The Wonders of Classroom Technology

After writing a whole lot of awful things about Skedula, I was asked to work on a UFT committee examining electronic gradebooks. It was kind of cool. I met a lot of people using various different programs, and heard a lot of good and bad things about them. I decided to really assess the program, I had to use it. So for about half a year I used both it and a paper book as backup.

I have to say, while I still find Skedula to be less user friendly than any program I'd buy or use on a regular basis, it was generally convenient. For one thing, as an ESL teacher, I tend to get new students pretty much all the time. A paper gradebook gets pretty messy as you add and drop names, erase things, and white out others. Online, everything is alphabetized, and I don't have to do updates.

Of course if you have multiple sections in a classroom, it gets increasingly complicated. Right now, for reasons I cannot fathom, there are maybe six sections in my morning class. That's not the real problem, though. For some reason someone has renamed the sections and I've lost all my grades. This has happened to me before when one student moved to another section, and I was able to retrieve the grades pretty easily. The other day I sat with an administrator and we managed to find my assignments, but they didn't have any grades attached to them.

I may or may not retrieve the grades I've been keeping these last few weeks, but losing them has made me a little more cognizant of the value of paper. After my first semester keeping records in two places, I've relied entirely on the program. I figure if my school pays them thousands of dollars, it's on them to keep the records. If they can't do something that fundamental, there's not a whole lot of value there.

I'm now entering my second year of trailer exile. For most of last year, I had a SmartBoard that didn't work at all. I used to hang my jacket on it and remind the kids I was using the SmartBoard. When my supervisor came in, I noted that I used it every day and demanded credit for innovative use of technology. (I don't believe I got any.)

Then the principal went and put in an LED screen that actually worked. I was shocked. I mean, there it was, the computer I'd never bothered to use, and it was actually capable of displaying stuff. So I talked to a young Chinese teacher who explained it was great using PowerPoint to display aims, assignments, and teach vocabulary. I looked at her presentations and thought I could do that. But I was much smarter than her, I thought, so I did things differently.

First, I used Apple Keynote rather than PowerPoint, because I read somewhere it was much cooler. But when I tried to open it on the Mac Mini in my classroom, I learned that it was an older version and couldn't read my presentation. A tech teacher showed me how to convert a Keynote presentation to a PowerPoint, so I put the PowerPoint on my thumb drive and was using that for a few weeks.

For some reason, the display in my classroom this year is much harder to manipulate. It's really hard to see the mouse icon on this screen. Also, there's a nag screen that comes up saying IOS wants to make changes and demanding an administrative password that I don't have. That's kind of irritating. More irritating, though, was when the computer stopped recognizing the mouse and turned itself into a useless piece of junk.

It happens I walk around with a MacBook Air all the time. I bought it a year ago and I have no idea how I ever lived without it. So I was able to use my presentation on the 13 inch screen, but it really sucks having to walk around and show it to a large class. (I did it again in the afternoon, and I can tell you it also sucks having to walk around and show it to a small class, though not as much.)

I've had teachers come up to me and complain that the machines in their room were broken, and that it was impossible to do their lessons as a result. A few years ago I thought about how lucky I was that I had no technology and therefore couldn't use it. Now I think how important it is, when you do use it, to have a backup plan, or be able to devise one on the spot.

And here's what the reformies don't or won't realize, when they say idiotic things like, "Let's just make CDs of great teachers and fire all the live ones." The machines break, but we don't. The machines do one thing, but we do everything. No matter how advanced the tech gets, that's not gonna change.

Mulgrew Misses Mark in Daily News

I'm reading Michael Mulgrew's piece in the Daily News and agreeing with much of it, but I find myself confused by the great disparity between his words and actions. I agree, for example, that it will not be possible to Fire to the Top, and that getting rid of teachers will not help our students. Mulgrew gives examples of schools that have had tremendous turnover. I can understand why people don't want to work in these places. In fact, as someone who absolutely loves being a teacher, as someone who hates to say this, I even understand why people don't want to teach at all.

Mulgrew advocates fixing schools that are perceived to be broken. A bigger problem, though, is determining precisely what that fix entails. If, for example, we are judging these schools purely on test scores, it's important we get to the source of the low scores. I'm not sure, from the column, that Mulgrew rejects the notion of failure based on test scores. In fact, Mulgrew helped craft the current APPR system, the one that is making working teachers almost universally miserable. Mulgrew not only accepted test scores as a factor to rate teachers, but went so far as to thank the Heavy Heart Assembly for accepting Andrew Cuomo's plan to exacerbate the situation, a plan the governor wanted specifically so as to fire more teachers. Make no mistake, placing the burden of proof on the teacher at 3020a hearings can and will achieve that goal.

Now Mulgrew seems to think the whole firing teachers thing is problematic. Why, then, did he not lay down the gauntlet when Cuomo turned the heat up on junk science evaluation? In fact, why didn't Mulgrew take a position against Cuomo when Zephyr Teachout opposed him in not one, but two primaries? Come to think of it, why didn't Mulgrew oppose him when he ran the very first time, a Democrat proclaiming he would go after unions? Isn't that fundamentally counter to what we stand for as unionists?

Mulgrew doubles down on the assumption these schools are failing, and prescribes the following:

Customize curriculum and instructional practice. Traditional teaching methods and approaches haven’t worked in these schools. The system has to abandon off-the-shelf curriculum, revamp the training that teachers get and focus on delivering lower class sizes, individualized instruction and curriculum that’s tailored to the students’ current knowledge and skills.

Is this not the same Michael Mulgrew who said he would punch our faces and rub them in the dirt if we tried to take his precious Common Core from him? Does Mulgrew actually assume that it is "teaching methods and approaches," rather than outside factors like poverty, special needs, or lack of English ability that cause low test scores? (To his credit, Mulgrew later asks for wraparound services, which actually may help.)

I also strongly agree with Mulgrew that smaller class sizes are key to delivering better education. But despite the valuable lip service provided here, the only instrument that has regulated class sizes for the thirty years I've been teaching has been the UFT Contract. In all that time, and for decades before, neither Mulgrew nor any of his predecessors has even tried to negotiate down what are, in fact, the largest class sizes in the state of New York. Mulgrew may argue that we went for money instead, but we haven't seen a whole lot of that, and what we will get will be ten years after the overwhelming majority of city workers got it.

Here's the thing--history has established there are many ways to raise test scores. You can cherry pick the students. You can dump those who don't work out. In fact, you can dump entire cohorts, like Geoffrey Canada did, and American Express will still pay you to do commercials. Or, of course, as we're seeing more frequently lately, you can cheat.

As none of those options are available to us, Mulgrew is now blaming others for failures. Mulgrew told the DA he had staked our reputation on turning around these schools. But Mulgrew accepts the reformy criteria for failure and success, i.e., test scores. And that is a crucial error.

It isn't the schools that are failing these children, and it isn't the teachers either. It is the nation, the state, and the city that allows them to grow up in poverty. It is a country that pays starvation wages and makes both parents take multiple jobs to make ends meet. It is a country that allows people to spend so much time working that they neglect their families, a country that allows Americans to suffer and die as a result of not having health insurance. It is a country that takes junk science in lieu of education, and it is union leaders like Michael Mulgrew who not only accept but enable and encourage such nonsense.

These are the issues we need to face if we want our kids to succeed and excel, be your standards reformy or reasonable. This is why I turn down perks and jobs to represent members rather than leaders. This is why I decided to join MORE/ New Action and oppose Mulgrew in the coming election.

This is why I'm a teacher, and this is why I'm staying until they shoot me down with junk science.

There are No Oversized Apples for Oversized Classes

This Apple Will Probably Never Make it to a Teacher's Desk...

