science are out of luck.

John King isn't worried about it because only 1% of teachers were rated ineffective last year. Of course, NYC has 28% of the state's teachers and wasn't rated at all, so that's a significant portion to overlook. But John King's not worried about that. After all, if statistics mattered to John King, he'd be worried that 70% of our children were declared failures by this program whose merits he praises at every opportunity. (Funny how he sends his own kids to a Montessori school, where they won't benefit from this incredible program.)

This is yet another band-aid. First, we temporarily shield the kids from CCSS high stakes. Then, we temporarily shield the teachers from CCSS high stakes. With the incredible statewide anger we saw the King face last year, someone had to do something. The problem is, there's this underlying assumption that the problem is in the rollout. It's the execution, not the program itself. What is this based on?

There's never been any proof that Common Core has any validity whatsoever. It's never been field tested. Perhaps the most extensive field test to date has been the NY State rollout, and that's been an abject failure. What do we learn from this? That we should fail more slowly?

We know what works for our kids. Our kids need good teachers, and we don't measure good teachers by Common Core junk science, by non-Common Core junk science, or by any variety whatsoever of junk science. Despite the druthers of self-appointed education experts like Bill Gates, there are some things you just can't quantify with mathematical formulas. Were that possible, teenagers everywhere would be clamoring for Windows phones.

I don't really mind the band-aid if it will help even one teacher in the state. But a much better program would be to get rid of junk science altogether. To do that, we will have to get rid of the politicians who are in the deep pockets of Gates, Broad, Walmart, et al.

Let's see whether UFT or NYSUT takes an active stand against Quid Pro Cuomo. Bear in mind that doing so does not entail merely sitting out the AFL-CIO nomination, but rather opposing and therefore precluding it. Anything short of that is enabling our "seat at the table." We need that seat as much as we need junk science, just as much as unions need Andrew Cuomo. So wait and see.

But in fairness, I must advise you to sit while you wait.

Chalkbeat NY---All the Reformy News that Fits

I rarely read Chalkbeat anymore. I appreciate that they send me their Rise and Shine every morning, as I'm kind of an ed. news junkie, but I haven't got the time to plod through their ponderous site and figure out what is new, what is recycled, and what is just glitzy nonsense. The comments on the sidebar used to grab me, but they're not there anymore. Nonetheless, when I see links like this one on Facebook or Twitter, I check them out.

Apparently, a bunch of reformy folks got together and criticized the UFT Contract for not being draconian enough. I'm the first to credit the Chalkbeat staff for their keen perception of the obvious. Michelle Rhee's brainchild, TNTP, and whatever Rheeplacement leader they have determine it doesn't benefit kids. Chalkbeat offers typically trenchant commentary:

The criticism is unsurprising...

I imagine someone at Chalkbeat shouting stop the presses, even though it's a blog. Another brilliant pundit suggests that if the city pays teachers more, there will be less money to pay for other things. Naturally I'm amazed by his financial acumen, and grateful that Chalkbeat deemed his insight worth sharing. I would never have guessed if you spent money on one thing you could not spend it on another.

Yet another pundit suggests that people who have relationships sometimes disagree. I was poised to read about how the world would be better if people were nicer, but alas, no one saw fit to inform the reporter.

The thing that most amazed me, though, was that anyone sees a bunch of reformy people saying reformy things as news. Chalkbeat is the outfit that brought us the world-shattering news that 100 E4E members supported more work for less pay, or some other such thing. I actually asked whether anyone could send a petition signed by 100 people and have it merit a story. One of their writers said yes it did.

At the time, NYC was having ESL teachers grade English Regents exams of schools that contained high percentages of ESL students. My large school had more ESL students than many of those schools, but a lower percentage. I got 100 signatures asking that ESL teachers grade ESL papers citywide. It took me about an hour.

Chalkbeat, or Gotham, or whatever they were called that week, had a reporter call me. She asked me for other names to contact and I gave them to her. She never followed up and the story never appeared.

Because, like UFT rallies when they can't be bothered to walk around the block from their office, such things are not reformy enough to tell people about. It's a shame that an education news outlet with such potential sees fit to push the corporate junk science agenda rather than informing those of us who really care not only about education, but also the overwhelming majority of American kids being educated.

On Class Size--Night and Day

I taught two double-period classes this year. One had 32 kids and the other had 14.

I had a great year with both of them, to tell the truth. But they had quite different characters. The prime difference was that the large afternoon class required a lot of handling. I go quiet when I'm not happy. I stare the class down until we can continue. Every moment spent staring is a moment of instruction lost.

It was particularly tough this year because of four personalities in the PM group. None of them were bad kids, and three of them passed, but they were all problematic in their way. The most troublesome was a young woman who seemed to require my attention every minute. She had a piercing voice that could not and would not be ignored. She also had a very high average.

I tried contacting her parents, but they were pretty tough on her. She'd come in and go silent for two or three weeks. I found that even worse than being interrupted and basically put up with her for the rest of the year. It's perhaps my most significant defeat as a teacher. (Don't tell my students, please.)

Another kid basically could not sit still. Another could not refrain from speaking his first language. Actually there were two kids like that. Neither could comprehend fully that when I said the class was all English, I really, really meant it. In a way, it's understandable. Imagine yourself sitting in a foreign country with 25 English speakers and having some guy tell you that from now on you couldn't speak English. It's a hard sell, but my job is a hard sell.

Here's the thing, though--in the morning class I had a few very outgoing personalities too. In fact, one of my PM problems had been transferred from the AM class, and he was passing the AM class at the time. I knew moving him into the other class would be trouble.

But in the morning, I could let the kids say what they liked. I could let them speak as much as they liked. There was no place to hide and speak your foreign language, and it was rare that anyone even tried. One girl, who I think would have failed the PM class, was able to pass largely due to excellent participation. What was amusing in the morning, sadly, would have needed to be shut down in the afternoon. I think that was the case with several of my PM kids.

