A Day in the Life

My day Friday did not start well. In my morning class is a young computer genius. Every time I mess something up on the computer, he calmly walks up, pushes a button, and all my problems disappear. Naturally I resent his being smarter than me when he is only 13 years old. Who the hell does he think he is anyway?

As if that weren't enough, he's learning English way faster than he's supposed to. For example, the other day I wrote a DO NOW assignment, and rather than simply answering it, as the other students did, he decided to challenge me. Here is the assignment:

DO NOW--Mr. Goldstein thinks you should study 200 hours a week. Is that a good idea? Why or why not?

It's a simple enough question. Yes or no, and give a reason. But instead of simply answering, he comes up with questions for me. Can you imagine? And not only that, but his use of English was pretty much perfect, which is also outrageous, because he's a beginning ELL. So here's what he says to me;

"Let's pretend there are 24 hours in a day. And let's pretend there are 7 days in a week. That means there are only 168 hours in a week."

You can see why I was upset. First of all, it's an English class. Now here is this kid, showing no respect at all, and doing math in English class. That's pretty goshdarn disrespectful if you ask me. Then, when I explain to him that I'm going to fail him for no reason, he tells me I can't do that. Can you imagine the audacity? Speaking to your teacher like that?

But that's not all. Later in the day, my co-teacher told me I have to do stuff. Now I'm pretty busy, and I haven't always got time to do stuff. After all, I have a lot of stuff to do, and when am I gonna find the time to do even more stuff?

Later, I'm in the department office, and I see my friend the Italian teacher. I recount all the injustices I've dealt with that day, and explain to her that I'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore. She's sympathetic and understands all the outrages I've suffered. I tell her since I represent all the teachers in the building I need someone to represent me, and she says yes, she'll do it.

So we go in to see the AP, and I explain to her that my co-teacher is asking me to do stuff, and that I don't want to do it. And no way should I have to do it, since I do enough stuff already. Then my advocate speaks up.

"Well it depends on what stuff she's asking you to do."

What? That wasn't what we just discussed. I look at her, incredulous. What happened to my unflapping advocate, the one who was gonna defend my rights no matter what? I give her a quizzical look. She responds.

"Well, depending on what the stuff is, it might hurt someone if you don't do it."

Wow, with an advocate like that, I may as well represent myself. What's up with all these conditions? We hadn't discussed modifying my demands in any way whatsoever.

"Wait a minute," I protest. "Are you trying to tell me there are consequences for my actions? That's unacceptable."

I walk out in protest. There's just so much one teacher can put up with in one day.

DA Takeaway--Through the Looking Glass with UFT Unity

Given the volume of outlandish and contradictory statements from the Unity loyalty oath signers, it was very hard to take notes quietly at the DA the other day. Mulgrew opened with sexist statements about Betsy DeVos, calling her, "our own beauty," before launching into ridicule of her name. This mirrored the UFT Unity Twitter feed, which took down a tweet or two after being called on them right here on this blog. You can still see what they said, though. (In fairness, there was later a PowerPoint with actual information.)

Mulgrew then drew us into his dream world, effusively praising the new evaluation system which, alas, has not only never been tested, but also does not yet even exist.  Mulgrew, who has never taught a single class under any evaluation system he negotiated, spoke with complete confidence about "authentic" measures that would be used to evaluate our teaching. He is no longer using the phrase "growth model," but continues to contend that growth can be measured via portfolios or project-based learning.

Remember that this is the same Mulgrew who boasted of taking part in writing the law that brought all this nonsense upon us in the first place. This is the same Mulgrew that called the system wonderful when Reformy John King created it, with his blessing, the same Mulgrew who ridiculed those of us, including Diane Ravitch and the American Statistical Association, who labeled it junk science. This is the same Mulgrew who boasted of getting every aspect of Danielson in as opposed to the seven or eight Bloomberg wanted, and the same Mulgrew who later boasted of getting it reduced to seven or eight, like Bloomberg wanted, after he was gone. This is the same Mulgrew who boasted of getting artifacts in, and then of getting them out.

Mulgrew is now saying, even though he deemed test-score ratings wonderful when they came out, that we will not use tests to rate teachers. He has finally concluded, as many of us did long ago, that this would result in teaching to the test. He says, though, that some teachers love being rated on tests. It's really remarkable that we're basically advocating a crap shoot because it's that risky to have administrators evaluate us. With such an absolute lack of faith in the ability of administrators, you'd think they'd want to do something about that, but they refuse to move on our resolution addressing it. Somehow it's OK to shout to the skies about how unfair they are, but wildly undiplomatic to take general action on it. 

Again, there is no research or practice to support anything Mulgrew says. I have no idea whatsoever how projects or portfolios will be rated or who will rate them. Mulgrew spoke derisively of those who ridicule us that we will actually grade the work ourselves. On the other hand, unlike Mulgrew, I'm a teacher and I actually spend hours grading things. I wonder, if we are not grading the work, who is? Is it the supervisors, the ones who he wants to make sure don't rate us? Is it the geniuses up in Albany? People from other schools? Space aliens? Who knows? Mulgrew, right on the heels of the most catastrophic failure in our union's history, continues to speak with total confidence, and we are expected to trust him absolutely and hope for the best.

Despite the punitive evaluation system pushed by Governor Cuomo, Mulgrew says he continues to support us. It's obvious to me, at least, that Cuomo is a creature of convenience who will do or say anything at any moment to advance his own personal ambition. Mulgrew mentioned in passing extending the moratorium he claims we are responsible for, but which actually was put in place to try to appease the statewide opt-out movement. Though Mulgrew claims to be meeting with parents, and I hear he is, he then said that it was dangerous for more than 5% of New Yorkers to refuse the test. This is no different from what he has been saying since opt-out appeared.

We then came to the discussion of the Resolution for Respect for All People. The history of this resolution is pretty interesting, to me at least. I wanted to jointly initiate such a resolution with Unity, so rather than write it, I proposed it to leadership. They said they'd get back to me. Days later, at an Executive Board meeting, where I rose to promote this idea, they had the resolution already written, with no input from us. (So much for trying to cooperate with Unity.)

This notwithstanding, the resolution was very good. With a few adjustments from Ashraya Gupta of MORE, all of the high school reps supported it enthusiastically. The next day, though, instead of crediting Donald Trump with his racism, bigotry, and misogyny, it was edited to attribute this to "the Presidential Election" instead. This was, of course, absurd (and still is).

Peter Lamphere of MORE rose at the DA to restore Trump's name. Mulgrew, ever the student of Robert's Rules, called on several Unity Caucus members to speak against it and never once asked for a voice of support, and it wasn't as though there weren't any. I saw several close to me with hands raised, ready to speak. One Unity member said it was obvious this was about Trump, so there was no need to add his name. LeRoy Barr, though, said we couldn't place his name because we were trying to get everyone on board, including Trump supporters.

I have to say Barr is a gifted speaker, passionate and persuasive. I saw him speak in Minnesota at the AFT Convention and he was great. Here, he spoke off the cuff and was just as effective. Yet he contradicted the other loyalty oath signers by saying we didn't want to alienate the Trump supporters. So which is it? Is it so obvious that we're talking about Trump that we need not name him, or is it important that we refrain from speaking his name so that the Trump voters continue paying dues once He Who Shall Not Be Named makes the United States a "Right to Work" nation? There is, of course, a third possibility--that UFT leadership thinks Trump voters are too stupid to attribute the racism to Trump. Maybe Unity assumes they will think it was Hillary or Bernie Sanders who advocated grabbing women "by the pussy." Who knows what goes on in those top-secret Unity meetings?

All I know is that they rise to support whatever they're told to. I was pretty surprised when Barr touted debate at the Executive Board as a reason to stifle it at the DA. While I did appreciate his willingness to enable it, and while that certainly sets him apart from Mulgrew, who can't even be bothered to sit through his own Executive Board meetings, the fact is the result of any Executive Board debate is a foregone conclusion. There are seven of us elected by UFT high schools against the will of leadership, and 95 loyalty oath signers who must vote and speak as told.

There is no logical reason to withhold criticism of the execrable and anti-democratic Donald Trump. However, anti-democracy is a quality that Trump and UFT Unity share. This, sadly, is just one of the qualities very likely to result in our losing on the NY Constitutional Convention, and maybe the pensions for which we've worked our entire careers. Another is our dogged insistence on falling down well before anyone has even pushed us.