Ed. "reformers" believe that branding teachers as "ineffective" is the single most important way to improve educational outcomes.  Although driving away experienced teachers with seniority and burgeoning pensions may cut costs, it fails to help students.  Cutting class size, however, so teachers can deal more effectively with individuals, would work miracles.  Too bad, the financial costs of such reform make it prohibitive; too bad ed. "reformers" are more concerned about their personal pocketbooks than profiting students.

I teach three of my five classes in a row.  Each class contains about 37 students; the number will hopefully soon be reduced to 34.  Whether 37 or 34, the numbers are overwhelming.  When I return to the workroom after three periods, I have about one-hundred homework papers in hand.  Let me picture an ed. "reformer" grading that many papers on a regular basis.  Ineffective!

When I collect essay papers, I can get as many as 175.  If I fail to grade the old work before the new work comes due, the profusion of papers mounts.  Try keeping one set straight from another.  It is a profound triumph of organizational skill.  It is time-consuming, not to mention, a literally heavy burden.  Now, imagine trying to read each paper carefully and electronically enter grades.  Ineffective, again!

When students write short responses in class, provided the students are well-behaved, I try to circulate around the room and read as many as I can.  I end up skimming papers, trying to find some further question to ask each student or some grammatical suggestion.  I try to fly around the room before most students are done.  Some days, I feel positively superhuman.  Other times, I just recognize that my students know I am mortal.  I try to call on most students during a given lesson, but in the span of 42 minutes, the time spent with any one child can rarely be anything special.  Ineffectiveness writ large!

If students were chatty or poorly behaved, they would be so much harder to control in a big class.  The probabilities of chaos would increase greatly.  Where students' needs are the greatest, and they are not met, the potential for frustration and disorder are profound.  When students need serious assistance, and the teacher cannot be in 37 places at once, or sustain her help, there may be far greater potential for some kind of "explosion"--or at the very least low test scores.  Fifty percent of your formula now spells INEFFECTIVE!

Imagine all the supplies needed for so many students.  Imagine all the handouts.  Imagine trying to secure enough markers for a project.  Imagine the cost of such supplies.  The chance that such supplies will be stocked in a closet somewhere becomes nil.  The supply lines have been cut.  Ineffective teachers reach into their own pockets.

The more people in a room, the more parents to call, the more papers to grade, the more stress AND the greater the chance of burnout.  Any teacher who tries to give extensive meaningful feedback on a daily basis is probably young, unmarried, without children and destined to look for another job soon.  Such a teacher may sacrifice his or her personal life for a year or two, but no longer.  Teachers with oversized classes burnout fast.  Some will leave while the getting is good.  Some may even become ed. "reformers."  We all know that Rhee and Campbell Brown could never have survived forty years in a classroom.  Perhaps they lack sufficient grit--or, perhaps, they care more about themselves than their students!  And, they will never have their effectiveness "scientifically measured."  Teachers, alone, need to be measured...not the size of their classes.  Only teachers are ineffective, not ed. policy!

The Perils of Merryl

Merryl Tisch is concerned about how things are going, or at least how things appear to be going. To remedy this, Tisch has decided not to change how things are going, but rather how things appear. For one thing, she wants to change the name of Common Core. This is part and parcel of the canard that there's nothing wrong with Common Core, but rather the way in which it was rolled out. This, evidently has given the whole Common Core thing a bad name.

So we can call it the Empire State standards, or the NY State Standards, or Merryl's Perils, or whatever. Then everyone will forget that their kids are spending 12 hours a night studying for developmentally inappropriate tests. The rising tide of opt-out will stop dead in its tracks, because well-informed parents will fail to notice it's the same nonsense with a shiny new bow on top. No one will notice that their kids are spending hours, days and weeks preparing for tests even the governor admits are meaningless (except for rating those darn teachers). Bill Gates has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on these standards, and we can't just leave them lying around on some railroad track.

The other big idea is to allow teachers to appeal their junk science ratings. This way, you see, it will be tougher for teachers to take their cases to court and claim the entire system is nonsensical and incomprehensible. That the entire system happens to be nonsensical and incomprehensible is of no consequence. What's important is, with this regulation, some teachers may have their ratings reversed. NYSUT and UFT leadership have praised this, but as usual they've started the celebration prematurely. However they spin it, all the ratings are baseless. How can Karen Magee or Michael Mulgrew get up and claim victory because every now and then logic may trump junk science? The optimal percentage of junk science in teacher ratings is, and has always benn, precisely zero.

No matter how many times you paint over that garbage can, its contents remain the same. It's really unbelievable how many people are paid to run around and rationalize this nonsense. Maybe they should start a cult or something. They could all gather around a Bill Gates statue and pay tribute.

Maybe they could call it a religion. It kind of fits that an organization dedicated to the privatization of a public good would pay no taxes. Perhaps they're rich enough to pay no taxes already, but why not double down?

It's a WIN-WIN!

UFT Leadership in the Face of Friedrich

Here's an interesting piece suggesting that losing Friedrich might inspire a leaner, more effective union, with possibilities for more involvement with rank and file. It does, of course, mention union's abject failure in Wisconsin, with the proviso that they've also lost collective bargaining. If unions can't do that, it's an even harder sell than it would be here.

What happens in NYC if UFT loses the right to automatic dues collection? Will Mike Mulgrew do a barnstorming tour, shaking hands and kissing babies? Will he get on Twitter? Will he begin to answer email? I don't think so. People don't fundamentally change overnight and UFT leadership is quite set in its ways. Of course there are people in Unity who are a whole lot more responsive than the President, but the organization runs primarily on patronage, and is largely tone-deaf to what teachers live with every day.

I will tell you exactly how UFT will react to a negative decision. Of course great effort will be directed toward dues collection. After all, 80% of working UFT members who can't be bothered to vote. If writing an "X" on a piece of paper and dropping it into a mailbox is too much of a personal strain, how are you going to get them to send a hundred bucks a month to 52 Broadway? That will be an uphill battle, to say the least.

But I know one message that Unity will certainly be broadcasting, because I've heard it over and over before. If we lose Friedrich, Unity will say, "This is not the time to be opposing leadership. All those of you who dare question the wisdom of the loyalty oath need to sit down and shut up immediately, if not sooner."

How many times have you heard that old chestnut? We're fighting Giuliani and now isn't the time to oppose leadership. We're fighting Bloomberg and now isn't the time to oppose leadership. Bloomberg wants to (insert outrage here) and now's not the time to oppose  leadership.

In fact, according to leadership, there is absolutely never a good time to oppose leadership. But this is the argument they invariably trot out when times are tough. Ask yourself, over the last few decades, when have times not been tough?

The problem with that argument is this--the very leadership asking us to sit down and shut up has actively contributed to these tough times, and continues to do so. By accommodating reforminess, by consistent appeasement that invariably results in further loss, leadership has contributed to the misery teachers face each and every day. I've seen Michael Mulgrew praise the Open Market system with nary a mention of the ATR situation it created. I've heard him wax poetic about a "growth model" that was somehow not value-added. Don't get me started about how UFT brought Steve Barr and Green Dot to NYC.

Unless leadership wakes up tomorrow and says to itself, "Gee, maybe we should start thinking about what effects rank and file, and have chapter leaders represent them instead of us," there's always reason to oppose leadership. In fact, through years of appeasement, leadership has emboldened our opponents to the point that they're bringing us, like animals, to the vet to have us declawed.

I don't like fighting leadership. But I don't like their decades of abject failure to fight for us either. They're going to have to address that, and if I were them I'd begin right now.

Advise you to sit while waiting for that to happen.