I like to encourage communication. It's one of my prime responsibilities as a language teacher. While I've got very few good things to say about Mike Bloomberg, one great thing he did was liberate teachers like me to place our classrooms in horseshoes. Before he made his much-despised push for that, you'd need special permission. Now I push the seats the way I like them, the next teacher pushes them how she likes them, and no one seems to care all that much.

But a few months into this school year, I pushed my PM class back into rows so as to hinder conversation. It was simply unworkable otherwise. Throughout the year I frequently reassigned seats. Nothing was ever quite perfect. But I know one thing--if my PM class had been split into two groups, I'd have been able to give them more attention. I'd have been able to indulge my louder kids a lot more. I'd have been able to make them love English more.

Making them use and love English is kind of my prime directive. It's very important for my kids, particularly if they choose to stay here. I'm absolutely sure I could do it better with class sizes of 25, or ideally 20. One thing I've noticed is whenever the most verbal kid leaves, another kid steps up and becomes the most verbal kid.

I would like to let each and every student of mine to step up and get a chance to be as verbal as possible. How about it, Mayor de Blasio? Chancellor Fariña? Shouldn't we reduce class size every half-century or so?

UFT Unity's Solidarity v. Real Solidarity

I read in NY Teacher that our contract places parents and "educators back in the driver's seat in our city's public schools."  I find the claim humorous.  I doubt UFT Unity asked many parents what they wanted and I know they certainly didn't ask me.  The lack of democracy in my Union is for me, perhaps, the single most depressing aspect of this whole educational war over "reform."  The people who are supposed to be protecting me forge ahead, caring little to listen to my concerns or those of the rank and file.    

When UFT Unity says "Solidarity," what exactly do they mean?  

1.  Does solidarity mean signing a loyalty oath to uphold Unity policies come hell, high water, your conscience or the differing views of your constituency? 

If that's solidarity, I am sorry for democracy.

2.  Does solidarity mean voting for a contract for which you have never seen the M.o.A. (the 300-member Contract Committee and the Executive Board) or for which the M.o.A. was only released on the eve of the vote (Delegate Assembly), allowing little time for any delegate or his or her constituency to digest it?  If solidarity means having so little faith in your own ability to analyze things or so much faith in Unity's ability to spoon feed grown adults, I cannot stomach that flavor of solidarity.  

3.  Does solidarity mean looking the other way when the contract enshrines principles like selling out your workforce with a second-tier, due-process ATR status, test-based accountability, merit pay and more PD at the expense of time with the children?

If that's solidarity, I'll leave it!

4.  Does solidarity mean forging a pre-election system that gives retirees, many of whom are far removed from the current onslaught against public education, even more voting power in leadership elections (when most unions don't even allow their retirees to vote)?  Indeed, Unity won the majority of its votes from retirees--who must have golden memories of a very different Unity than the one I know.  Does solidarity mean removing the vote for District Representatives from the rank and file?

If solidarity means muting the voice of the current membership, you can keep your solidarity.  

5.  Does solidarity mean sending out Unity propaganda as you brand ed bloggers (except your own) as myth makers, but won't even engage in debate to point out those myths?  

If solidarity means censorship, I say to hell with it.  

6.  If solidarity means sending reps to every school to sell the contract instead of canvassing the rank and file prior to negotiations to see what it wants and listening to its concerns (as in Chicago), then I say I've already had too much of your trickle-down solidarity.

7.  If solidarity means having delegates spread fears that the contract is the best we can do and they can become #151 on some line if they do not like it, then I say the word "solidarity" is an insult.

8.  If solidarity means buying the loyalty of your own delegates through double pensions, whopping salaries for after-school office work and perks, including nice vacations to AFT conferences at which Unity reps must close their minds to a spectrum of views as they raise their hands at the appointed time, then I say God help us all.

9.  If solidarity means never having to say you're sorry for things like mayoral control under Bloomberg and 22 domains of Danielson, then I am sorry for your brand of solidarity. 

10.  If solidarity means selling out our brother unionists by setting a pattern and supporting politicians who would lie to us and then destroy our union, then solidarity spells suicide!

In my mind, "solidarity" means:

1.  Delegates must encourage the rank and file to educate itself on current national threats to education.

2.  The needs and concerns of the rank and file must be valued by the UFT.

3. The rank and file of the UFT must help set the terms of the current educational debate.

4.  The rank and file must be encouraged to build its bonds with parents, community members, concerned activists and unionists to identify and support common causes.  Indeed, we all must help set the terms of the current debate, not the businessmen who send their kids to elite, private academies and not an elite cadre of union leaders well-removed from the realities of NYC teachers.

5.  Membership must be empowered to act.

If Unity really cared what we thought, it wouldn't build a buffer of retiree votes around itself  to muffle the voice of its active membership.  It wouldn't put its faith in loyalty-oath swearing, reflex-hand raising caucus members who don't seem to care that Unity doesn't value their independent thought enough to allow them adequate time to even digest the M.o.A.  

I will not accept solidarity on terms that stifle my voice.  When only 17% of current membership cares to vote in leadership elections, and leadership seems unfazed so long as it is reelected, there is no "solidarity," only sickness. 

Teacher Season Begins Nationwide

In the wake of Vergara, corporate reformers are smelling blood in the water, and see this as the time to pounce. How else would you explain the sudden return of education expert Campbell Brown to the tabloids, and the banner article on the cover of yesterday's Post? (I'm not linking to it.)

The recipe is quite simple. Take a few cases, sensationalize them, and apply them to every member of a group. This sort of argument resonates with the public. I hate that group of people. They get too many privileges. Who the hell do they think they are wanting to sit in front of the bus?

And no, I do not see the distinction between using this line of argument against teachers or against racial or ethnic groups. I'm honestly not certain the Post, or the DOE even knows what a bad teacher is. Thus, they grab whatever they can find, blow it up to define the teacher they pick, and then display that image as representative of all teachers. That's simply ridiculous.