The very worst quality of UFT Unity leadership, though, is that they just bet the farm on a candidate who stood for nothing, lost the farm, and still can't bring themselves to take clear and principled stands on issues that, debate notwithstanding, aren't even debatable. 

December Delegate Assembly--Everyone Knows Resolution Is About Trump, But Let's Not Say So and Offend Anyone

President’s Report

National—Mulgrew says he’s not a therapist and is counseling people. Says he’s been to many meetings. Says he wants to calm people and we will come up with a plan. Says he can’t curse. Says cabinet of Trump, everyone put in charge hates what he’s put in charge of. Says Putz, in charge of DOL doesn’t believe in minimum wage or worker’s right. EPA head doesn’t believe in global warning and thinks his agency impedes business.

Exxon is Sec. of State. “Our own beauty,” Miss DeVos. Ridicules pronunciation of her name. Her life about privatizing ed. minimizing worker’s rights, but she’s not worst. Glad we are laughing so I don’t have to do therapy.

Are members getting this in their schools, what’s happening? Says those who voted for Trump are now coming to him saying they were mistaken.

Shows slides, Moskowitz got 300K from DeVos. Says Eva turned down ed. post because of pay cut, picked DeVos. Gave 400K to Campbell Brown. 100K alliance school choice. 4.8 million to right wing super PACS.

Says you know what’s coming. We have done analysis. Will they incentivize by holding Title One hostage? Would require dismantling of last spring’s law. Is infighting among GOP. Will not be top agenda item.

Says majority GOP Congress have been pissed off about using incentive to influence state policy. Will they continue to not believe in it? We don’t know. We think we have 18-24 months before Friedrichs-like case hits SCOTUS.

We will be defunded or under attack. If not policy, then defunding.

Activities around inauguration day—no permits around mall for days, unprecedented. They will issue permits, we don’t know where. There may be demos in NYC. We will get people to DC, but will be more activity in NYC.

State—Governor continues to support us at this moment. Who thought we’d be saying that two years ago? He’s criticized Trump a lot now. Union has created research paper on DeVos, we want it on their radar her main goal dismantle public ed. We are starting to strategize, are talking to everyone. Want a positive piece on public ed. and a negative attack against DeVos. People love their own public schools countrywide. Will use that.

Civil rights community say NYC schools moving forward. Now people want to get rid of it and they are upset. Revenues for state slightly down. Will see where that goes.

We know we will get a bag of crap monthly from DC. We cannot, while that is happening, afford a Constitutional Convention. Our members don’t understand what it means. Will be inundated with money coming into this state. Must educate members.

Says they will sell CC with greater environmental protections.

Shows PowerPoint, will attack workers, rights, pensions, education and environment. Speaks of NJ and IL and that they are in crisis because state didn’t make payments, though workers did. This is because they don’t have a constitutional protection.


Billionaires, reformies, corporate interests, and right wing pols want CC. Some small groups won’t understand implications, motivation might be good. They are wrong.

Must be put to vote every 20 years, with yes, every aspect up for possible change. Strategy is we vote no.

With yes vote, State senate districts would get delegates, with staff and 80K each. 100 million dollars minimum. Could run for six months, two years, whatever. Will set own rules. This would drag our our fight.

Amendments would go to statewide vote.

Says we can’t fight feds and state at same time. Vouchers illegal in NY. Could change. Won’t say vouchers, will call it choice. Says fact-less reporting is rule of thumb. Would like to know if they teach that in college.

Last in 1967, wasteful and harmful. 77, 97, rejected. Asks we speak to all to reject it. We just saw what happened when misinformed people vote against own interests.

Will not dismantle ESSA now, doesn’t mean they won’t get to it. Great flexibility, test scores not mandated. Working in Albany, have concerns, NYS needs to take advantage of flexibility in ESSA law. Very close to finalizing evaluation agreement.

If we have an agreement now that no longer uses test scores, what happens when school lives and dies by test scores? Only in our evaluation for two years, but Bloomberg made it sole factor, schools were all about tests. We fought to get changes and are moving it where we want it. Moving in positive place. If state system based on test scores we are back in crazy world.

If this doesn’t work we will get on social media. I’ve been meeting with parents across state, we want eval. based on whole child, what we do. If eval is test score that says that’s all we care about. Says no one does programs in great way because we get no credit for it. If we put it in system we will get real action at school level instead of lip service from bunch of hacks.

City—Evaluation—31st headed right at us. DOE, CSA, and us, We have stuck through giving teachers real voice in this process. Flexibility in observations, not too much. What does student learning mean? If you want to measure real student learning tie it to what we are actually teaching, do each day. Not to outside assessment we have to prep for. Not authentic.

Want members to feel good about focusing on what’s actual taught. That is basis for “authentic student measurements.” Says we are sick of tests. Measuring growth of what student has learned. Says schools that use portfolios and project-based learning base things on what’s being taught.

Says if it’s tied to real curriculum we will get it passed. Says people ask “What are teachers gonna do, grade their own papers?” Mulgrew says as long as kids are in classroom they will learn. Says tests based on what we teach are fine. Some subjects lend themselves toward portfolio, like music art. Must have standardized practice on how to collect these things.

Piece not up for negotiation, in state law, is matrix. Says you will be very thankful it is in state law. Fairest thing ever. When done right it is teacher performance. Says we will do borough based trainings. If not done next week I will walk away. Will say I don’t care if we lose the money because you’re all a joke.

Principals don’t like matrix because it takes their discretion away. Every principal knows how many points they can mess with you on. Magic number is 24. Will be no score anymore. If student learning isn’t ineffective neither are you.

Very late in year for agreement. No changes to whatever observations you picked for this year. Will figure out guidance for MOSL committees. Will be different.

Exec. Board putting together a committee, a task force, looking at next mayoral race. Many unions have already endorsed de Blasio, including sanitation. Got rid of crap equipment and bought right stuff for them. Barr and Schoor will handle. 5:09 ends.



Staff Director’s Report

LeRoy Barr—Teacher’s Choice deadline Jan. 15, forms 20th. School lunch cards push free lunch for all program. Stigma to free lunch. Bill will go from 11 to 20 billion remove stigma. Want universal free and healthy meals.

Coalition for homeless event, kids from around city came. Saturday partnering to help homeless women and families. Next DA Jan. 18th. Wishes us happy holidays and new year.


Questions

Mulgrew asks if they have horrible green peas at lunch.

CL—CTLE credits—will DOE get approval?

Not yet. We don’t run DOE. Our responsibility is to members, so we became approved. Can call teacher center or Evelyn de Jesus for approved hours. They aren’t doing their job. 5 years to get hours.

With our contract, we get PD. We agreed teachers should give some. Why should people go if they aren’t certified?

Remember when we had no time for training? We now have less time in classroom so we get training. If a group of schools would like people trained by us, could we do that?

DeJesus—We are doing it now for Ls. Building it out.

Mulgrew—Would you send someone from your staff for training for certification?

Yes, says crowd.

CL—Cuomo did about face, what can UFT do to influence him to reign in independent dems who function as GOP?

Not sure. They can do what they like. Says they were played as marks by DeVos. Says we aren’t happy with dem performance and he’ll probably get this on a blog somewhere. Will get some phone calls later probably.

Q—Portability—Can they do that without ESSA, and will opt-out movement hinder us?

Opt-out now really dangerous, they will enforce 5% provision. They want to defund us. If we give them a reason….ESSA says we still must give standardized test and info must be public. Said civil rights community was very strong on that. Says feds have right to withhold Title one funding.

Q—Can they tie funding to child and bypass school?

That’s how they argue for vouchers. Not something we want to even discuss. Would violate state constitution. You clearly read up on this.

CL Bryant—Concerned about eval. Why can’t teacher have choice of evaluations. Why can’t we have choice of whether we use test or not?

Especially doesn’t work with principal like yours. We need to shine light on bad admin. Other side has to agree to flexibility. But there will be some if we do it right. Trying to give more definitive voice to MOSL committee. We don’t believe standardized test scores should be used but some teachers like it better than administrators. Would like to make Regents optional standard. Says some schools would want to use test scores, they’ve treated them well. Warned that test scores can vary. If you choose them, test becomes entire focus.