No Accountability for UFT Unity

One of the cool things about being in Unity is once you're in, you're in. You have a whole group, a family if you will, that you can depend on. And as long as you are loyal to the family, you'll have a bright future. For example, you might be elected chapter leader, or you might just take the job because no one else wants to do it. You'll go to chapter leader training and your district rep will ask you if you want to spend more time in hotels having meetings and going to meals. Do you want to travel? Maybe next year we'll hold the AFT convention in Hawaii. Who knows?

And maybe you have a good time, going to California, to wherever, and staying in fancy hotels. But, oh no! What happens if you do a crappy job as chapter leader and your colleagues dump you? The cool thing about that is it doesn't matter even a little bit! As long as you're willing to vote as told, as per the loyalty oath, there is no consequence whatsoever! Why should the district rep go to the trouble of recruiting the new chapter leader when you're already in? So no more counting oversized classes, representing troubled colleagues, going to long meetings, and you still get to enjoy the fruit of everyone else's union dues!

That's right, you're off to a whirlwind trip to Schenectedy for the NYSUT conference, and then AFT could send you right to Sin City on the member dime. Sure, you may have to applaud for the likes of Bill Gates, or maybe the Vice President after his administration has imposed junk science on pretty much the whole country. And sure, you have to support Hillary even though you might like Bernie Sanders a whole lot more. But maybe, just maybe, you really don't give a crap who's in charge of the country, state, city, or schools, and you just want to fly around and stay in fancy hotels every now and then. Let the yahoos sleep in Motel 6 because you're headed to the Hilton.

And if you have any moral qualms, just keep them to yourself, unless you want to be relegated to the sidelines like every single UFT activist who dares agree with Diane Ravitch. Sure, UFT will pay lip service to the greatest educational thinker in the country, but she goes just a little too far for leadership. After all, UFT leadership has repeatedly supported junk science. Sure, sometimes they call it "growth model" instead of VAM, but it's the same old baseless crap whatever you call it. Ravitch not only opposes mayoral control and Common Core, but also unequivocally supports a parent's right to opt children out of high-stakes testing. She even opposes charter schools and colocation, while UFT has actually colocated its own failing charter school.

But let's ignore all that and get back on topic. If you vote the way you're told, it makes no difference how poorly you do as chapter leader. It makes no difference whether your colleagues respect you enormously, or even at all. You can stay on the Unity gravy train, keep your patronage gig, and dispense with all those troublesome chapter leader duties. In fact, you can even keep your spot on the UFT Executive Board if you've got one!

The UFT election is set up so that everyone represents leadership rather than schools. Sure there are a few New Action types sitting on the Exec. Board, but they'll try to fix that next time so they have total absolute power to continue making abysmal deals for working educators. Cool, isn't it? No voice whatsoever for anyone but leadership, and that's how they like it.

The only problem is that darn election. But unlike most unions, UFT allows that retirees get to help decide who represents active members. In fact, retirees made up 52% of the vote last time. And most working teachers, cynical after years of indifferent representation, often by the very people they deemed unfit to run their chapters, take the ballot and toss it right into the trash.

It's a great system, unless you happen to advocate for, you know, democracy. I do, and 2016 is the year we bring democracy back to our union.

New Action Joins MORE

 New Action has come to its senses and decided to align itself with tried and true activists in the MORE caucus. Opposition is finally coming together.

This is a time for change. It's a time for renewal. New Action Caucus, far less credible for the unholy alliance they forged with Randi Weingarten's Unity, has finally dumped said alliance in favor of being once again a truly independent opposition. Without the quid pro quo deal to support Mulgrew for a few seats, there is no longer any reason to oppose them.

So I'm happy to announce here, whether or not you've seen it elsewhere, that the opposition caucuses will present a common front against Unity this spring. I've known this was coming for a few months and had been sworn to secrecy.

The UFT election is rigged. 52% of the voters have no stake in who negotiates UFT contracts. Most unions don't allow retirees to vote on who negotiates for working members. But leadership loves to have a big old office in Florida where no opposition candidate can go, and get them all to vote for whatever it is they get down there.

Mulgrew is a shoo-in, and anyone who tells you differently is delusional. But there are still a few spots that are chosen by the people who they ostensibly represent. Years ago leadership decided high school teachers, having selected a New Action candidate, were too irresponsible to select their own VP. Now, the high school VP is now chosen by the elementary teachers, the retirees, UFT members who don't work in schools, and everyone. That, frankly, is an outrage. But leadership forgot to take the Executive Board seats away from us, and from the junior high schools, and history suggests MORE-New Action will win, at the very least, the high school seats. They are far from a majority, but they are a start.

A few months before the election there will likely be UFT ads saying how the world would be better if people were nicer, or some other such profound reflection. The one that sticks with me was, one election year, a teacher saying, "It's just not fair." I don't recollect exactly what was not fair that year, perhaps that we were underpaid or without a contract, but that's not what resonates with the public. Often, I don't even accept fairness arguments from my students. This particular commercial seemed aimed at UFT voters.

I've been teaching over 30 years, since 1984, Unity's always run things, and I can tell you that things have not improved for us since then. I have never seen so many people discouraged, I have never seen so many young teachers fleeing from my school in particular, and I have never seen morale so abysmally low. I see people with big hearts running for the hills, and even more of them contemplating which hill they can run to when they get half a chance. People ask me if they can take another job and hold onto this one in case it doesn't work out.

There is grotesque incompetence in administrators, and if you can't see it firsthand take a gander at Sue Edelman in the NY Post. Boy wonder supervisors are now empowered to fire people based on whatever, dispensing poor ratings based on a rubric clearly beyond their highly limited interest, let alone comprehension. If they see things that didn't happen, or didn't see things that did happen, too bad for you, and having it on video won't make a difference. So don't let them tape it, unless you want them to have evidence to use against you.

The time of going along to get along, whatever that even means, is gone. The time for a seat at the table for the sake of sitting there is over. So is the time for saying, "Everything sucks but it's not leadership's fault." I'm sorry, but if we're going to be accountable, so are they.

 Job one is making it through the door being indebted to leadership for nothing. No endorsement of Michael Mulgrew. No meeting with Randi Weingarten and forming a caucus the following week.

We will win, we will represent rank and file rather than leadership, and we will make leadership hear us, whether they like it or not. Make no mistake, this is our year.

Michael Mulgrew and Happy Talk

The APPR system, the one that UFT President Michael Mulgrew boasted he helped craft, hangs over the heads of every teacher in New York State. Every thinking teacher knows jobs are on the line, and that junk science ratings could render you a Moskowitz test-prep clerk or a Walmart greeter. Yet Mulgrew tells The Chief (behind a paywall) the following:

“We know that two years ago, morale was basically at an all-time low,” Mr. Mulgrew said. “My feeling is that now it’s definitely getting better.”

My jaw drops as I read this. All I can say is Mulgrew is spending way too much time with loyalty oath signers. He seems to have no notion of what rank and file feel every single day. Perhaps he's taken too many of those happy pills, and just can't stop basking in the glow of those awesome victories no working teacher really knows about.

After all, it was a victory when we got all 22 components of Danielson, as opposed to the 7 Bloomberg wanted. It was another victory when we got 8 components of Danielson, as opposed to the 22 for which UFT fought. It was a victory when we earned the UFT transfer plan, which allowed teachers (including yours truly) to move to other schools and escape unreasonable supervisors. It was another victory when we tossed that in the trash and rendered our members wandering ATRs.

I have never, ever seen teachers so demoralized. My school is one of the least risky in terms of the junk science aimed at teachers' heads, but last year I saw an unprecedented exodus of young teachers, including one who I'd considered to have a more positive outlook than just about anyone. It is simply incredible that the President of the United Federation of Teachers can be so utterly out of touch with what we're living through. That, however, appears to be very much his choice.