When demagogues like Bloomberg pack children like sardines into trailers, hallways, bathrooms and worse, these self-appointed protectors of our children are completely silent. When money-grubbing parasites establish virtual charters in which kids don't even turn on their computers, you hear crickets. When the saviors of the universe, the charter school owners, fail to take in kids with extensive special needs, when they make parents jump through hoops, when they indulge in practices that exclude those who need the most help, that's fine as long as Eva Moskowitz can be compensated at a higher rate than, say, the President of the United States.

This is only the beginning. And unfortunately, PR is one area in which the UFT is even worse than other areas. I've repeatedly asked UFT to step up and work with the press, but they tell me they're afraid it will backfire. In fact, it's tough to imagine worse PR than what we get nowadays. I can find an outrageous misrepresentation, give it to the UFT, watch them do nothing, and write about it myself. Mind you, they actually pay people to deal with the press.

When my school was in danger, I courted the press. We were covered in every major paper and even made the nightly news. Bloomberg and Klein even acknowledged us on TV. Sure, they lied and twisted the truth, but that's what demagogues do. These things can be done.

The only thing is they can't be done by timid people whose concept of doing the right thing revolves around loyalty oaths and gala luncheons. It's rather pathetic that none of the brain trust at 52 Broadway can conceive of anything better than what is, for all intents and purposes, nothing.

Go from "Grossly Ineffective" to "Highly Effective" Overnight

Advertisement

Feeling out of sorts and grossly ineffective in your inner-city classroom?  Do students occasionally hurl objects at you?

"Vergaraitis" getting to you? Afraid you'll be booted from your job after twenty years of hard service? Want to become Highly Effective overnight?  We have a school for you!

The problem was never you. It was your students.  As long as there are public schools, you need never face the neediest kids again! 

KIPP has rules:

We have rules, too. And children who cannot follow them will be "counseled out."  

And, we also have rules for you:

Coming soon to a location near you,thanks to colocation rights!

The Amazing Disappearing Mr. Astorino

A few months ago, I went to an anti-testing demonstration at Comsewogue High School. One of the speakers was gubernatorial hopeful Rob Astorino. Astorino spoke forcefully against Common Core, to the overwhelming approval of the crowd. Cuomo was awful. He was dancing around the truth. He supported this awful testing program. Who needs someone like Andrew Cuomo?

And no one really disagreed. Only while Astorino was ridiculing Cuomo for dancing around the issues, he somehow forgot that he himself opposed a woman's right to choose. His enthusiastic support for charter schools somehow never made its way into his speech that day.

It also slipped his mind that he opposed gay marriage. That was fortunate, because many in the crowd could have suffered a distinct slip in enthusiasm had they known that. In fact, it's pretty well-known that the Tea Party shares pretty much the same sentiments, and they wouldn't be likely to make much headway in NY without wearing a fairly convincing mask.

But there's even more reason to be wary of the slippery GOP candidate. Astorino opposes the Triborough Amendment, and wrote an op-ed in the NY Post explaining why. Astorino, like many tabloid writers, maintains that collectively bargained step increases are in fact raises, and wants an end to them while contracts are being negotiated. He claims working people have zero incentive to come to the bargaining table. Ask UFT teachers who waited over five years for a raise and then voted for delays and givebacks whether or not that's so.

He further claims having municipalities hold up the terms they've negotiated is a drag on the economy. Astorino also rails against retroactive increases. If working people have to wait years to get a contract, too bad for them. Astorino is worried about increasing health care costs. Why should cities have to absorb them simply because they can't be bothered negotiating with unions?

If you read the whole piece, despite Astorino's absurd claims he isn't anti-union (no doubt the zillionaires who financed Vergara weren't either), he wants government to hold all the cards in negotiations. In fact, he wants government to have zero incentive to negotiate with public sector unions. Why should they, really, when they could simply freeze wages forever and continue to expand deductions for health care costs? Eventually unions would owe municipalities for the privilege of coming to work, and we could revive that whole, "owe my soul to the company store" thing.

So be careful what you wish for when saying, "anybody but Cuomo." Would Cuomo dump the Triborough Amendment if he could? Absolutely. The only thing I can say in Cuomo's favor is that he's at least obliged to pretend to be a Democrat now and then.

Will the Vergara Case Make Us Rich?

By Special Guest Blogger Rolf M. Reformeo

I read the "tentative decision" in the Vergara case.  The concluding paragraph quoted my hero, Alexander Hamilton.  Having been so inspired, I will inform you of my "tentative decision" by introducing two more quotes of Mr. Hamilton:

"When the sword is once drawn, the passions of men observe no bounds of moderation."  And, "I think the first duty of society is justice."

Lend me your ear and listen to the relentless logic of my arguments for justice.  In the Vergara Case, Judge Treo pointed to Brown, Serrano I and II, and Butt (p. 2) to justify the court's interference in the realm of education in the name of securing equality of educational experience.  I could not agree more that the "quality of  teaching is what matters most for students' development and learning in schools" (p. 7).  All sides confirmed that grossly ineffective teachers undermine the ability of students to succeed.  According to the evidence provided by Dr. Chetty based on his "massive study," a single year spent with a grossly ineffective teacher "costs students $1.4 million in lifetime earnings per classroom" (p.8).  These ineffective teachers who can only be removed by a "complex, time-consuming and expensive" procedure (p. 13) place a "disproportionate burden on poor and minority students" (p. 8).  

I propose a class(room) action suit.  So long as the statute of limitations has not passed, many people are due a heck of a lot of back pay.   I can recollect some pretty ineffective teachers in my past.  I met one years later and he apologized to me.  He had been undergoing cancer treatment and sapped of all his energy that year.  Oddly enough, he was my global history teacher and, now, I spend much of my life teaching the global history I never learned in his classroom to other students.  Oh, the irony of it all!  Imagine how much better I might be at teaching global history if he had been fired for suffering from cancer that year!  Society owes me something!