Motions 5:29

NYC Schools should be sanctuaries for all students, resolution. UFT will not allow ICE on campus. Will defend those threatened. Will set up committees for rapid response and outreach. Committees will assemble to shut down affected schools, mobilize mass actions.

Dave Pecoraro—last paragraph violation of Taylor Law.

Pro—We need rapid response, we are biggest and most powerful union, need to do what we need to do. We know what it means when people are loaded onto buses and taken away.

Howard Schoor—asks we vote against this. Says we’re pushing for immigrant liaison in every school. Want to see if this works. Have to give them chance. Also some resolveds not “doable.” We don’t control police and one violates Taylor Law. Would put members in jeopardy.

Does not pass.

Mulgrew—spoke to mayor and governor, and says if this happens there will be arrests of UFT members and president. Says individual must make decision.

Rich Mantel—Middle school VP—About DeVos. Opposition to her appointment. We will work with partners to press her rejection.

Passes.

5:39


Resolution in support of Meaningful Teacher Induction—Carmen Alvarez—thousands of teachers come and go, many special ed. Mentor teachers can help. Let’s institute something already required by law and make it work also toward retention. UFT will urge principals to give an additional year of mentorship.

Delegate—speaks in favor. Knows we lose many in first 3-5 years. Vital we do all we can to support newest teachers, those not quite ready. Mulgrew calls another, does not seek voice against.

Delegate—Moves to amend—add “ensuring time for a mentor.”

Questions called.

Amendment, resolution pass.

Resolution in support of Consent Ed.—Janella Hinds—Refers to Access Hollywood conversation, thinking about sexual violence—We can think differently about how to engage and support our students to prevent sexual violence and support survivors. Expands DOE respect for all initiative. Wants conversations about relationships in healthy and respectful manner.

Question called.

Passes.

Resolution in Opposition to a Constitutional Convention

Mel Aaronson—I voted against them since 57, urges every person to vote against CC. Simple referendum. Dangerous to public employees.  Not only about us. Only 24% of working people belong to unions. If only they vote our way, we can’t win. Now, 60% of public support this and we must overcome it. Tell your family tonight to vote no in November. Tell colleagues tomorrow. You know why.

CL—Says teachers are unaware. Says we must let them know.

Passes unanimously

Resolution Calling for Respect for All People

Sterling Roberson—Impact of recent election, rhetoric of “one of our candidates” based on race, religion, etc,, goes against what we believe in. We understand in NYC impact it has had on schools, crime. violence. We need to recognize, regardless of political affiliations that we have to respect each and every one of us. Fighting privatization, vouchers. We have history of ensuring we meet those obligations. Asks for support.

Peter Lamphere—MORE—Moves to amend.

Replace “presidential election campaign” with Donald Trump’s election campaign. Resolution originally presented as I proposed. After exec. board voted to approve, was changed. We have a fight on our hands. Sterling is right, we need to educate members. We should specify source of this rhetoric. We need to be clear where it’s coming from and what we need to do to fight it. If we shy away we’re doing a disservice to our members. We know GOP alone doesn’t attack ed. but shying away from confronting Trump is a mistake, wrong foot to start four year battle.

CL—Rises in opposition to amendment. Important we don’t focus on man Thinks it’s obvious. You have to remember many of our members voted for Trump. Must focus on issues, not man.

CL—Stands in opposition to amendment. We need to have respect for all, Need to not alienate our own members. We don’t want his name on it. Everyone knows what that is and we don’t need to be blatantly insulting.

LeRoy Barr—speaks against amendment. Says we voted several times and debated based on his motion. Another vote took place. There were three votes. There was full democracy. Says it’s position of strength to respect members voice and vote. Says we need all our troops behind us. Is it important enough to alienate our people. Says something Trump said resonated. Says if we disrespect it again we will lose every battle.

Much applause for LeRoy.

Dave Pecoraro moves that DA be extended.

Fails.

Moves debate be closed.

Amendement fails.

Resolution passes.

Mulgrew says we have a lot of work ahead of us. Wishes us a great break. Says when we come back, we are going to war.

Governor Bribes Me with 240 Cuomo Bucks

I may be cheap, but I am for sale. That's what I learned after unfolding one of those check mailers the other day. My village, Freeport, respected Governor Cuomo's tax cap. We raised the school budget by two percent, or whatever the limit is. Therefore, I supposed, every home owner in my town got a similar check.

I guess we could all jump up and conclude, "Wow, that Andrew Cuomo is one heckuva guy. He just gave me money, and I like money." And yet he's the first guy who got me to stop voting blindly for Democrats, as he ran for the first time on a platform of going after unions. I actually think, if he'd been fairer with unions, that I'd have more than just 240 bucks, so I'm not all that happy.

So what to do? Do I sent the 240 bucks back? I don't think that would be an effective form of protest. For one thing, it would just seep back into his Evil Empire. He'd probably find a way to funnel it to Eva Moskowitz, and she'd use it to bus hapless children to Albany. That's not gonna work.

Should I go all consumer and put it back into the economy? Shop local? Maybe I could get all my shoes fixed at the shoe repair shop that's miraculously survived. But my shoes aren't broken, so what's the point in that?

What I really wonder is whether these checks will help soften the loathing and disgust with which people view Andrew Cuomo. He's already being touted as a 2020 Presidential candidate. Personally, I'd hope the Democrats would go with someone who actually favors working people, as opposed to a union-basher. Isn't that the Republicans' job? Shouldn't they sue him for pretending to be a Republican? Should we sue him for pretending to be a Democrat?

Actually, Cuomo is neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Like Michael Bloomberg before him, he's a raving opportunist, doing and saying absolutely anything he thinks will promote his endless and bottomless ambition. That doesn't sound like a winning formula, but given Donald Trump is President-elect, it might just be the ticket.

With the "ethics-shmethics" philosophy of the incoming Trump administration, I see it as unlikely they will do a big push to end corruption. Of course, the Donald could view Cuomo as a rival and therefore go after him to preclude competition, but somehow I'm pessimistic over the possibility of his sharing that cell with his buddies Skelos and Silver.

What do you think the appropriate disposition of 240 Cuomo bucks would be?

Electoral College Is Legal Fraud, Like UFT Election

It's disgraceful that Donald Trump got 46% of the popular vote and is poised to take 57% of the Electoral College, thus becoming President of the United States. There are all sorts of rationales advanced for this system, but the only one that makes any sense is that it's designed to thwart the will of the people. In a national election, there's absolutely no justification for a vote from Wyoming carrying more weight than one from New York.

UFT members may or may not know that my friend James Eterno got more votes from working high school teachers than his opponent. Taking that into consideration, why shouldn't he be UFT Academic High School Vice-President?

The answer is simple. Someone like James would be inconvenient for leadership. For one thing, he has consistently refused to sign a loyalty oath, and is therefore not qualified, in their view, to lead. It's kind of ironic that leadership sees the sworn inability to speak one's mind as indispensable for leadership. Me, I'd think in these troubled times that out-of-the-box thinking would be an absolute prerequisite for survival. Of course I haven't signed the oath either, so my thoughts are nothing but an inconvenience to those at the top.

In fact, in the 1980s, shortly after I started teaching, Michael Shulman of New Action had the temerity to go and get himself elected UFT Academic High School Vice-President. This was unacceptable to Unity, which insisted on doing over the election, only to have him win by an even higher margin. This was even more unacceptable.

So when UFT Unity once again controlled everything, it changed the rules and made all Vice-Presidents at large. Than means that everyone gets to vote on every VP. It doesn't matter if you teach elementary, if you are a paraprofessional, a retiree, or a nurse. You get to help select the High School Academic Vice-President. That's your reward for consistently voting the right way, and the punishment for high school teachers for being so uppity and daring to challenge the status quo.

This directly parallels the undemocratic United States Electoral College system. In fact, it also parallels the Voting Rights Act, which was rendered pretty much moot in 2013. That's discriminatory, and it's a national disgrace. Effectively removing the right of high school teachers to select their own leader is also discriminatory, and it's a local disgrace. High school teachers have no voice in leadership.