Michael Mulgrew is notorious for his failure to answer email. I'm the chapter leader of the largest school in Queens and he can't be bothered to respond to me. That's why, on the very rare occasions I send him email it's likely to be posted here. That way at least I know someone will read it. A few months ago, Mulgrew asked that the entire DA get on Twitter and push a couple of hashtags (full disclosure--I was already on Twitter, and I participated), but he himself did not. It's quite clear he can't be bothered with that social media nonsense (Maybe it's just a fad.) and prefers to spend time communicating with people sworn to support whatever he wants.

Where does Mulgrew get this feeling things are getting better? Evidently, if you only spend time with people who tell you what you want to hear, you tend not to get the whole picture.

What myself and the Chancellor and [Principals’ union president] Ernie Logan have decided is we’re going to try to isolate our schools as much as we can from the craziness from the state level,” he said. “We’ll do whatever we’re legally responsible for, but we know that stability is the key to education.”

These are strange words from a man who not only presented the Heavy Hearts matrix as an improvement over the current system, but also thanked the Assembly for passing it. How on earth do you isolate schools from a system that not only demands teachers be judged by junk science, but further exacerbates the situation by raising its weight? How do you tell working teachers that they're better off in a system where the burden of proof when facing dismissal is on them rather than their employers?

I suppose it's pretty easy when you yourself have not been in the classroom for years and almost everyone with whom you speak has signed an oath to agree with you. I hear from real teachers every day of my life. Not only do they not talk like Mulgrew, but they don't remotely appreciate the things he touts as improvements.

The only thing left is to break them out of their cynicism long enough to vote next spring.

Gearing Up for Another Year of Opting Out

Arne Duncan rails against the opt-out movement, but it seems like all efforts to sap it only further strengthen it.  Opt-out numbers have grown by leaps and bounds.  Numbers, doubtless, will continue to grow until politicians wake up to reality.

Secretary Duncan initially blamed "white suburban moms," with over-coddled kids, for the backlash against the Core.  Since these moms don't opt out their children via private academies like our U.S. President, their kids need to learn that they aren't as "brilliant as they thought they were."

Of course, today, Duncan opts his own kids out via the Chicago Laboratory Schools where, coincidentally, his wife works--and will probably never receive a VAM score.  The Chicago Lab fails to "follow key school reform policies that his Education Department has set for public schools."  So, if Chicago Lab kids aren't "as brilliant as they thought they were," they may never know!  If Duncan's plans weren't as "brilliant" as he "thought they were," do you think he would ever know?

Over-coddled or not?

Still, some dutiful local districts (under federal pressure) prop up the tests that are not good enough for Duncan's own progeny.  Some local districts send out long and confusing letters to those who would opt out, packed full of Common-Core aligned mumbo jumbo and veiled threats.   Districts must deliver over the data.

Would such a letter dissuade you or would it find its way into your garbage can? 

Some schools take it a step further.  They enforce a Sit and Stare policy.  But for children who would rather not "Talk to the Pineapple" or put their "Big Foot in the mouth," sitting and staring in space is preferable to sitting and staring at a test paper.  Instead of dissuading the opt-out movement, actions like these just might make it more militant.

Cyber terrorism has been used against the opt-out movement.  In 2014, unitedoptout.com had its website hacked on the eve of growing test resistance.  Although the identity of the perpetrators is unknown, it's pretty clear that temporary setbacks work to propel a movement forward.

Propaganda paints mandatory testing as a civil right.  Forget that all this testing and the ed. "reform"  movement, itself, are destroying the ambitions of minorities, civil-rights groups are supposed to see tests as the keys to equality.  Yet, with every passing year and every failure of reform, far fewer civil-rights activists favor high-stakes standardized testing.



If parents continue to opt out, schools might be threatened with the loss of much needed funding, if not this year, perhaps the next. The power of the purse can be powerful, indeed; states were pretty much bribed by federal grants to accept the Core.  If the federal government withdraws funding, Title I schools seemed lined up to suffer the worst.

But how many lies and threats will it take before ed. "reformers" admit that their ideas have helped few and hurt far many more?  How much larger does the opt-out movement need to grow before ed. "reformers" realize that what won't work for their own children will definitely not work for ours?  Expect another year of massive opt-outs!  Duncan doesn't seem to be learning from his mistakes!

Leadership Defense of APPR Is Total Nonsense

Teachers all over the city, all over the state, and all over the country are stressed out almost as a matter of course. This is because everyone wonders about the ratings, the ones on which their jobs depend. Sheri Lederman's lawsuit brings this some attention, but not nearly what it merits. As Governor Cuomo and the editorial pages blather on about getting tough with teachers, it seems like nothing more than a diversion so no one looks too closely about the hedge funders and billionaires who've bought them off.

UFT leadership sold us this bill of goods. I don't know how many meetings I've been to in which I've heard that this was an improvement. Before, I'd hear, the principal could just say you suck and you'd get a U rating. That wasn't as big a deal, I'd argue, and everyone would scoff. But it wasn't, because burden of proof was still on the DOE to establish you were incompetent, or unfit, or whatever. Now, if the UFT rat squad determines you suck, the burden of proof is on you, the teacher. And it doesn't get any better under the Heavy Hearts plan.

At one meeting, a District Rep. whose name I do not recall got very testy with me when I referred to VAM as junk science, a concept accepted by both Diane Ravitch and the American Statistical Asssociation. He said he'd be happy if his principal's negative determination were contradicted by the junk science. What he didn't say, what with the test score rating being essentially a crap shoot, was that the teacher well-rated by a principal and dragged down by junk science was also a possibility. Essentially, this UFT employee was endorsing tying our jobs to a crap shoot.

Unfortunately, the case of Shari Lederman shows that to be true. This is a woman whose principal very much liked and supported her, but because of low VAM scores got rated ineffective. Lest anyone think this is an extreme and unusual case, just this week I met two teachers in the same situation. One was a chapter leader from a small school who got an excellent rating from her principal. Another was a young teacher who got a good rating, but whose MOSL numbers were abysmal. If I happen to meet two such people in one week, how many are in the state? I'd argue that one is already too many.

In our high-performing school, our MOSL committee decided to share the joy rather than have individual teachers rise and fall on the basis of junk science. As our grades are generally OK this seemed to work. Almost everyone in our building got scores of 16 on both state and local measures. I got a 15 on state measures, though, and I hear some people did marginally better or worse. I have no idea whatsoever why that is.

What sort of system is it in which virtually no one understands how scores are calculated? What sort of system is it in which scores are meaningless but a person's job could hang in the balance?

And here's the thing--in a building like mine, in which junk science scores are almost uniform, people can still get bad ratings. Are they merited? I can't really say, not having seen the lessons and not having total confidence in the magical Danielson Framework. I don't believe rubrics translate to fairness. I don't believe personal prejudices are overcome by a system that assigns a 1-4 rating for various aspects, and I don't believe a computer calculation takes ratings out of the hands of anyone.

If you have a supervisor who really doesn't like you, threes become twos, twos become ones, you become developing or ineffective, and your morale is in the toilet. Is the UFT rat squad a check against this? If you're rated developing, it's not a factor. If you're rated ineffective, you have to depend on the kindness of rat squads, not a prospect I'd much relish. And as far as I can tell, the Heavy Hearts plan won't even afford you that option. Burden of proof will be on you, and there won't be any rat squad to turn a thumb up and declare otherwise.

This is not an effort to identify good and bad teachers. It's a witch hunt to divert attention from why kids really have issues in schools. For one, think poverty, which Gates won't address, and bought-and-paid-for politicians do virtually nothing to mitigate.