There was another teacher who was on the cusp of retirement.  He made sure to enjoy as many of his allowed absences as possible that year.  He was a teacher you didn't mess with though because he came to school with a gun in his briefcase.  He was my law teacher.  Although there was no regents for me to ace in his class, I finished with my only average of 100 in my whole high-school career.  I'm mighty glad I didn't have to argue grades with this gun-toting teacher!  But, imagine how much better I might have done if he'd only been fired (I don't mean his gun).

I'm sure you can remember many teachers who might have done a heck of a lot better by you.  Perhaps some were pregnant and left you stranded with a sub at the mid-year point.  Maybe they just should have been fired.  Why should we care if Mom and baby are put out in the street?

Stop and think about it.  If you had at least two bad teachers in your school career, thanks to Mr. Chetty, I can tell you that's $1.4 million per classroom for each year.  Let's imagine a crowded classroom of 34 students.  Now, that's $41,176.47 I am owed by the state for failing to provide me a spiffy teacher in just one classroom.  By the way, if my arithmetic is wrong, just blame my "grossly ineffective" math teacher, but realize you now owe me more in reparations!  Now, if I've had two such teachers, I'm not sure if the law of diminishing returns or the multiplier effect "kicks in."  Can you tell I had a great Economics IB teacher?  Regardless, I do have a feeling I'm going to be owed a heck of a lot of money.  Come to think of it, we're all owed that much and much more.  

So, join me in a class(room) action suit to reclaim all the earning potential that has been so unjustly stripped from us!  If we can only secure some of this money it might help offset the pension they intend to rob from us next!

California Judge Strikes Teacher Tenure in Vergara Case

Details here. Could copycat cases be edging toward the east coast? This is the sort of thing that AFT keynote speaker Bill Gates would spread like cancer if he had half a chance.

On the other hand:

They are likely to appeal the lower court decision, and a final resolution could take years.

It's quite clear to me the zillionaires who brought this case don't give a damn about California kids, our kids, or any kids of the bootless and unhorsed. This is a head on attack against union from the usual suspects. If LIFO is unfair for teachers, how can it be fair for anyone else in a union? Apparently, it's better to rely on the opinions of junk science purveyors like Gates, Cuomo, and Duncan.

I have a lot of issues with our union but I'm absolutely certain we're better off with it than without it. It's time for unions to take a strong stand, not that this is anything new. Without seniority or tenure protections we might as well all go work for Eva Moskowitz.

I was pretty upset when UFT partnered with Steve Barr and Green Dot to bring his union-lite, no tenure, no seniority crap to NYC. If things like this are permitted to spread teaching will be a step up from Walmart associate, if that.  It is not ultimately helpful to our students to turn an available and worthwhile career into crap.

But there's big money in the US set on doing just that.

It's time to stop appeasing these people. It's time to stop throwing them mayoral control here, VAM there, and Common Core somewhere else. It's time to stop saying, "OK, ATR teachers can have a second-tier due process." It's time to stop claiming such things aren't tremendous givebacks for which we gain absolutely nothing in the long run.

It's absolutely clear what corporate reformers want, and no seat at any table is worth playing their game. It ends with knives in all our backs.

Fred and Wilma

My afternoon class is a little crazy. Of course I pride myself on being the craziest person in the room, but there are a few kids who give me a run for my money. For the purposes of this blog I'll call them Fred and Wilma.

I usually seat my classes in a horseshoe so as to encourage dialogue. I've moved this class into rows so as to impede it a little. And I've carefully calculated where kids should go. This is very tough to do because 90% of my students speak the same first language, and it's literally unnatural for them not to use it. But my job entails battling nature at every turn.

I do get quite a bit of English out of this group. But I get it at odd times. Fred likes to speak his first language, and I've moved his seat on multiple occasions. There are really no places to put him where he won't find people with whom he can speak. His verbal English is not bad, but he can't seem to control himself. The odd word in his first language comes out here or there, now and then, but several times in every class.

Wilma is different. She'll speak English all day long, but has a voice that can cut through anything, and she's not afraid to use it. She's challenging because she has a 95 average, and is likely as not the smartest person in the room. My go-to remedy for overly loud students is calling the home, but for her it's problematic. Last time I did that, her parents took her phone away and she sat in the class for two weeks with her arms folded, refusing to utter a word. I found that a lot worse than her outbursts.

But she's got a sense of decorum. For instance, she knows people aren't supposed to shout. And if anyone does, she will shout, "Stop shouting!" to that person loudly enough that the walls shake. Bright though she is, the irony of that escapes her utterly. She just can't help herself.

Yesterday, after Fred said something particularly amusing to those in the room who understand his language, I got a flash of inspiration. There's a vacant seat in front of Wilma, one of the few students in my class who does not speak Fred's language. I moved Fred to that seat.

I then started asking questions. Wilma is always ready to answer, even if it entails shouting above anyone else who'd like to answer. Yesterday I called on her more than usual. Actually, she'd prefer that I call on her exclusively and ignore everyone else. So she was pretty happy to get this attention. But I asked her to repeat her answers. I told her I couldn't hear. She was only too happy to oblige loud, louder, loudest, and well-beyond. Fred cringed from the seat in front of her.

Both Fred and Wilma understood exactly what I was doing and why I was doing it. I managed to throw Fred off-balance and channel Wilma's energy in such a way that its innate distraction was under my control. It was a miracle.

I wonder whether I can sustain it for the next five class days. It's a little tiring having to think of things like this. But there's always a way, somewhere.

They're Here to Replace Us

That's what Jerry Seinfeld says about our children. They look innocent enough, but their ulterior motives are not remotely hard to figure. To that end, one of my students took over my class last week. She decided she could do as well as me, and commandeered my notes.

Actually she did not do all that badly. The students gave her less of a hard time than they gave me, and were generally amused by her. She understood the material very well. I had to tell her to ask the questions first and call names later. She asked my why and I told her if she said the names first, only that person would actually listen to the question.