Pretty soon we'll be a "right-to-work" country, and UFT leadership will have to ask members to pay dues. How are they going to explain to high school teachers that taxation without representation is the way to go? That's a tough mountain to climb. Are they going to tell us that our choice for Vice-President is invalid because only they know what's good for us? Are they going to treat us like 4-year-olds and expect us to say, "Thank you sir, may I have another?"

I'll tell you something about James Eterno. He knows the contract up and down, back and forth, and can recall instantly regulations I've never heard of. He's been an enormous resource to me and many others. He was the chapter leader of Jamaica High School, and Jamaica teachers far and wide have nothing but respect for him. They contact him immediately from wherever they are ATRs with questions.

Yet UFT members at large have little access to him because leadership prefers to hire people like this one. Not only is James shut out from his rightful place as Vice-President, but he can't even help members on the phone as a UFT employee. I don't know about you, but I call the borough office to talk to staffers only as a matter of last resort. I know who I trust, and not being Blanche DuBois,  I'm not willing to rely on the kindness of strangers. Extraordinary competence, alas, takes a back seat to the loyalty oath, and leadership scratches its head and wonders why we're in the state we are.

These are extraordinary times and leadership cannot break out of the weak, flawed thinking that endorsed junk science because it was the easy way. Leadership can't break out of the bind that endorsed charter fan Hillary Clinton and failed to criticize the hurtful policies of John King and Arne Duncan. Leadership can't see that its criticisms of Betsy DeVos apply largely to both King and Duncan.

Leadership continues to walk all over high school teachers with impunity, and they wonder why three out of four teachers don't find it worth their time to vote in union elections. Organizing effectively will soon be a fundamental aspect of our survival as a union. The "sit down and shut up" philosophy of UFT Unity will not enable our union to even survive.

Andrew Cuomo's Heavy Hearts Club Band and Their Evaluation System

I was at a chapter leader meeting last week where I got the impression that there would be no agreement on a new evaluation system for next year. Of course that could change, but it's hard for me to imagine how it could change for the better.

I got up and said that evaluating teachers via test scores was junk science, and that the American Statistical Association said that teachers influenced test scores by a factor of 1 to 14%. One UFT  person said she was sure that her teaching influenced the kids. I didn't dispute that, actually. I'm sure it does, and I'm sure mine does too. I'm just not sure it influences their standardized test scores. In fact, the standardized test my kids take, the NYSESLAT, has little or nothing to do with English acquisition, which I encourage and foster. My kids did well on it last year, but I'm inclined to think it has more to do with the fundamental lack of validity of the test than anything I may have done.

Another UFT person challenged me to come up with an ideal rating system on the spot. I thought that was a pretty silly response. It reminded me of climate change deniers. Well, you come up with a better way to improve the environment than rampantly polluting the air and water and hoping for the best.

The real challenge is to come up with a worse way to rate teachers, and that, in fact, was precisely what Governor Andrew Cuomo set out to do. The system we work under, in case it's escaped your attention, was designed to more easily fire teachers. When it failed to do that, Cuomo famously labeled his own system "baloney" and set out on a path to send as many of us as possible toward destitution and ruin. That's his vision of advocacy for children. And the Democrats in the Assembly voted with "heavy hearts" to support it. UFT President Michael Mulgrew, for reasons that elude me utterly, thanked them for this.

There are other flaws in this system. One is the number of required observations. It's simply not necessary to observe every single teacher in the building that many times. We were lucky in that the principals' union advocated for four rather than six. But that's still too much. My principal says he gets a very good idea of what's going on in classrooms by observing from the hall and I believe him. In the year I spent doing hallroom patrol I got a very strong impression where things were going right and wrong, and I'm not trained to observe classes at all.

I think a principal or AP could observe teachers once a year, and if there were no problems otherwise recorded that would be enough. If, in fact, the observation did not go well, that would be an indication that the supervisor ought to support the teacher in question with further visits and advice. In fact, teachers in need of help get less of it because supervisors, in my building at least, are swamped visiting thirty or forty teachers four times a year. My friend James Eterno, however, informs me that the state law sets two observations as a minimum, so that's the best we can do. And if it is, I have no idea why we'd go for more. It's a waste of time and effort, and it demoralizes teachers to no end.

Of course I'm not Reformy John King, who Michael Mulgrew trusted to have the final word on our system. Though it's been refined somewhat, it's still his baby. I believe Geoff Decker wrote in Chalkbeat that neither the DOE nor the UFT wanted this much observation. If UFT is negotiating anything, I hope they're working toward reducing this number. It's a great time to give teachers something to be grateful for, what with Donald Trump and his Billionaire Swamp threatening to envelop us and all working Americans in toxic sludge.

Of course I'm not privy to the inside workings of UFT. I'm on the Executive Board, but those of us not on the dais are just the outside looking in. Ideally we should just sit there and question nothing, but they're now faced with the inconvenience of high school teachers having elected seven people who haven't signed loyalty oaths.

I think it's healthy for the union to have us there, and it amazes me to sit there while people roll their eyes and curse us out for having the temerity to ask questions. We are teachers, and it behooves us to ask questions and set an example. But up is down and right is left in America today, and sadly leadership make no exception for the United Federation of Teachers.

There is no question whatsoever, despite frequent assertions otherwise from leadership, that the evaluation system is the most demoralizing thing that's come down the pike in decades. In fact, it's specifically intended to be that way. I heard directly from a UFT Unity member that the "norming" exercises this year were directly meant to have supervisors give lower ratings. So don't believe all that crap about how a rubric makes everything equal or fair.

If UFT wants to do something to help and support those of us on the ground who actually do the work, it will push relentlessly for fewer observations. It will give those of us who teach some little thing for which to show gratitude when Donald Trump and his band of corporate goons make this country "right to work" until we rightly take it back.

What Does It Take To Get Promoted to Principal in NYC?

 I'm reposting this at top of the blog today, both because it's in the news, and also because there is an active petition to remove this abusive principal. Please consider signing and/ or donating to this cause.

by special guest blogger Peter Lamphere

You’d hope it would be skill. Or perhaps leadership. Maybe it would be an overarching educational vision. But apparently, rising to principal in NYC nowadays entails heaping abuse on your subordinates and destroying the educational community you supervise.

Some readers of this blog may remember headlines from years ago about Rosemarie Jahoda’s harassment of the Bronx Science math department, which triggered one of the largest mass grievances in our union’s history. Yet this summer, Rosemarie Jahoda was appointed interim acting principal at Townsend Harris High School - one of the premier public high schools in Queens.

When I joined the Bronx Science math department in September of 2006, I entered a pedagogical community with several centuries of collective experience teaching some of the most gifted students in the country. Greg Greene - whose freshman geometry class I dutifully attended every day and who reminded me to “always do my homework before class” - had been teaching at the school since 1968.  Many others had been teaching since the seventies or eighties and were some of the most dedicated and creative teachers I’ve had the pleasure of working with. They generously shared their lesson plans and techniques. They were joined by a number of newer teachers like myself (I had 4 years in at that point) who added energy and new perspective.

A year later, our supervisor was replaced by Jahoda, who seemed like a very competent, friendly educator.  We didn’t know that she had been told by principal Valerie Reidy to bring order to the “wild west” of the math department. The math teachers were a group who knew their union rights and were willing to defend their untenured colleagues - which apparently angered principal Reidy.

Jahoda followed her mandate with gusto - and soon was ordering untenured faculty not to speak with veteran mentors and reducing younger teachers to tears with ruthless criticism. She also yelled red-faced in department meetings. An arbitrator later found she “reduced 7 teachers to tears on 12 separate occasions,” had raised her voice at teachers in front of students, and called another veteran a “disgusting person” in a meeting.

By May of that school year, the teachers of the department were fed up. Twenty of us (out of 22!) filed a harassment grievance and refused to meet with her without another colleague present for fear of a hostile work environment.  As our case wound through a multi-year arbitration process, all of the untenured teachers who signed the grievance were either fired or left the school. Others quickly followed in a string of retirements. But we were vindicated by the ruling of respected arbitrator Carol Wittenberg who held that Jahoda had engaged in a course of harassment and recommended her removal from the school.