We Bloggers Gotta Get the Banned Together

Sometimes we bloggers feel rivalry. For example, you may know that José Luis Vilson not only wrote a book, but also actually got it published. And if you don’t think that in itself is impressive, not only have a whole bunch of people read it, but I even read it myself. (Personally, even the idea of writing a book makes me tired.)

But blogger rivalry runs deeper than that. The fact is, whenever I looked up my blog on DOE computers, it just showed up right there, in front of my face. José’s blog was blocked, though, because he’s a dangerous man. So I thought to myself, how can I become as dangerous as José? I tried putting on a fearsome expression, but my students just laughed at me. My wife said she thought I was sick and demanded I go to the doctor. So I gave that up.

I went to plan B, which was sulking. I moped around for a while, but it was very tough. People are always demanding I do stuff and answer questions, so I never get the time I’d really like for a good sulk. So for almost the entire Bloomberg administration I had to endure the stigma as José was banned and I was right out there.

Another thing José and I have in common was our support of Mayor de Blasio. I contributed to his campaign, and got a gold ticket to his inauguration. José only got a blue ticket or something, so I briefly felt a sense of having gotten somewhere. But it turned out we both had to sit outside in the freezing cold, and I was only a little closer to the center. (Had there been heat, that would've been something worth boasting about.)

This year I came to school a few days early with my laptop, and decided to check the blog. I do that from time to time, because you never know who’s gonna come around and say whatever. And it turns out Mayor de Blasio decided to show his appreciation for having supported his election. He did this by blocking my blog. (So in your face, José.)

Now that I have finally reached the summit of the blogging mountain, people notice me more. They look at me differently. People say, “Hey  NYC Educator, what’s it like to be so macho and tough and good looking?” I tell them it’s hard work. You have to say just the right things, and you have to insult just the right people.

And if you aren’t impressed by the fact that I’m banned in the DOE, I have to tell you I’m also banned in China. (And no, this is not an empty boast. I’m friends with one of our Chinese teachers and she always complains she can’t read the blog when she’s there). As you probably know, China’s a pretty big country. There are now well over a billion people who can’t read what you’re reading right now.

So today China, tomorrow the DOE. My pet project now is to have the blog banned in all these United States. Then it will be really elite. Eventually, I aim to become the JD Salinger of bloggers.

Wish me luck.

Another Year on the Front

I used to think of my workplace as a home away from home.  My school felt like that in so many ways.  There were the familiar faces of long-term colleagues who had become close friends.  I still find my friends at school, yet, upon my return, I find so much else has been turned topsy-turvy.

There was once a sense of comfort.  Not only did I already possess the golden key to the bathroom, I possessed the all-important knowledge of where to go to find things and who to go to.  I, in fact, had become one of the go-to people, myself.  But don't ask me today where one can find the teacher lounge.  It disappeared during the Bloomberg years.  It has never returned.

In this present era of ed. "reform," we are living with "creative disruption."  School communities have been turned upside down--if not all-out closed.

People now come and go at a frightening pace.  Long-term colleagues have retired.  Too many have been driven out of the profession.  So many tried to seize their retro last June.  And, it seems, citywide, many newbies don't last the first few years.  Tenure is never within their grasp.  ATRs wander in and out, and with each one, there is the sense that it might have been me.

Every year, we now face new mandates, usually unfunded and poorly thought out.  There are new evaluation systems, coming and going.  The threat of invasion by alien forces known as "outside observers" looms large.

Our school has installed a new alarm system upon its doors, per Avonte's Law.  In the name of student safety, in our case that of high-school students, one might sense education under the auspices of a police state, a school which seems to have become not so much a pipeline, as the prison, itself.  Good for our attendance stats, I guess!

Curriculum has been turning on its head.  Although history rarely changes, last year we had to reorder, and in some cases rewrite, the entire ninth-grade social-studies curriculum.  Now, we are told ninth-grade material will no longer be on the Regents.  At a time when the Core is coming down the pipeline with its designs to fail a generation of kids, we have only a vague notion of the nature of the new test...or of our impending doom.

We have a new data system in place.  I tried to move gracefully through ARIS to Daedalus.  Last year, I managed to generate a great many letters home from Daedalus, many bearing praise, more of encouragement to perform the work necessary to pass.  I even learned how to save my Daedalus file to my desktop for the inevitable moment when the printer would fail and sixty letters suddenly vaporize.  Daedalus is now dead.  Long live "Datacation."  It will be tied to Skedula.  Before learning the ins and outs of this new system, however, one has to wonder how long it will last.

Perhaps all this stress is a test for teachers, a test for the real world.  But if I had wanted so much "creative disruption" in my life, I might have chosen the business world instead, earned more money and societal respect.  Instead, I chose a job which I thought would provide stability and a sense of community.  These things are necessary for children and comforting to me as an adult.  Sadly, these things are rapidly disappearing.  It affects adults and I can't help but thinking it must also adversely affect our children.

Opening Day Checklist

I Wish Someone Had Told Me

Practical suggestions were few and far between when I started out. I was an English teacher, with an AP who spent hours describing the difference between an “aim” and an “instructional objective.” To this day, I haven’t the slightest notion what she was talking about. She also spent a good deal of time describing the trials and tribulations of her cooking projects, and other utterly useless information.

Neither she nor any teacher of education ever advised me on classroom control. The standing platitude was “A good lesson plan is the best way to control a class,” but I no longer believe that. I think a good lesson plan is the best thing to have after you control the class.

I also think a good lesson plan need not be written at all, as long as you know what you’re doing. If you don’t, neither the lesson plan nor the aim will be much help.

The best trick, and it’s not much of a trick at all, is frequent home contact. It’s true that not all parents will be helpful, but I’ve found most of them to be. When kids know reports of their classroom behavior will reach their homes, they tend to save the acting out for your lazier colleagues—the ones who find it too inconvenient to call. You are not being "mean" or petty--you're doing your job, and probably helping the kid. If you want to really make a point, make a dozen calls after the first day of class. Or do it the day before a week-long vacation.

Now you could certainly send that ill-mannered kid to the dean, to your AP, to the guidance counselor, or any number of places. But when you do that, you’re sending a clear message that you cannot deal with that kid—he or she is just too much for you. You’ve already lost.

And what is that dean going to do anyway? Lecture the child? Call the home? Why not do it yourself?

You need to be positive when you call. Politely introduce yourself and say this:

“I’m very concerned about _______________. ___________ is a very bright kid. That’s why I’m shocked at these grades: 50, 14, 0, 12, and 43 (or whatever). I’d really like __________ to pass the class, and I know you would too.”

I’ve yet to encounter the parent who says no, my kids are stupid, and I don’t want them to pass.

“Also, I’ve noticed that ___________ is a leader. For example, every time ___________ (describe objectionable behavior here) or says (quote exact words here—always immediately write objectionable statements) many other students want to do/say that too.”

"I'm also concerned because ________ was absent on (insert dates here) and late (insert dates and lengths here).

I certainly hope you will give _________ some good advice so ___________ can pass the class.”

If the kid’s parents speak a foreign language you don’t know, find someone else who also speaks it, and write down what you want that person to tell the parent.

If you’re lucky enough to have a phone in your room, next time you have a test, get on the phone in front of your class and call the homes of the kids who aren’t there. Express concern and ask where they are. If the kid is cutting, it will be a while before that happens again. If the kid is sick, thank the parent and wish for a speedy recovery.

The kids in your class will think twice about giving you a hard time.

Kids test you all the time. It’s hard not to lose your temper, but it’s a terrible loss for you if you do. When kids know you will call their homes, they will be far less likely to disrupt your class. The minutes you spend making calls are a very minor inconvenience compared to having a disruptive class.