Still, I got in trouble. The girl sitting next to me raised her hand and claimed I was bullying her (I wasn't). I was pretty surprised she even knew that word. I had never heard her accuse anyone of such a thing before. The girl teaching the class made me sit in the back. None of that innocent until proven guilty stuff that day. There were a lot of remarks about the troublemaker in back of the class, and corrections made by me were questioned pointedly.

After all, who can trust the guy the teacher made sit in the back?

This was a pretty good moment, the sort of moment that Danielson might rate highly effective. And if you're going to use a rubric to encourage good teaching, it might be a positive thing to which a teacher could aspire. Of course, if you're shooting for one of those 20K master teacher gigs, you'd best have them all the time. (By the way, Mulgrew says these positions are not merit pay because they aren't based on test scores. The reality is they're based on our ratings, which are currently 40% based on test scores. A better argument, if you accept Mulgrew's premise, would be they're only 40% merit pay.)

I don't want the master teacher gig, so I don't have to sit and hope my students take over my classes on a daily basis. But the problem with using Danielson as a rating rather than guidance tool is that highly effective entails circumstances not precisely within your control. Students are simply not predictable, and you will have good days and bad. With particular groupings, any class could lean one way or the other.

I do everything I can think of to make my class a positive environment, and I really try to shape the culture, but I'm just one person. Within the culture of a classroom, one person, depending upon who it is, can make a big difference. Having a kid who's willing to get up in front of the class and take a chance like that is great when a supervisor walk in. On the other hand, one disruptive kid can change the environment a lot too. I had one kid absent from one of my classes on Friday and it made my life a whole lot easier. You don't realize things like that until they come up.

If your classroom is a lively place where kids feel free to express themselves you cannot predict from one day to the next what will happen. That's the kind of classroom I want to be in, even if it's a little noisy from time to time. I don't want the room out of control, but I want it right on the cusp. I always hope I get kids who will work with me so I can leave it right there.

But I never know what's going to happen. I can't just write a lesson plan and make it hit every Danielson bell. A lot depends on the kids who are with me, and I never know what they're going to do. That's one of the reasons I keep coming back.

But Mister, I'm Not Using the Phone for That

There are a whole lot of reasons why we grab our smart phones. I'm as guilty as anyone. Though I wear a watch, I don't trust it anymore. My phone has atomic time or something, and it's always accurate. I will pull it out of my pocket in class to check the time. If a student doesn't know the population of her country or something, I just might ask Siri and have her tell the class.

Students have different reasons they may look at phones. Some of the girls in my classes say they aren't using it to text. They're using it as a mirror. Often it's evident that they're doing just that, so I tell them to put their mirrors away. That's what I tell kids using real mirrors. But that's just one more odd use for the phone.

Many of my ESL students use smart phone programs as translators. This is really helpful in that stand-alone translators, which I almost never see anymore, cost hundreds of dollars. These translators replaced paper dictionaries, which I used to frequently see. The thing is, I don't actually want my kids to depend on translators. Students who use translators are focused on whatever happened when the word came up, and they're completely tuned out of the moment.

Some of my least successful students spent an inordinate amount of time with dictionaries or translators. I tell them they don't need to do this in class, and that if they want to they can sit with a newspaper at home and translate the whole thing. In a live classroom, as in every live situation, they need to train their ears. They'll have ears even if they forget their translators. Also, a lot of translators are notoriously awful, giving my kids words that are either outdated or never used by those of us who are native speakers. Ears are almost always better.

I'm constantly suspicious of kids who have their hands under their desks, and more often than not find them using phones. Sometimes they defend themselves by saying they're using translators, but it's plainly visible that they're texting. Sometimes they think I can't tell they're texting because they're doing it in a language I don't understand.

It's a fact of life. I might place a phone on my desk for a period, but I won't have a phone confiscated unless someone does something really egregious. The cardinal rule in my class is that we use only English, and I don't care how inconvenient anyone thinks that is. Once, a phone rang, and a kid picked it up and began having a conversation in a foreign language. That phone got confiscated. Another time, a kid went into the trailer bathroom and deemed it a good idea to play music the whole class could hear. His mom had to come in and pick up that phone.

I have one kid who pulls out an empty case to distract me. When I call him on it, he proudly turns it around to reveal he isn't using a phone after all. Clever. "Don't bring your toys to class," I tell him, and make him put it away anyway.

With all the uses for a smart phone, I've yet to find the one that makes it OK for kids to use it in my classroom.

The Waiting Is the Easiest Part

It's been over five years since any NYC teacher has seen a raise, despite the nonsense purveyed by tabloids. I've repeatedly read arguments that step increases are raises, from Bloomberg and various teacher-bashing op-ed columnists. That most other city workers got not only step increases, but also actual raises, was neither here nor there.

Now, at last, there is a UFT contract, the skies are all blue, and all the people are singing songs of joy. Except, of course, those who resigned before the contract signing. And anyone who resigns before receiving that fabulous retro, now at a staggering and life-altering 2%. And, of course, those who rose within the ranks to be supervisors, who are now hearing there may be a fight before they get their money.

There's a certain cynicism at work here. After all, neither those who resigned nor those who moved up will likely join the 52% of retirees who decide UFT elections. So who really cares what they do or how they feel?  We've already established second-tier due process for working members of the ATR, so what's it to us if we screw a few thousand people out of money for which they've actually worked? It's not like they're cause make the elite Unity Caucus to have fewer or less gala luncheons.

It turns out, though, that some teachers who resigned actually read the news, and have decided they should be recipients of the money they actually earned. Not only that, but they're now contemplating a class action suit to get that money. And it appears there is precedent:

In May 2001, the Hoosicks Falls school district and local teachers union approved a new contract that included retro pay for the years 1999 and 2000.
The agreement said the back pay only covered current employees, and excluded those who worked those years but then left the payroll.
But 11 former teachers sued the union and the school district for back pay and won.