I know many of the current Bronx Science math department teachers and respect the good work they do, but Jahoda destroyed the kind of teaching-learning community that is extremely valuable for students and families, not to mention educators. New York City schools desperately need to multiply such communities of learning.  Instead, Rosemarie Jahoda is being rewarded for destroying one.

In a sane system, this would hardly be grounds for promotion.  But the DOE is not a sane system.

Principals are regularly rewarded for bad behavior and abuse. Racist Queens principal Minerva Zanca, who attacked black employees as having “big lips,” looking like “gorillas” with “nappy hair,” is working an F-Status counseling job to supplement her retirement income.  Rather than settling out of court with the EEOC, Chancellor Fariña chose to let the DOE get sued by Preet Bharara, US District Attorney, for protecting Zanca and Superintendent Juan Mendez.

Only by organizing strong UFT chapters can we protect teachers, and students and families, from incompetent and abusive administration.  The main lesson I learned from my Bronx Science tenure as chapter leader was that simply relying on the UFT grievance process is not sufficient. Although the UFT grievance department supported us through three years of grinding hearings, the DOE simply ignored the arbitrator's ruling (relying on a technicality in Article 23 of our contract that makes such decisions non-binding). I was able to overturn one U-rating on my record in court, but the Bronx Science chapter had been weakened and I was forced to transfer from the school to keep my job.

With the MORE caucus this coming year, I plan to help run a series of chapter organizer training workshops, to help support educators mobilize the power of their coworkers to defend themselves against the insanities of our education system, and their abusive representatives.  Please feel free to share your own stories of organizing against abusive administrators below.  Collectively, we can work toward building sanity into this system.

It's a Beautiful Day in Carmen's Neighborhood

You probably won't be surprised to hear that NYC Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña loves her some colocated schools. She seems to think that colocated schools are better than small schools. The only really issue with that line of thinking, of course, is that colocated schools are small schools. They're a remnant from the Bloomberg era of shutting down comprehensive high schools and placing little boutique schools in their place.

They started out great, since they got to hand pick students. It turns out when you take whatever students you wish, ignore ELLs, students with special needs, students who are homeless, and students who inconveniently get low test scores, you have fewer low test scores and therefore get higher test scores. That's pretty much how Carmen Fariña built her reputation. What keen insight.

That works, of course, and many charter schools have replicated this model, thus drawing the praise of various NYC editorial boards. But the small schools, alas, were told to start taking representative samples of NYC kids, and who would've thunk it, started to perform just as other schools. Like most educational miracles, this too was predicated on fraud. No fraud, no success, and thus Bill Gates got off of the small school train he himself had started.

But Bloomberg plodded on. The small schools were fantastic. They contained a whole lot of newbie teachers who didn't cause trouble. Many of them don't have to worry about union interference. Sometimes when I go to grieve class sizes I meet reps from small schools who the principal has sent. They aren't chapter leaders because they haven't got chapter leaders. I'm sure they aren't all like that, but it was certainly convenient for Mayor Mike to take a school with one chapter leader, break it into five schools, and send that nasty old chapter leader into ATR World.

The thing now is that Fariña wants cooperation. It turns out that, if you have five small schools and let them share facilities and classes, the students get more choices. Eureka! The only thing missing from that thought process is the notion of reversing the split. For example, in a big school like mine, kids have as many or more choices as the kids in colocated schools. We don't have five principals.

So my question is, why has that not occurred to Carmen Fariña? Alas, Fariña, like a whole lot of people in the DOE, is a remnant of the Bloomberg administration. It's time for de Blasio to clean out Tweed and bring in new people. It's time for him to place his own stamp on education.

It's no small coincidence that it's also time for him to run for re-election. I think his chances are much improved, given the insanity that was the Presidential election. A UFT endorsement would help. Let's hope that our leadership wakes up and tells him they want a new broom at Tweed. It would be nice if we actually accomplished something worthwhile before "Right to Work" becomes enshrined in national law and we move back to the nineteenth century.

Proposed UFT Voucher Resolution Applies to Charters Too

On Monday at the Executive Board I looked at the voucher resolution (click on it below to enlarge it if you'd like to read) and knew that something was wrong. Aren't vouchers even worse than the resolution says it is? I've sent out feelers and am looking to find something concrete with which to amend it. I haven't yet, and if any reader knows something I don't, please feel free to make a suggestion.

Nonetheless, after I read it a few times, I noticed a disturbing pattern. The resolution states that voucher programs grow "to the detriment of public schools," and of course that's correct. It's also correct that public schools provide fewer services when they have fewer resources.

How is that any different from what charter schools do, particularly when they "colocate" with existing schools? Haven't we seen a mass exodus of school libraries as we make way for Eva Moskowitz and her chain of charters? Even as my school is starved for space, others with available space lose it as charters relentlessly expand.

The resolution continues, stating that underfunded public schools are unable to attract and retain good teachers. That's true, of course. But don't charter schools also suck funding from public schools? Wouldn't troubled schools recuperate more easily if large swaths of their neighborhood kids were not sucked out via massive advertising campaigns by charter schools?

The resolution then calls vouchers, "thinly-veiled privatization schemes." I don't object to that per se, except I'd argue that vouchers are not veiled at all, thinly or otherwisely. Vouchers take money from public schools and send ot to private schools. That's it. If we want to go with "thinly-veiled," that road leads us, yet again, to charter schools.

Charters claim to be public some of the time, but don't want to be subject to the same regulations as we are. They don't want to take the same kids we do, and if they don't like the ones they get, they toss them to the street (or more accurately, to the public schools which are then vilified for their test scores). Then they can make preposterous claims about 100% of their kids going to college, or something, after they've tossed the rest. Above you see Eva Moskowitz, livid at being asked to follow the same regulations every pre-K in the city did. No stinking rules for Eva, thank you very much.

Then the resolution says voucher schools pick and choose their students. Actually I have no experience with voucher schools so I can't speak to that. I suppose private schools, being private, take who they please. But we all know that charters pick by lottery, and that it takes a proactive parent to bother to enter one. We know that charters can require parents to spend hours working at the charter. We know that Eva Moskowitz might pick a day and drag the parents to Albany, along with the hapless kids. We know that she makes the kids do work on the bus, just to ensure this is the Most Miserable Field Trip Ever.

So while I haven't yet found good enough info to improve the voucher resolution, I have to ask, given the language in the resolution, why the hell do we support charter schools? It's one thing for us to talk about what Al Shanker envisioned. It's one thing to support the few that actually accomplish whatever that is.

But it's quite another to pretend that the charter movement, as advanced by wealthy, profit-crazed privatizers like Besty DeVos, is not geared toward privatizing, and the next best thing for them as they were unable to get communities to pass vouchers. DeVos tried twice in Michigan, was rebuffed, and now wants to do away with all that messy democratic election nonsense. After all, she and Trump are in the driver's seat after having lost in the general by 2.6 million votes and counting.

It's pretty ironic that we in UFT are pushing a resolution that condemns vouchers for a whole lot of things charters do as a matter of course. I wonder if the folks on the 14th floor can see it. It's hard to say. Personally, I've never been up there and can't be sure they allow irony on that floor.  It would be a welcome addition, though. Seeing irony helps to accentuate the import of what otherwise appears to be mundane reality.

Given that the idealistic charters envisioned by Shanker are the exception rather than the rule, wouldn't we be more credible if we simply opposed charters altogether? Wouldn't we be more credible if we hadn't supported the neoliberal Democratic agenda that hurt education just a little bit less than Trump and his flying monkeys want to do? Is it finally time to stop rationalizing the nonsense we've been enduring all these years and take a stand, even if it offends the faux-Democrats who enable such things as Moskowitzes?

Inquiring minds want to know. 

Class Size in the UFT Contract

You probably think that your administration is bound to keep class sizes to the contractual minimum. I used to think that too. I'm a high school teacher and the contractual language is crystal clear. From Article 7, M, 2. b:

No homeroom or official or subject class in senior high school shall exceed 34 pupils, except as specified in 3 below. This shall not be accomplished by an increase in the size of classes for the non-college bound students.

So what is this "3 below?"