If you’re fortunate enough to have a reasonable and supportive AP, God bless you. If not, like many teachers, you’ll just have to learn to take care of yourself. If you really like kids, if you really know your subject, and if you really want to teach, you’ll get the hang of it.

But make those phone calls. The longer you do it, the more kids will know it, and the fewer calls you’ll have to make.

Your AP, whether good, bad, or indifferent, will certainly appreciate having fewer discipline problems from you. More importantly, you might spend less time dealing with discipline problems, and more helping all those kids in your room.

Originally posted June 5, 2005

See also:

Ms. Cornelius with everything they forgot (or more likely, never knew about) at ed. school.   Here's something from Miss Malarkey. And whatever you do, don't forget Miss Eyre's excellent series on what no one will tell you about working for the DoE.

Watch What They Do, Not What They Say

That's the mantra of Norm Scott, and nowhere is it more apparent than in this Facebook post from AFT President Randi Weingarten:

Ok-I am not beyond a selfie with the President.... particularly on Labor Day when he says as he did at the Greater Boston Labor Council Bkfst: "if I were looking for a good job that builds security for my family, I would join a union" 

Now I certainly don't begrudge Randi a selfie with the President of the United States. And the guy has done some good things. While I'd much prefer single payer, Obamacare keeps my daughter (and many others) on a medical plan until 26. Americans don't have to face rejection for pre-existing conditions to acquire an insurance policy. While there should be none, there will at least be fewer bankruptcies on the basis of catastrophic medical emergency.

But on the union front, President Obama has not particularly walked the walk. I mean that in a very literal sense. When campaigning, he said he was going to find a pair of comfortable shoes and walk with labor if it was in trouble. Yet search though he may have, we did not see hide nor hair of him in Wisconsin when there was a popular uprising against current Presidential candidate Scott Walker. I mean, I understand losing stuff in the closet, but he's the President of the United States. I have to assume he doesn't need to run to the mall when he needs a new pair of shoes.

As a teacher, I am now rated by junk science test scores. This is a direct result of Obama's Race to the Top. At a time when states were dying for money, Obama pushed high stakes testing and junk science to a level GW Bush could only have dreamed of.  This has demoralized every teacher I know. The only ones crowing about it are the leaders of E4E, and they aren't teachers anymore anyway. The American Statistical Association is very clear that judging teachers by test scores is nonsense, and the President, along with every editorial board in New York and dozens more around the country, can't be bothered to acknowledge that, let alone respond.

And while it's nice that Obama will be photographed with Randi, now that he doesn't have to worry about re-election or midterms, I haven't seen him fret much about union over the rest of his term. One of the large reasons I voted for him the first time he ran was that he promised to support the Employee Free Choice Act, which would've enabled unionization via card check. It would've prevented a lot of anti-union management from prevention unionization. As far as I can tell, he did not lift a finger to do that, and I voted for the Green candidate rather than Obama mach two.

Right now we are at a crisis. We are facing a SCOTUS decision that will effective render all public unions right to work status. Without automatic deduction of dues, Wisconsin unions have withered and all but died. This will be particularly damaging to a union like UFT that's been hands off and managed top-down. If fewer than 20% of working teachers can be bothered to vote in union elections, what percentage will pay dues?

As bad as leadership is these days, they can be persuaded, and if enough of us crawl out of our collective coma, they can even be replaced. But there's gonna be little hope for that if nothing is done. And as far as I can tell, President Barack Obama has done considerably less than nothing for union over the last seven years or so.

Labor Day--What Is and What Should Never Be

Happy Labor Day to all. These are tough times for union, and we are under direct attack in SCOTUS. People fought and died for our right to unionize, and may do so again as forces try to erase the twentieth century and move us back to good old feudalism, or whatever you call it when workers have no rights and few options. 

This is an election year in UFT. Before a single vote is cast we're fighting to have something worth fighting over. The Friedrichs case is crucial, and I'm constantly wondering who's paying attention. To deprive union of the right to collect dues from all the people it represents is to almost reduce it to passing the hat. Sadly, in this hat, those who give will be compelled to support those who save the money to buy that new Xbox. 

Those people are like your lazy uncle who doesn't want to work but would gladly sleep on your couch, watch your TV and eat your food. Twelve hundred bucks is a lot to volunteer, and in the short term it seems like a lot of money. Maybe it's a giant big screen TV to go with that Xbox. Maybe it's buying caviar for your dog. The options are endless. 

Now's when I want to tell you that you're paying to have people negotiate for you. Regrettably, UFT negotiators are fairly awful. It's hard to make them a selling point when we're waiting for five years from now to receive the money everyone else got five years ago. But it's not just UFT here. NYPD and FDNY were able to squeeze 4% and 4% over two years from retired Emperor Michael Bloomberg. UFT took that, sort of, and added 10% over 7 years, the lowest pattern in the living memories of anyone I know. 

Now imagine if FDNY, NYPD, and other union leaders had to scrounge around begging for dues instead of negotiating fair contracts. We, the teachers, might not be able to depend on them to establish a decent pattern. Perhaps there wouldn't be a pattern and we'd have to depend on the inept negotiators who worked out our substandard, miserable pattern, dual due process piece of crap contract, the one we have yet even to see. Or maybe they'd get a fabulous raise but make us give it all back for health care costs. (And, to be fair, that might yet happen under this contract, which stipulates that if Mulgrew's projected savings aren't met, arbitrators can make adjustments. That might be why there is as yet no new paper contract.)

Crappy though the contract is, we still have very good health benefits. Dental is not quite as good as it once was, but a whole lot better than the nothing many of my friends utilize. And it's good that every school has a chapter leader, though I understand some may be better than others. 

I believe in union with my whole heart. Flawed though ours is, it beats the hell our of standing one by one in front of Andrew Cuomo with a bowl and begging for more a la Oliver Twist. Make no mistake, that's what our reformy friends want for us. That's why we're facing a ridiculous observation system. 

I believe this school year we can start to change our union for the better. It won't be fast and it won't be easy. But a flawed union is a hell of a lot better than no union at all, and union can accomplish a whole lot more if it doesn't need to troll schools, hat in hand, begging for people to collect dues. 

Don't believe Michael Mulgrew and his gang when they tell you they know what's best. We are the union, we know what's best, and this is the year they will begin to listen, whether they like it or not.

Message to Staff

This is my first member email this year, and it went out last week. It's not really unique to my school. Acceptable number of classrooms may vary according to your building and/ or department (and your school, hopefully, is not as crowded as mine). A lot of this applies to everyone, though.  I wish a great year to all. 

First of all, I hope you had a restful and rewarding summer. And let me be the first to remind you it isn't actually over yet.

If you have not yet checked, I advise you that end of year teacher ratings should be in your DOE mailbox. If you received a rating of D or I, you will be getting a TIP, or teacher improvement plan. You should have an initial TIP meeting before September 28th. You are entitled to have input into this plan. You are further entitled to bring me with you to the meeting, and I strongly suggest you do. If you wish, email me with your phone number and we will discuss it before school begins.

If you received an I rating, there is an appeals process. I strongly suggest you read about it, and take advantage of it.

As you know, you will soon be receiving your programs. We have thus far enrolled about 300 more students than we did last year. I expect this to result in issues not only with programs, but also with class sizes. I will check the master several times this month. I will grieve class sizes for the entire school, if necessary, by September 28th, our tenth school day. You will not need to file class size grievances individually. Programs are another matter.

If there are issues with your program, you need to let me know immediately. I will be happy to help you resolve them. You have only 48 hours from the time of receiving your program to file a grievance. There are several reasons you may wish to do this, including:

1. You filled out a request form and got none of the courses you requested
2. You have four preps.
3. Excessive number of classrooms (likely 4 in our building).