Maybe it isn't a good idea, when negotiating what is clearly an inequitable monstrosity for working teachers, to simply say screw everyone who can't vote for us. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to promise no increase in health care, publicly label bloggers who questioned the program liars, and then say they weren't actually sure what would happen. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to say people who questioned two-tier due process were against teacher empowerment.

Maybe it wasn't a good idea to browbeat and frighten working teachers into accepting a substandard contract.

Of course UFT leadership never, ever admits fault in anything. That's not the Unity way.

But maybe they should start figuring who'll be responsible for paying all those people who earned that money. I hope they do. And I hope, if I'm still even alive in 2020, that they don't expect me or any of us lowly non-Unity members to pay for their mistakes. Those who signed the loyalty oath ought to all pitch in and show their money is where their mouths are.

Make Someone Happy! Blame a Teacher Today!

Blame the Teachers!  For many years, the thought never crossed my mind that teachers were the single most important factor complicit in the perpetuity of poverty in the United States.  But I guess it makes sense; poverty has been around since the beginning of time and so, too, have poor teachers.  I just never took the time to consider the connection until I listened to Michelle Rhee.  Since that fateful day when my whole world was turned upside down by this new logic, I began to wonder if teachers might not also be responsible for a whole host of other problems.  I have made a list of the top ten problems which I now believe are caused by teachers.

10.  Teachers are to blame for the long World-Series drought of the Cubs.  I know you heard the rumor that it was the Curse of the Billy Goat, but with new facts brought to bear (or cub), I respectfully beg to differ.  After all, what sense does it make to blame a goat?  Blame teachers!

9.  Have you ever had a nagging headache?  You might be tempted to blame dehydration, loud noise or stress.  Just Blame teachers!  It's that much easier!

8.  Have you ever failed to accomplish anything in your life?  Someone might try to convince you that you didn't work hard enough or that you just gave up.  I'm telling you, your teacher was and still is to blame. 

7.  Your computer's gone "kaflooey" and you're thinking it was the link you clicked on from someone overseas asking you for a few dollars to help free the long lost Aunt (you never knew you had) from a false arrest.  I'm telling you the person to blame is much closer to home.  It would be your teacher.  You know the one.  Blame her!

6.  You might want to blame the current administration for the nagging issue of unemployment in the U.S.  Why put the blame on the President's desk when there are clearly so many other factors at work and they are all teachers?    The buck most certainly does not stop with the President.  Follow it to a teacher!

5.  Teachers are to blame for the recent sharp decrease in the bee population.  Forget the theories about new pesticides, bacteria and such.  Rhee is the original "Bee Eater." She's since moved on.  So, find another teacher to blame!  

 4.  Teachers are clearly to blame for Hurricane Sandy.  One has only to ask who benefited from the Super Storm.  Teachers, of course.  Teachers got a full week off from work with pay.  Who cares that some saw their homes submerged?  Blame teachers!

3.  You might worry that Kim Jong-Un will someday wreak havoc in the Pacific with his nuclear testing.  You can't blame North Korea.  The real culprit is closer to home.  You have only to look into a classroom.  Blame the teachers!

2.  Teachers, not carbon emissions, methane, deforestation, chemical fertilizers, and such, cause Global Warming.  I should know.  I am one.  The finger is pointing at me.  The study will be out soon.  Too bad teachers may be harder to ban than aerosol sprays. 

1.  Teachers are to blame for an increase in global terrorism.  And, I'm not talking about all the standardized testing today.  So, if you see something in the classroom, say something!  There may not be a second to spare.

There is no time for a closer examination here, but teachers are probably also to blame for many problems that have plagued our ancestors in history.  Use your imagination and write a revisionist history of the world.  And, whatever you do, don't forget to blame teachers! 

Where Are the Brooklyn Queens Days of Yesteryear?

This is the day when teachers in Brooklyn and Queens hold fond memories of Brooklyn Queens Days past. It was the best holiday in the whole world. No one knew what it was about. Sure there were stories, but they were contradictory and incomprehensible, and no one cared what they were anyway.

You didn't have to travel. There was no cooking. You didn't have to buy gifts for anyone, and no one asked you to do anything. Most of all, you didn't have to go to work.

Teachers in Manhattan, the Bronx, and Staten Island did, of course, and that made it all the more satisfying. Sure, they hated you and everything you stood for, but while they were crawling out of bed at the crack of dawn you were sleeping in, and contemplating where you'd be going to breakfast. Pancakes, maybe? Those ones with all that stuff on them that you wouldn't have time to eat if you were commuting to work? Or should you just sleep until lunchtime? Decisions, decisions.

But then came the 2005 contract, the one that was the bestest ever (kind of like the one that's bringing us that fabulous 2% raise), and just like that, Brooklyn Queens Day, the best day of the year, was gone forever. In its place were a bunch of meetings, PDs, and who knows what else?

Tell the kids they shouldn't be late, because being late is bad, and that's not good, and therefore you should fail them. It will teach them a valuable and indispensable lesson. Is that clear? OK, now let's talk about how we can pass absolutely everyone without exception no matter what. Does that test grade really have to count? Can't you just have them take it again after you've reviewed it? What if you pair the kids who don't know the answers with those who do?

And remember all those domains we made you memorize last year? It turns out that most of them were a waste of time. Yes I know we said they were vital, and that you couldn't possibly be a good teacher if you didn't do these things, but it turns out they're of no relevance whatsoever, and you just voted for a contract affirming that. So this year we're gonna work on these, because these are the only important things in the world, and they will never, ever change. Yes I know I said that last year, but this year I really mean it. Don't question me like that. I refuse to admit it doesn't make any more sense to me than it does to you.

Rest in peace, Brooklyn Queens Day. We miss you. And though the supervisors won't admit it, they probably miss you too. Unless they're from Manhattan, the Bronx, or Staten Island.

Hey, Mr. Mulgrew, Can You Pause the Gloating for a Moment to Consider This?