An acceptable reason for exceeding the maximum class size limitations listed in paragraphs 1b through 2g above may be any of the following:

1. There is no space available to permit scheduling of any additional class or classes in order to reduce class size.
2. Conformity to the class size objective would result in placing additional classes on short time schedule.
3. Conformity to the class size objective would result in the organization of half-classes.
4. A class larger than the maximum is necessary or desirable in order to provide for specialized or experimental instruction, or for IGC instruction, or for placement of pupils in a subject class of which there is only one on a grade.

In the event that it is necessary to assign a teacher to a class which exceeds the maximum size listed above, the principal shall stipulate the reason in writing to the teacher and to the Chancellor. Such statement of reasons may be available for examination by the Union in the Office of the Chancellor.

So it sounds like there are a lot of ways to circumvent the rule.  They can grant an exception. However, exceptions ought not to prove a rule, and they aren't granted over and over again. So in a school like mine, where there are perpetually issues, where I go to Manhattan twice a year to grieve class sizes, careful planning ought to preclude these issues. What happens when that doesn't occur? For that, you have to go to Article 22G, 2, j:

If the Board asserts that it cannot comply with the arbitrator's award, it must set forth a plan of action to remedy the class size or group size violation. If the Board has acted in good faith, and the plan of action is not unreasonable, it will be accepted by the arbitrator.

Now this is where things get really sticky.  A year or two ago I heard about several local Queens high schools that had dozens of oversized classes. The arbitrator, rather than lower class sizes in any way, decided to release all the affected teachers from daily C6 assignments. I personally found that outrageous. Perhaps some teachers were happy not having to go tutor, or tend the book room, or whatever it was they were supposed to do that period. But it certainly didn't alleviate the issues with oversized classes.

I was pretty happy that didn't happen in my school, until of course it did. And when you enter the slippery slope of accepting nonsense as a "plan of action," you find the nonsense mounts rapidly. Thus teachers at my school were told they would get only one period off from C6 activity per week. That's outrageous. And when I went to count oversized classes, I found that there were maybe 20 new ones since the arbitrator ruled.

I ran around like a crazy person and dragged 6 teachers to computers to file grievances. It would have been 7, but the worst offense was done to a probationary teacher, and I thought having a grievance in her file might be frowned upon by the superintendent come tenure time. I've seen superintendents do way worse than that, in fact. A friend of mine, in fact, reported improprieties in testing and was discontinued.

I don't know what they're thinking over at 52 Broadway, because I'm not privy to what goes on in their Sacred Cone of Silence. But I can tell you, if they want members to continue paying $1200 a year after Trump Right to Works us they'd best not leave stuff like this on the back burner.

Teacher: What? I don't have to pay a hundred bucks a month to the union?

Me: Yes, but that may weaken us and our Contract.

Teacher: UFT left 37 kids in my class and gave me one period a week off from tutoring. I tutored anyway. My 37 kids needed more help, not less.

Is that the sort of conversation UFT leadership envisions when dues become optional?  If it isn't, they'd better take off those rose-colored glasses and wake up.  We have the highest class sizes in the state, we haven't moved to improve them in half a century, and teaching a class at maximum is already quite challenging.

Arbitrators who think they can just toss teachers a marshmallow and collect oversized paychecks from us are gonna need to think twice. And so should UFT leadership. One absolutely predictable alternative is teachers looking at dues, refusing to pay, and not even giving it a second thought. Times have changed and if we aren't thinking ahead we aren't thinking at all.

UFT Executive Board December 5th

6:05 Secretary Howard Schoor welcomes us.

Approval of Minutes—approved

President’s report—

Mulgrew is not here.

Staff Director’s Report—LeRoy Barr

Also not here.

Kuljit Ahluwalia—New Action—Teacher evaluations online. What about principal evaluations? Is it that only parents can ask them?

Schoor—Adam Ross, attorney, Law says only parents can ask for evaluation.

 Ahluwalia—Shouldn’t I be able to see how admin rated?

Schoor—this is the law.

Arthur Goldstein--MORE--At this juncture it’s vitally important that we support our members, our students and our community.

Last week I learned that Deborah M. Gaines, an arbitrator who gets paid $1600 a day, found it reasonable that Francis Lewis High School teachers with oversized classes be released from one C6 assignment per week. She also found it reasonable that Forest Hills High School teachers be released from on C6 assignment per week per oversized class. Thus, if I have two oversized classes, I’m relieved from one C6 assignment. If a Forest Hills teacher has two oversized classes, she’s relieved from two C6 assignments.

First, it’s ridiculous to think it’s easier to teach two oversized classes at 214% capacity Lewis than at Forest Hills. Second, it’s ridiculous to contend the DOE-sponsored “action plan” of releasing teachers from C6 assignments makes up in any way for oversized classes. Teachers don’t need a period off from tutoring when they have oversized classes. Students in oversized classes don’t need less tutoring either. The DOE, which claims to place “Children first, always,” clearly doesn’t give a golly gosh darn about our working conditions, which are student learning conditions.

More importantly, this remedy tells principals everywhere they can make as many oversized classes as they wish with no consequence. Why should they care if teachers give one fewer day of tutoring when they can create fewer classes with impunity and save thousands of dollars by cramming students in like sardines? Today I went and counted, found 33 oversized classes, filed five grievances and got eight corrected. That is eight more than the arbitrator managed to fix and I’m on day one.

An action plan needs to address and discourage oversized classes. This does neither, and in fact tells principals they can abuse the Contract, us, and our students with impunity. Let's let members know with absolute clarity that we don’t play this game.

I ask that the UFT let both members and the DOE know we absolutely oppose oversized classes and will not tolerate nonsense like this. I ask the United Federation of Teachers to make sure Deborah M. Gaines never get another contract as arbitrator.

Also how many oversized classes are there in the city as we speak, and what’s our plan moving forward?

Schoor—We will get an answer. Grievance department not here.

Janella Hinds—Grievance department is reviewing this situation. We are evaluating this plan for Lewis.

Mike Schirtzer—MORE—How did deputy chancellor meeting go? Update on adult ed? In special ed, do we have data on how many ICT classes are out of compliance?

Schoor—We met with them, will have a discussion. will be no retribution against letter writers, Dep. Chancellor will meet with DR, definitely,  and some chapter members, perhaps.

There is shortage of special ed. classes.

Ashraya Gupta—MORE—Asked several times about immigrant Liaison.

LeRoy Barr—We did have a meeting with DOE, brought up issue. They seem intrigued by concept. We will have further conversations. Talking about who could do job. We are in preliminary talks. We believe they will talk it through. We need to clarify what issues the person will deal with. No commitment at this point.

Schoor—They will bring it to mayor’s office. Thankfully no more questions.

6:19—Mulgrew arrives.

President’s Report

DeVos makes it clear where this admin headed. Asked L. Barr to make resolution. DeVos makes ed. marketplace and removes public. We were not surprised she was named but we know where they are headed. Are they going to drill down into state policy or stay out? Only question left.

GOP has always been angry at incentives to influence state ed. But they will not be friendly to us at all, don’t like unions, want ed. privatized. Have had conversations about it. Want resolution on record with AFT. Hearings for her should show what she really is, should show she wants to take away public school.
Spoke with AFT, million women march moving, and we will send people to participate when we know for sure where they are, what permits they have.

ESSA—Regulations up for final public comment. Gives us 3 years unless new admin dismantles. We do not believe they will do this now. They want multiple measure approach, not just test scores, transparency, so public knows what local schools do. Still require 95% participation in standardized tests, but no longer require its use to evaluate schools or teachers. Must be considerations for Ls, special ed students.

Renewal schools—will be press. We are tying to churn rate of teachers. 1/3 well, 1/3 stable, 1/3 not so well, and they match churn rate. If people leave schools, sign points something wrong with leadership.

Constitutional Convention—Will do presentation at DA. Big political hurdle. Lots of money will come to state to push this. We need to stop in tracks. NYS pensions in good shape because constitution requires contributions from municipalities, unlike NJ and IL. Will be big push, members don’t understand this. We must educate.

Asks LeRoy and Howie to make committee on mayoral race. Unions have already endorsed. Mayor inherited no contracts, now we all have them. There will be general election candidate, will run against UFT and school system.

Coalition for homeless Saturday—children come and we celebrate, work with them all year round. Thanks Karen A.