While your AP may be the most wonderful person on earth, you may not rely on assurances that these issues will be fixed. Your AP may have the best of intentions, but if you do not file a grievance your rights are not protected. I have seen multiple teachers receive sincere assurances that their programs would be fixed, and admin eventually turned around and told them that alas, it was just not possible.

Only you can protect your contractual rights. A reorganization grievance will be quickly brought to arbitration, if that's what it takes. However, during the six years I've been chapter leader, we have never needed to do that. The only people who have ended up with lingering problems were those who failed to file grievances.  If you fail to grieve within 48 hours and get stuck with an awful schedule, you will have no recourse whatsoever.

You may also wish to file a grievance if you got none of your C6 choices. Let me know if that is the case and we'll discuss how to proceed.

Best regards,

Arthur

Christie, Cuomo, and Teachers

I don't read Jersey Jazzman's blog as often as I should. He's got very sharp analysis of all things Jersey, and often goes beyond. He's gone in depth over the massive failures of merit pay, and the fact that politicians continue to believe in it, rely on it, and impose it despite a 100-year history of abject failure. His most recent blog is on Chris Christie's public criticism of a system he himself negotiated and passed. This is, in fact, exactly what Andrew Cuomo did, before revamping it to make it even worse.

In New Jersey, there is a case of a teacher who was late 111 times over a two-year period. His case was brought to an arbitrator, and the teacher wasn't fired. Now I'll go on record, as did JJ, to say that if you're supposed to be in at a certain time, or course you should be in at that time. And I'll also agree that 111 latenesses over two years is pretty outrageous. That's why it's got such attention-grabbing potential on Twitter.

The power of tenure: New Jersey teacher who was late for work 111 times keeps job http://t.co/MIPG8IERSi via @YahooNews

— Errol Louis (@errollouis) August 27, 2015

Wow, those teachers can get away with anything, huh? It's awful. Who needs any further detail before we pass judgment? Does it matter that most of the latenesses were only two minutes, or that he had to actually stand on a line to clock in every morning? What if, as I read in an ensuing interview, he never missed a moment of class? Does it matter that he was, in fact, rather severely penalized? He will be on unpaid leave until January. Could you afford to be without income or medical benefits for half a year?

In any case, as JJ points out, it was the arbitrator's call. As sad as it is, Christie sometimes has to follow the rules he helps make. I mean, it's tough to do that, just like it's tough to have to pay the state portion of the pension. After all, wouldn't that money be better used in the form of tax breaks for Christie's wealthy BFFs? But I digress.

The thing that I found most egregious about the clarion calls against tenure was that it took one flashy case, and painted all of us with it. For example, I was not late 111 times over the last two years, yet my tenure is being condemned on the basis of one person who was. That, dear readers, is what is known as a stereotype. For example, I'm kind of upset with Iowans this week, as they have an undue influence on who becomes President. If I find one Iowan drunk on the street, shall I condemn them all as a bunch of drunks? If one of them is cheap, or dumb, or promiscuous, or crazy, shall I do the same?

That particular paintbrush is indispensable in the bigot's tool kit. I won't rehash ethnic stereotypes, but they're all based on the same old thing. I grew up with stereotypes. I didn't much like them when I was a kid, but I understand them a lot better now. My job entails dealing with kids from every corner of the earth. Few things upset me as much as one kid refusing to cooperate with another, because she comes from here or there, because she's this or that religion or color, because her accent is harder to understand than yours, or whatever. I tell the kids someone hates each and every one of us in this room just because of who we are.

I have patience for children. Bigotry has considerably less charm when it comes from adults. Adults are supposed to know better. I'm sorry, Chris Christie, that when you make agreements even you have to follow them. I realize how inconvenient that is. But I won't label all governors juvenile crybabies simply because it applies to you and Governor Cuomo. Because that would be a stereotype, and stereotypes are the refuge of the small-minded.

It's pathetic when politicians have to resort to such nonsense. You'd think, by 2015, we'd be past that. Sadly we're far from it.

The Only Thing Unity Caucus Is Good At

Sure we have a substandard contract, and the money everyone else got five years ago won't be in your pocket until five years from now. Leadership expects you to ignore that and say, "Thank you sir, may I have another?" It's also true the contract sets up a new level of due process, only for ATR teachers, and that this, according to the UFT President, represents progress.

I could go on, but I will spare you for the moment. I've been teaching over 30 years, and I can tell you the job has not much improved. Leadership thinks any change it makes is an improvement. Even when they surrender previous improvements they are improvements. This is the best of all possible worlds, you are living in the best of all possible times, and you have the best of all possible contracts due to the best of all possible union leadership. So what if over 80% of working UFT members are so absolutely cynical and disenfranchised they can't even be bothered to vote? So what if the election is dominated by retirees who have no stake in future contracts? Who cares if high school teachers aren't allowed to select the high school VP?

The point is Unity Caucus has a monopoly on power, the system is designed to maintain said monopoly, and if something shocking occurs, like an opposition figure winning the vice presidency, the system can be tweaked so that it never happens again. So that's just what they do. And if those annoying New Action folks should keep winning, well, you can always make some deal to have them support the sitting UFT President.

That deal, in fact, has fractured the opposition for years. It was genius on the part of then President Randi Weingarten. A fringe benefit was that those New Action members who didn't approve of the unholy alliance with Unity broke away, and formed another caucus, ICE. ICE actually managed to win a few seats on the UFT executive board until Unity tweaked the system so as to co-endorse New Action rather than fail to oppose them. Now if you were to combine the New Action votes with MORE votes, they would have actually defeated Unity last time.

Of course, there are always contingencies, so Randi Weingarten met with a disaffected teacher, and a week later, voila!, there was yet another caucus. Personally, I don't know or care what the intentions of that teacher were. I have reservations about MORE, but they have people I respect enormously and I will support them this election cycle, as I did the last. With them, there's certainly no coincidental meeting and no deal with Weingarten, Unity, or any person or entity that's made deals counter to the interests of teachers.

In case the point is not clear, the only thing Unity Caucus is really good at is sustaining the Unity Caucus. The election is fungible, with rules that can be changed any time they become inconvenient. AFT President Weingarten can meet with anyone, offer jobs if necessary, and divert a lot of people who might become serious opposition. I don't think Mulgrew does things like that. Who knows if he answers email or talks to anyone at all?

Right now UFT votes are overrun by loyalty oath signers who will do anything and advocate for whatever based on a free trip or after school gig. In NYSUT and AFT, they vote as told. If your chapter leader isn't Unity, you have no voice in AFT. If your chapter leader is Unity, you still have no voice in AFT because that person is sworn to represent leadership rather than rank and file.

It's time to make a crack in the wall. It's time to make them listen whether they like it or not. Because it will be us who wake the sleeping, or dead if need be. We have made no deals and we are stalking horses for no one, willing or otherwise.

And make no mistake, this will be our year. We are going to break the Unity wall and they are going to listen to us inside what they believe to be their house.  In truth, it's not their house.  It's our house.

And the time for us to use it is long overdue.

ESL--Twice the Work in Half the Time

I'm quite upset about what's happening with my ESL students. They're getting substantially less support and being held to increasingly inappropriate expectations. In fact, I approached UFT leadership about in June and was encouraged that they might do something to help.

We had scheduled a meeting for tomorrow, they sent me several reminders, and I worked my summer plans around it. Yesterday I got an email that it was canceled, with no explanation whatsoever. I had to call the people who'd agreed to come with me and tell them not to bother. (They did not thank me for having invited them.)

(UPDATE--UFT is rescheduling this meeting.) 

So instead of sitting on a beach somewhere, I'm here playing stick with my dog. (That's not so bad. I love my dog.)