Dear Mr. Mulgrew,

I think we all knew the contract would pass, not because it was a good contract, but because something looks better than nothing to a demoralized, post-Bloomberg workforce.  It is a sad commentary that we have spent a decade dug into a pit, largely with the overt aid of corporate interests and, now, we are happy for even scraps.  If we dig down much further, Mr. Mulgrew, I'm pretty sure we'll find Mr. Shanker rolling over in his grave. 

I know I really haven't begun, yet, to play my part in this "war" to save public education and the democracy it supports.  I've primarily watched from the sidelines.  Things pretty much played out as I expected with the contract. But I also realize there are many unwritten chapters.  We're living in an epic, Mr. Mulgrew, and many of us will have bigger roles to play before its finish.   

I learned a lot.  The UFT didn't seem to care to ask me or the rank and file much of what we wanted to see in a new contract.  Unity, assuming it knew best, successfully shoved the contract past its contract committee, executive board and D.A., allowing no time for even the pretense of their careful consideration.  I stayed up late that Tuesday night, reading and re-reading the M.O.A.  I'm not sure I understood all of it, but I sure as heck tried.  I doubt many in the D.A. did the same.  I'm sure they read your e-mails though.  So, they knew when to raise their hands.

The Unity propaganda machine rolled well, better than MORE's.  I know of one para who read our CL's letter and told me she was voting for the contract because she didn't want to be #151.  If these are the best arguments for the contract, I feel sorry for the future of our union.  Unity sent its representatives to most schools, purportedly to explain the contract, but actually to sell it.  The contract proposal was originally touted as a big victory.  Then, when this clearly seemed highly questionable, you told us "the cupboard was bare."  We must believe that something is better than nothing.  How can one argue with this logic?

I study mainly the past, but I can tell you a few things of the future.  I can tell you that sometimes when I think on things that happened in the past, I can best understand them in the context of the present.   In the same vein, I believe that the events of today will best be understood in the context of tomorrow.  

Humor yourself and join me for a few seconds on a trip to 2020.  Warp speed!

By 2020, some of us will have left to teach in the suburbs.  Many of us may have left for greener pastures in other careers.  Some of us may become APs.  Some of us will be dismissed.  Some of us will be dead.  Gone is all that retro which, of course, was never a "God-given right."  

By 2020, many ATRs will be harassed, perhaps a very few for good reason, but most for factors entirely outside their control.  We will have a new mayor.  If we don't mobilize soon to support true Democrats, our schools may be closed due to Common Coritis.  We may all become ATRs.  We will fall into survival mode and remain media punching bags.  

By 2020, the merit-pay measure will prove to be an expensive failure.  In any good school, teachers already share ideas and no single teacher has a monopoly on excellence.  By 2020, we will have read a few stories of corrupt "master teachers" in the papers and we will have sat through countless hours of more less-than-edifying PD for which we can now blame our colleagues.  We will all laugh about the ruse.  Maybe our "master teacher" will take us all out and treat us to a few drinks after work to celebrate the absurdity of the entire idea.  We'll have some really good laughs!

By 2020, our current contract will have expired.  We will have now set a pattern of less than ideal pay raises, creating the kind of contract which has made our sister and brother unionists cringe.  When our current contract expires, we will still be awaiting large lump-sum retro payments.  The new mayor may very well point this out and use it as a bargaining chip in his or her favor.

By 2020, the idea of PROSE schools will have shown itself to be highly unpopular.  A few naive idealists may push for the option in place of closure and corporate takeover, but God help them.  I don't expect their noble plans will fare much better than the UFT Charter School (particularly, the middle school) which seems perpetually under threat of having its charter revoked from the state.  In order to achieve the kind of success which current measures of accountability call for, if anything less than a miracle occurs, the school will need to practice all the slimy policies of attrition adopted by the "best" charters.  

By 2020, God only knows what will have happened to our healthcare.  I don't even want to speculate here, but it is a grave concern for all of us.

By 2020, some of the Unity faithful will have worked their way up in the Union.  They will be earning more than their current union salaries which encourage them to look the other way when they're asked to vote up Unity contracts for which they've never actually seen anything in writing.  Kudos to them and their double pensions. 

Mr. Mulgrew, you gave us something--which was better than nothing and you steamrolled it along with your propaganda machine.   We both know the war against the educational deformers is raging as strongly as ever.  We're both on the same side.  And, I'd like to think we're on the same page, just the words are different.  And, I read every word I can.  I hope you do the same  despite the pressures and time constraints of your position.  

By 2020, I'll still blog some, but I'll also be doing a lot more.  By then, the book of this epic educational struggle will have advanced many chapters.  Heck, we're not even through the first book in the trilogy yet.  I could flip ahead some pages, but I don't wish to spoil it too much for you.  Picture the fury of even greater forces fighting the educational deformers!  Will they need to fight you, too, for true democracy within our Union?  

Please don't feel you need to reply here and now.  Just something to think about.  Thanks for your time.    

Pre-K Needs to Be in a Real School, Led by Real Teachers

Considering the Daily News expose of conditions in pre-K facilities, Mayor Bill de Blasio ought to reconsider how universal pre-K should be run. In fact, there's little reason why pre-K ought not to have the same controls, if not more, than existing city schools. There ought to be certified teachers--UFT teachers--in every room.

This article is a great argument against the for-profit corporate education mentality that has infected our collective psyche. Around the country, we offer kids all sorts of third-rate options. There are charters where our children are trained like little martinets, and cyber-charters that collect all sorts of money for kids who may or may not avail themselves of the so-called services they provide.

For our youngest and most vulnerable children, we need more than some half-assed plan to overload the already overloaded and substandard services that are now available. We need to find sufficient space to treat these children better than the million-plus children already attending public schools. We need to find better facilities than those described in the News.

If UFT is paying attention, it will serve not only the union but incoming children by insisting on very high standards. If this is to be the new introduction to school for four-year-old children, it behooves us to make them happy and motivated. We won't achieve that via the Common Core crap we've been shoving down the throats of our older children. Let John King eat rigor and grit for breakfast if he so desires. His kids go to Montessori schools where they're treated as individuals, and our kids deserve no less.