ACTE—career and tech ed—largest org of its kind—we have taken it as strategy to engage with them, made deal on Friday, and we will host Region 1 yearly symposium here in April. Resolving paperwork complaints, big win in adult ed. If CLs don’t want to do this tell them it’s simple. When they know it will go out of school it gets resolved.

Professional conciliation—working toward a template. We have right to question admin judgment.

Thank you.

6:32 Mulgrew leaves

Schoor—We have many paperwork complaints.

Staff Director Report 

LeRoy Barr—CL Training part 2 went well. Coalition for homeless Saturday. Kwanzaa celebration 12/15 at UFT. Next EB Dec. 19th

Report from Districts

Karen Alford, thanks David K. New Teacher Initiative works to retain teachers, save them from chaotic schools. Financial wellness workshop for new members very helpful to new teachers. Will be repeated.

Mindy ? —thanks leadership for negotiating speech teacher agreement. Teacher will collect medicaid funds for their service and resolve SESIS issue.

Sean R—Last week SI had SRP day, 300 attended.

Howard Sandel—Last week new collective bargaining agreement for Lighthouse Guild. 36th year on time contract.

Janella Hinds—Last week we thought about HS enrollment, went to L. James panel, engaged around issue of diversity. Were panel discussions with DOE, academics, community activists. Want to do even in Jan.

Schoor—response to question last week.

Adam Ross—Same law that shields teacher ratings shields admin.

Schoor—You have to get a parent to do it.

Kuljit Ahluwalia—New Action—Recourse if principal disregards parent request?

Ross—Parent could go to OSI or SCI or file lawsuit.

Legislative Report—Paul Egan—going to Albany tomorrow for meeting, pushing for pay raises. Leader of Assembly and Governor at odds. Democrat Brooks up by 41. 1000 votes yet to be counted, most on GOP objection. Absentee and provisional ballots. 32 Senators elected on Democrat line, fewer on GOP but some Dems caucus with GOP.

Resolution in Opposition to School Vouchers—

LeRoy Barr—Resolution attempts to educate members in terms of what vouchers are, how they affect public schools, and how they affect city. We have to let members know about this issue. Asks for support.

Arthur Goldstein—MORE--Asks for more detail, vouchers are actually worse than portrayed here. Will support but reserves the right to send more info.

Schoor—you can amend at DA.

Passes unanimously.

Motion to adjourn—passed.

Patsy Cline Sings Crazy. UFT Practices It.

It's kind of funny, if you fancy gallows humor, that the United Federation of Teachers, the largest teacher local in the United States of America, can't manage to change. After all, patronage has been the icing on the cake, perhaps the cake itself. Last Monday I went to a meeting in which UFT Unity loyalists all stood up to say it was too dangerous to take sides against Trump, because we might alienate Trump voters in our midst.

Why did they do this? Because "leadership" of the union, according to Secretary Howie Schoor, made this decision. Jonathan Halabi asked for names, but instead, we heard "leadership." Who is that, I wonder. Is it Michael Mulgrew, who won't get on social media, who carries a flip phone so as not to be troubled with electronic communication, who flits in and out of Executive Board meetings like a butterfly who doesn't want its wings ruffled? Is it LeRoy Barr, who seems to think on his feet, whose mind appears newly open to the fact that we may actually need to do something differently? Is it the entire mysterious and elusive AdCom committee, whose meeting minutes we are asked to approve even though we don't attend? Is it Randi Weingarten, hanging around DC and still pulling our strings?

We'll never know.

Leadership doesn't understand that at all. What they know best is inertia. Nonetheless, when they put out the bat signal for Unity Caucus members to get up and speak, they do. They stand and wait for the chance to argue that the United Federation of Teachers ought not to take sides against the bigoted, homophobic, racist and anti-Semitic Donald Trump. People might get mad at us if we take sides. That's what they're told to say, so they do. This is activism, UFT style.

Of course, this follows their all-out miserable failure of a push to make Hillary Clinton President. In fact, there was a Hillary Clinton office at 52 Broadway, and Mulgrew boasted of it to the Delegate Assembly. Now why the hell was that if we can't alienate people? Were they worried about Trump supporters then? Were they concerned about alienating me, a Bernie Sanders supporter? Was Randi Weingarten worried about how I'd feel when she tweeted about "Bernie Bros," the stereotypical and baseless insinuation we were a bunch of thugs?

I know Trump voters in my building. They won't support me for US Senator, but they'll vote for me as chapter leader. They've told me so. They know absolutely I will stand for them when they're in trouble no matter who they or I select as US President. They aren't so sure about the folks at 52 Broadway, particularly when things like class size violations go fundamentally unchecked.  

By the logic leadership advanced last Monday night, the UFT ought not to ever take a position on anything, because there's always the possibility someone might disagree. We ought not to oppose "right to work," even though it will shoot an arrow through our veritable heart, because some members may support the notion of saving 1200 bucks a year. Instead of soliciting donations for COPE, we ought to abandon it altogether. Taking sides is too risky. Let's drop the pretense and officially stand for nothing.

The argument might hold merit, considering UFT leadership's long and uncanny run of political failure. Who can forget the musical chair-style endorsements of Hevesi, Ferrer, and that idiot Mark What's-His-Name who alienated Ferrer voters and lost to Bloomberg? Who doesn't recall our failure to support Thompson against third-term, won by 5% Bloomberg? Who's forgotten, after we stabbed Thompson in the back, that he said we couldn't afford raises for teachers, and we then finally supported him anyway? Who can't forget Thompson's loss against de Blasio, and our failure to get what NYPD and FDNY got until ten years later?

Oh, and who recalls our champion Hillary failing to support any substantive change or improvement for working Americans, thus enabling demagogue Trump to take over? Wasn't Hillary a foregone conclusion, wasn't she inevitable, and weren't those of us who dared question those assumptions apostates, to be ridiculed and derided?

Of course, the now-officially sanctioned conclusion that we ought not to take sides is preposterous. One Unity person got up and made the inane and outlandish argument that Trump was of no consequence, and that we ought to instead write in the name of Hitler. I stood there thinking if it actually were Hitler, we'd lack the nerve to utter his name. Another spoke to MORE rep Ashraya Gupta, who openly wondered how a Trump presidency would affect people who looked like her. The Unity member said she was Latina and understood Ashraya's concerns. Then she spoke a bunch of nonsense, and went back to Ashraya's concern, angrily declaring, "I don't play that card!" This was remarkable because when she declared she was Latina, she indeed played that very card. A good thing about being Unity is no matter what you say, no matter how you contradict yourself, if you're on the correct side it's officially sanctioned and therefore always right.

We've got a whole lot of people in Unity who formulate arguments I would not accept from my beginning ESL students. UFT Unity will stoop to any level, invent ridiculous nonsense to attack those of us who dare question them, and give not a second thought to alienating, say, the opt-out movement that made Cuomo step back from his vicious anti-public education stance.  UFT Unity employs a social media twitter person who is outrageously sexist, who posts things from real education defenders and has zero awareness they fundamentally oppose UFT positions.

Of course, the Unity Caucus members sign a loyalty oath, and therefore get up and say any damn thing they are told to. They enable and recruit people who are, charitably, less than diplomatic, people who feel no compunction to think things through, people who say what they're told and stoop to any level to defend it. On Twitter I got into an argument with a Unity loyalist who contended it was great that burden of proof was on teachers at 3020a. He thought teachers facing career loss could then own their arguments, or some other such blithering nonsense.

A few weeks ago, UFT Unity unanimously supported the original resolution rightly criticizing Trump. We, the high school reps, applauded and enthusiastically supported it. Last Monday they were scrambling back and forth to rationalize the cowardice of deleting Trump's name. I give credit to LeRoy Barr and Howie Schoor for enabling an honest discussion on this issue. The last time I was able to participate in an honest discussion with union leadership was never (and if you're reading this, Unity, that cuts to the core of our problem).

This notwithstanding, the notion that a labor movement ought not to take a stand against demagogues is simply idiotic. Trump is coming for us, and being fraidy-scared to speak his name is not only disingenuous, not only unprincipled, but also short-sighted and counter-productive, the same thinking that's gotten us into the rut we're in now.

I hope against hope that leadership wakes up, palm-slaps themselves on the forehead, and realizes stifling thought and allowing patronage-inspired, self-serving obsequiousness to pass as activism has gotten us exactly where we are now.  I'll certainly do my part to sound the alarm, but it's hard to teach an old machine new tricks. 