A recent piece in Hechinger Report suggests that Common Core, which UFT leadership passionately supports,  is creating double the work for ESL teachers, even as NY State issues draconian cuts in time for kids to learn English. As reported previously in this space, the geniuses who run education in this space have taken one period of English instruction away from high-school level ELLs, to replace it with a content area course taught by either a dual-certified content area teacher or a content teacher working in concert with an ESL teacher.

I don't know whether the teacher interviewed or writer of this piece are familiar with the new regulations. But for us, in fact, the new rules amount to a demand that we somehow make kids acquire language more quickly via wishful thinking. Rather than spend time acclimating teenagers, who naturally acquire language more slowly than their younger counterparts, we're placing them in a content course they'd have taken anyway, and hoping they learn English at the same time. We're essentially demanding that they acquire academic English instantly, via magic for all I know, and offering even less support for a process known to take 5-7 years on this astral plane.

There are several additional flaws in this approach. One is, while it won't hurt to have someone qualified deal with these children, content area courses frequently culminate in the same assessment regardless of whether or not the kids know English. I suspect many principals, freaked out over test scores, will place kids in these classes so they can pass Regents exams. If they don't, of course, it will be some defect in the teachers, rather than the simple and indisputable fact that the kids don't know English.

Of course, the geniuses who administer NYC education think ESL only exists so that kids can do better in content area courses. Things like, you know, living their lives, communicating with others, vastly enriching their educational and vocational opportunities, ordering lunch, or meeting friends, lovers, husbands or wives are of no relevance whatsoever. The priority is getting a 65 on that Global Regents.

And yet the current plan won't much help even with that very low standard. It's interesting to read the story about Port Chester, where it appears all of their ESL students speak Spanish. You can do things with a monolingual population you can't do with a population hailing from all parts of the world. I'm not exactly sure what they are because, over decades of teaching newcomers, the most I've ever had an ESL class that spoke only one language has been never.

Yet there are some good ideas here. A bilingual class (which the article does not much differentiate from an ESL class) would be a much better place to teach content area. Alas, bilingual classes I've seen have frequently been taught largely in foreign languages, neglecting  English quite a bit. This is not what bilingual classes are supposed to be, but even in those cases it would be easier to teach science, social studies, or indeed anything. It would also be easier to assess reading and writing skills or lack thereof. While I teach newcomers reading and writing, I do so gradually. Handing them a two-inch thick textbook and demanding a 5 page paper day one would be nothing less than insane.

While the bilingual teacher in the article adores the standards, I'm afraid I do not, and parents across the state agree with me. That's why 20% of NY States students opted out of the tests, a 300% increase from last year. Parents are weary of having their children discouraged, with hours of incomprehensible homework and developmentally inappropriate assignments. I agree with some of what she says:

“But, if the test is assessing their ability to read and respond to literature, make inferences and think critically — how can they prove proficiency if they are in the beginning stages of English? How do we capture what they know, and what they’re capable of and how far they’ve come?”

We can't, and that would apply whether or not we had Common Core. One thing kids need, regardless, is to learn English. And for that, no matter what our goals, the new state rules are absolutely nuts. The notion that kids need less time to learn a language in addition to all the Common Core stuff we're thrusting upon them has no basic in research, logic or common sense. You don't need to study language acquisition to know that it takes time to learn one. If you don't believe me, go find a writing test in a language you don't understand and try to get through it.

Better yet, why don't we send MaryEllen Elia on a fact-finding trip to Shanghai. She can sit with the students as they take their tests, try to pass them, and we'll judge her just as we do our students. If she doesn't pass with flying colors, we'll conclude that the Shanghai schools and teachers are failing.

Because absurd as that sounds, those are precisely the expectations she has for my kids.

Ratings Are Out

Does anyone other than me wonder whether the early rating release indicates that NYC is making time to enact the draconian Cuomo/ Heavy Hearts rating plan this year?

Correction: I just checked and they actually came out almost the same time last year, on September 2nd. I'd thought it was later, but I was wrong. I remember learning about it in a UFT chapter leader meeting. Clearly it was earlier than I'd remembered.

ANNUAL PROFESSIONAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW (APPR)
OVERALL RATING

Teacher Name:	ARTHUR GOLDSTEIN	Teacher ID:	0622911
School Year:	2014-2015	School Name/DBN:	26Q430—Francis Lewis High School

OVERALL AND SUBCOMPONENT RATINGS:

The overall APPR rating is based on the sum of three subcomponent scores: Measures of Teacher Practice (60%), State Measures (20%), and Local Measures (20%). Ratings are determined using the scoring chart below.

Measures of Teacher Practice State Measures Local Measures 0-60 points: 56 0-20 points: 15 0-20 points: 16 Highly Effective HEDI Rating Effective HEDI Rating Effective HEDI Rating

Overall Rating 0-100 Points: 87 Effective HEDI Rating

Teaching in a Right to Work State

Add caption

From time to time in this space, you may note a disparaging word or two about UFT leadership. There are several reasons for this. One is that leadership has supported a host of counter-intutitive measures that hurt working teachers in its perpetual bid for a "seat at the table." Mayoral control is a biggie. We supported it when it came out, and then, after it was proven an unmitigated disaster, we demanded a few changes. When we failed to get them, we supported it anyway.

There is our support for APPR, which forces teachers to be judged on test scores largely beyond their control. There is our support for charter schools, which operate on a completely different playing field and yet are used by politicians and journalists to undermine those of us who teach all of NYC's children. There is our support for and participation in charter colocation, which reminds me of nothing more than a cancer to public schools. There's our abject failure to support opt-out, and our misguided trust in the Heavy Heart Assembly, Cuomo, Gates, John King, Mary Ellen Elia and the like.

And then there is a rigged election that deprives high school teachers the right to choose its own VP, not to mention the UFT choosing district reps who chapter leaders used to elect. Democracy finds it hard to breathe, let alone prosper, under loyalty-oath driven representation, as the UFT ensures those of us who follow the philosophy of Diane Ravitch get no voice whatsoever in NYSUT or AFT.  

But as we face a real threat in Friedrichs. The fact is, if dues retrieval becomes voluntary, the massive apathy engendered over decades by union leadership will cause massive losses in revenue, and will render collection the number one, if not the only priority, of the leadership that's failed to represent the feelings and struggles of working teachers for decades. Will it become the lot of chapter leaders to skulk around begging people for $1200 a year so Michael Mulgrew can negotiate sub-standard contracts, two-tier due process, and punch us in the face if we don't support Common Core? That's gonna be a tough sell.

On the other hand, it's not a whole lot of fun being in a so-called Right to Work State. Take a look at North Carolina, where teachers can't even make ends meet. The environment is not a whole lot different from that here, in that teachers and public schools are routinely blamed for all the ills of humanity. But the funding has been rolled back to the point where public schools can barely function, and the teachers are on long-term exodus from the state. Make no mistake, that's the agenda of the reformies, and Cuomo would do it in a New York minute of the parents and citizenry were less aware.

Union is our bulwark against this, and we must work to make UFT an organization responsive to those of us who see what's coming. Flawed though our union is, we must work to improve it rather than lie down and watch it be destroyed. As bad as things are, they could be much worse. A lot of us are working to make things better, and I expect to give more detail on that in this space in the coming weeks and months.

Friedrichs can hang over our heads like the Sword of Damocles, but we cannot give up. We cannot become North Carolina. If you think it can't happen here, take a look at Michigan and Wisconsin. No one thought it would happen there either. Because even if we win Friedrichs, that's just cutting one head off the monster. Surely another will grow in its place.

We need to be smarter and quicker than the reformies. Our current leadership has not proven up to the task. One way or another, we are going to help them, whether they like it or not.