On this day when we're dumping one of the crappiest contracts imaginable on not only our members, but likely those of other unions as well, let's take a new direction and try to do something good for someone. Let's insist our children get quality pre-K, and let's be as demanding of de Blasio as his convoluted junk-science evaluation system is of us. Let's insist that the city add more than the 12 inspectors it now proposes to ensure our children are well-treated.

Let's make sure our children get the same treatment that John King, Bill Gates, Barack Obama, and Andrew Cuomo would demand for their own children. If they're not prepared to offer us that quality, it's one more reason, and a very compelling one, they're not suited to serve our children.

Our kids can and should play make-believe if they like. Let's demand more of our elected leaders.

Dear Mr. Mulgrew--If I Traffic in Myth, Please Tell Me Why

Why wouldn't Mulgrew want his 300-member contract committee to read the M.O.A. (Memorandum of Agreement) before voting?  Why wouldn't he want his Executive Board to do the same?  Why would he want his D.A. (Delegate Assembly) members to receive the M.O.A. only on the eve of their contract vote, allowing them an inadequate amount of time to digest it first? 

Is it that he has so little faith in the reasoning powers of his members or is it that he has so much faith in their ability to rubber stamp?  I hate to ask these questions, but I have to know.  

Why does the UFT pretend to represent its teachers when it drowns out the voices of active members by increasing the votes of retirees?  Retirees do not vote in almost all other unions.  Why wouldn't the UFT care that only 17% of its current membership cares to vote?  Why wouldn't Unity care that more retirees vote than current members during an age in which even Mulgrew has recognized a "war" raging over education?

For most, the 17% vote might spell failure.  For Unity, it seems to spell success.  It keeps Unity in power.  Unity seems to feed off of the apathy of its current members.  This seems to be its strength.  

Mulgrew says bloggers deal in myth.  Mulgrew seems unwilling to debate and expose those myths.  But, could someone please tell me in polite terms:  What are these myths?  I don't want to walk around with a worldview built on myths.  Do you?

I've dealt in ideas all my life.  Use truth and logic.  I don't take kindly to those who try to persuade primarily through the use of fear, the old vote-your-conscience-but-just-remember-you'll-be-#151-at-the-back-of-the-line argument.  I've seen too much of that lately with the contract vote.  

I don't expect Mulgrew to answer my questions.  Perhaps, there is some other powerhouse of a Unity mind though who could answer my questions below and pleasantly put me straight.  I have limited my list to three for the sake of brevity, but if any of my other statements above are myth, please feel free to kindly expose them as well.  
  

1.  Is it a myth that Unity members have signed "membership obligations" (p. 2), adding up to a loyalty oath--which means ultimately they may need to vote against their conscience or the wishes of their constituencies?  Please let me know.  

2.  Is it a myth that the UFT refused to give ATRs a separate chapter, claiming that it would divide the union, while now ATRs have a second-class system of due process which clearly divides them from the rest of the membership?  Can ATRs have their own chapter now as well as a chapter leader?  I nominate Mr. Eterno.  Please let me know.  

3.  Is it a myth that Unity supported mayoral control which proved devastating during the Age of Bloomberg, but moved ne'er a finger to help Mayor de Blasio defend the interests of public-school children in his epic struggle against Eva Moskowitz?  Please let me know.  

Thanks for your time.  

On Danielson Evaluations--Lazy Administrators Do Whatever

I've been receiving a lot of complaints from teachers about ridiculous observation reports that declare them developing or ineffective with no evidence whatsoever. Has this happened to you? You get rated poorly and the comment is something like, "Goes to meetings only when physically dragged there," or "Fails to accept my word as tantamount to that of deity?"

Actually that's unacceptable. Aside from being lazy, it's just using a random quote to buttress the administrator's highly subjective opinion. How does it help you to hear that? If you were really doing something unacceptable, there'd be evidence. Rather than saying, "Questions are of low rigor" the administrator ought to quote the question. Your actual behavior in the class ought to be described.

If you're falling asleep in front of the class, the administrator ought to be saying so, and then tying it to some piece of Danielson. If you aren't, the administrator ought not be quoting Danielson to suggest you are. Danielson should be used to highlight what you actually do, not what the administrator thinks you do, in his or her fertile imagination.

It's not your fault if the administrator doesn't know how to write, and therefore opts not to. It's not your fault if the administrator has happily spent the last decade ignoring everything that goes on in classrooms. Nor is it your fault that administrators now has to write 4-6 observations a year, and no longer has time to sit in an office and ponder the mystery of what they are actually supposed to do in there. (However, if you fail to point out the lack of evidence in a response, that is your fault.)

The job of the administrator is to support you. It's not the job of administrators to plot vengeance against you for not sharing a vision, particularly if said vision entails your working 5 classes in a row, teaching oversized classes, washing their cars, or picking up their dry cleaning. Random quotes from Danielson, whatever PD geniuses may preach for 80 minutes every Monday, will not improve your practice.

Under the new UFT contract, there will be fewer areas of Danielson from which to quote. This may further limit the ability of some administrators to give the appearance they know what they're talking about. However, that is not your problem.

The problem, really, is that of people who can't wait to get out of the classroom. If that's what motivated someone to be an administrator, it's likely that person wasn't the best teacher in the world. If that's the case, how on earth will that person teach you how to be "highly effective?" Danielson, though much-maligned, is not the problem. The problem is the assumption that a rubric precludes subjectivity. Actually, nothing precludes subjectivity. Anyone who already has a bad opinion of you, your teaching, the horse you rode in on, or whatever, will seek text in Danielson to bolster that opinion. That's the nature of prejudice.

Let them pretend to write low inference notes. Or not. But the fact is the new evaluation forms, in the wrong hands, are every bit as subjective as the old ones.