Chalkbeat Goes to Highest Bidder

Back before Chalkbeat went national, I used to write for it. That ended when I made outrageous assertions that Cathie Black, who was appointed by billionaire Michael Bloomberg, represented billionaires. I also asserted that TFA courted people from Ivy colleges. Though these assertions were not even debatable, Chalkbeat had enough of my nonsense. This was kind of a relief because their editing process was like water torture.

Of course, even as I endured the third degree and found my voice edited beyond recognition, its resident E4E columnist voiced total nonsense with no restraint whatsoever. Reformy is as reformy does, I guess. I hear that person, who never managed to even get tenure as a teacher, got a nice gig somewhere as a school leader. Beats working, I guess.

Nonetheless they've moved past that, and no longer bother with pretense. Every time someone from E4E sneezes, they dutifully report it. If Eva Moskowitz stubs her toe, it's prominently featured. If UFT holds a rally, meh. Why bother reporting such trivialities? After all, UFT is only the largest teacher union in the country. It's not like they're Evan Stone and What's-Her-Name, the renowned former newbie teachers who run Gates-funded E4E.

Doubtless you're curious as to why this might be. Well, here's a small clue. Half a million bucks from the Gates Foundation. That's gotta keep a lot of lights on. Now Chalkbeat always insists that it's objective, but oh my gosh that's a lot of lettuce.

It's really disappointing Chalkbeat chose to go this route, but hey, it's the American Way. Chalkbeat NY is simply doing its part to Make America Great Again by practicing journalism and pretending that a huge donation from the reformiest man in the world is not a blatant conflict of interest.

That said, I can't vouch absolutely that Chalkbeat has gone to the highest bidder. I honestly don't know just how high Bill Gates is. But given his outrageous and outlandish ideas about education,  I can only conjecture that billionaires get the best drugs money can buy. I remember hearing somewhere that Jerry Lee Lewis said the only reason he survived while Elvis died was that he couldn't afford the drugs Elvis got.

I wonder how high I'd have to be to donate to Reformy Chalkbeat.

Fun Fact--UFT Team High School Has No Input from UFT High School Teachers

The other day I got an email from Team High School telling me about all the wonderful work they were doing. Evidently 200 members attended workshops, which is surely good, as everyone needs to work on one thing or another.

Also, there will be Team High School Awards, for those who've done outstanding work on whatever it is the Team does, or perhaps for something else. I can't be sure, as I have no notion what Team High School deems award-worthy.

Here's the thing--UFT High Schools elected exactly seven people in the last election. I know because I'm one of them. Thus far, Team High School hasn't bothered to ask any of us anything whatsoever about anything.

Team High School means jobs for someone or other. I'm not sure who, though I have a strong inkling it starts with the Unity Caucus members who got paid to run the workshops 200 people attended. I was actually in a working group with one of them, I think, and I noticed him asking Michael Mulgrew a question in an informational video about Friedrichs. This was one of those spontaneous videos where people just sit around and ask the President off-the-cuff questions, and every one of them just happens to be a UFT patronage employee for whom actual high school teachers did not vote. It's curious Mulgrew appears to favor such spontaneous chat. It makes me wonder why, when real live elected High School Executive Board members ask questions, he doesn't even hang around to listen, let alone respond.

What does Team High School do besides send out newsletters and provide work for Unity loyalists? Well, it's hard to say, and I can only assume we lowly high school teachers aren't supposed to ask. If they wanted our input, or that of anyone who hasn't already signed a loyalty oath, they'd ask for it. Of course, that hasn't happened, and Team High School rolls along on its merry way, with no input whatsoever from the people it purports to represent.

The good thing is, whether or not you voted for Team High School (and most of you did not), you have the privilege of paying for it. Isn't that a cool logo? Your dues at work. But when you speak, when you say we want a new voice in the UFT, they say forget about it. You get no voice in the AFT, you get no voice in the NEA, you get no voice in NYSUT, and you don't even get a voice in the organization that presumes to speak for you, Team High School.

And that's the way the UFT rolls. Gee, I can't begin to imagine why more than half of working teachers will decline to pay dues when they get a Friedrichs do-over. After all, leadership surely knows better than those of us who actually vote. Otherwise, they'd seek input from us. And you have to admit, Team High School with No Elected Representation Whatsoever hasn't got much of a ring to it.

Still, it's not the kind of thing that makes me "Loud and Proud." How about you?

Class Size Shmass Size, Says Arbitrator

I went last month to see an arbitrator about the oversized classes at my school. Silly me, I thought when you violate contractual class size rules, the remedy was to fix the class sizes. But I was just naive somehow. I mean, why should the DOE abide by the rules when they could just make up an "action plan?"

The genius arbitrator, who gets paid $1600 per day for this incredible wisdom, decided it would be a great idea to have the teachers of oversized classes in my school do one fewer C6 assignment a week. The teachers in Forest Hills High School, for reasons that escape me utterly, get one fewer C6 for each oversized class. So if I have two oversized classes, I lose one C6 period a week. If a FH teacher has two oversized classes, she loses two C6 periods a week.

Why the discrepancy? Maybe it's tougher to have oversized classes when you're that far west. Or something. Funny how the DOE can be so preposterously arbitrary. Haven't they got a rubric?

Hey, maybe I can go rob a bank, and instead of giving the money back, I can make an action plan. I'll work as a teller one hour a week for ten weeks, and then I'll take all the cash and buy that chateau in the south of France. Works for me.

On this astral plane, unlike the arbitrator, who evidently knows everything, I'm just a lowly teacher. This notwithstanding, unlike the arbitrator and DOE lawyers, I have actually taught oversized classes. I know what it's like to have 50 kids in a room. I know what it's like when no one helps and you have to sit and wait. And you know what? The only way that got better was when they took the extra kids out.

In fact, this year opened with my co-teacher and I having several oversized classes. It's great to have a co-teacher. It's great to be able to discuss ideas, what works, and what doesn't with someone who's actually got a stake in what's going on. It's great to be able to add to what you do with a different point of view. It's great to try different approaches to things you've done before.

What is not great, though, is teaching over 34 kids at once. If what you value is participation, you can't really make it happen effectively in such a hugely populated room. The point of team teaching, I think, is to make things better, to model adult cooperation for kids, and to give them a little more than they'd bargained for. To use it simply to get around a class size rule ought to be criminal.

And for the edification of The Great and Mysterious Arbitrator, offering one fewer tutoring period a week does not alleviate non-contractual class sizes. It just means fewer resources for the poor kids you've condemned to class sizes higher than the UFT contractual maximum, which is already higher than class sizes anywhere else in the state.

What's the point of having a contract if the employer can cavalierly break it, toss you a marshmallow, give the kids nothing whatsoever, and then pay some arbitrator an obscene amount of money for this alleged service? Sorry, but I don't want oversized classes. I've taught in trailers and closets. I've seen sheets of ice on the floor. I've had no heat, no AC, and sometimes no floor. I've seen railing fall off the trailer like a medieval lance to be used for jousting. I've seen floods making it very tough to make it out, and ice making it very tough to make it out alive.

But I've never been told screw you, teach the extra kids, and we'll give you a period off from tutoring. What you need when you have oversized classes is NOT extra time. Extra time does NOT help you to manage an oversized class. You do NOT need more planning time. You do NOT need to do a little less tutoring. And let's not even try to pretend that less tutoring helps kids in oversized classes in any way whatsoever.

What you need, and let's not forget what the children in your class need as well, is a reasonable class size. 34 is already too high. Higher than that is not reasonable, especially when you're supposed to be jumping through hoops and doing all sorts of extra assessments.

Anyone who doesn't know that is not a teacher, and has no idea what teaching entails. And anyone who doesn't know that has no business doing class size arbitration. Honestly, I don't think you need to be a teacher to recognize how nonsensical this "action plan" is. I'd label it a "no action whatsoever" plan.

I hope the arbitrator sleeps well tonight. It must be nice to have a job in a nice clean office where you can do any damn thing, pat yourself on the back, cash your check and go to the next gala luncheon, or whatever it is these folks do when they, along with the DOE, aren't throwing our children to the dogs.