FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Philadelphia, PA January 26, 2015
PHILADELPHIA SCHOOL DISTRICT TAKES DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST TEACHERS FOR INFORMING PARENTS OF THEIR OPT OUT RIGHTS AROUND HIGH STAKES TESTING
Parents at Feltonville and across the district stand in support of teachers
Dissatisfied with how standardized testing is eclipsing their children’s education, 20% of parents at Feltonville School of Arts and Sciences — with the support of teachers — have opted their children out of standardized testing. And that number is growing despite disciplinary actions taken last week against teachers involved in informing parents of their rights.
Teachers were issued letters compelling them to attend investigatory conferences on Thursday of this week. The district move follows this City Paper article announcing that 17% of students at Feltonville School of Arts and Sciences refused to take the PSSAs and other assessments. News of the action prompted Council members María Quiñones-Sánchez, Mark Squilla and Jannie Blackwell to issue a public statement of support for Feltonville families on Thursday saying “Until we put some limits on this obsession with testing students, we will see protests like that at Feltonville. We stand with families who are making the choice they believe is best for their children.”
With the recent appointment of a new Pennsylvania Secretary of Education, Pedro Rivera, Council members Quinones-Sanchez, Squilla, and Blackwell called upon the School Reform Commission to formally request a waiver for this school year, and to begin a review of the long-term strategy to reform the use of standardized testing.
“We, as parents, have a right to say no to the test”, says Heidey Contrera, the mother of 8th grader Natalie Contrera, who, having moved to Philadelphia from the Dominican Republic in 2011, is designated an English Language Learner at Feltonville. “The test is not a good measure of my daughter’s ability. It is not a fair way to judge her. And we’re not taking it.”
“Parents have the right to opt out – that is an indisputable right,” said Helen Gym, co-founder of Parents United for Public Education, one of the groups to come out publicly in support of parents and teachers at Feltonville. “The District has an opportunity to work with parents and teachers on an issue of common gain rather than once again being on the wrong side of the table.”
Amy Roat, amyroat@gmail.com, 215 768 8479, teacher, Caucus of Working Educators Steering Committee member, and Feltonville School of Arts & Sciences PFT Building Representative
Kelley Collings, kelleycollings@gmail.com , 215 868 3089, teacher, Caucus of Working Educators Steering Committee member, and Feltonville School of Arts & Sciences PFT Building Committee member
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
So much for Je Suis Charlie. I guess speech is only free when it’s convenient for those in power.
Anyway, I would hope there is a legal defense fund and some brave teachers (perhaps nearing retirement anyway) willing to challenge this.
Same thing happened in Utah last spring: http://www.standard.net/Education/2014/04/24/25-SAGE-warning.html
Again I’m struck by ed reformers complete inability to put their policies in the larger context of the reality they create. These are the talking points pro-testing:
“The good news is that better tests are on the way. As part of the Common Core State Standards initiative, our state is about to start using a new set of tests that are dramatically better, tougher, and fairer than what we’ve had before. Schools won’t be able to teach to these tests. Drill-and-kill and test prep won’t work. The only way to do well on these tests is to teach students well—and not just basic skills, but a well-rounded curriculum that includes art and music, history and science, geography and literature.”
They know this is exactly what parents are complaining about, right? That your average public school no longer has these things like art and music, and we have been slowly losing them for the last 15 years? I actually remember the specific year we lost field trips. I have two sets of children- the older two who had field trips and the younger two who didn’t. We’re down to one “band director” who does all the work for the entire instrumental music program. It’s a joke. He has hundreds of kids who range from age 10 to age18. No one could do that job well.
If kids need art and music to do well on the Common Core tests, a lot of Ohio public school kids are in big trouble.
http://edexcellence.net/articles/stump-speech-contest-what-members-of-congress-should-say-about-testing
What a cynical article. At least the post-article comments are good.
I don’t see how a 2 dimensional test whether it’s sorting ranking or bubbling in can “demand” arts and science when the Common Core itself is focused solely on the text on the page, and any computer graded test is going to have that limitation (what can be counted and valued).
At best it’s idealism, at worst, it’s an outright lie.
And it occurs to me that with this “monopoly” on cut scores that education commissioners have, the system we are very likely at this point to end up with, is one that is almost entirely private, moves the cut scores lower for 10 years, re-evaluates, and then discovers “OMG we were lying by playing with the cut scores again!!” – and then this charade can continue until 15-20 years out we have no public school and moving back in the other direction would take another 20 years after decades of disinvestment.
So long as they control the tests, they will win. Opt out – they are the ones lying to us.
If I were you,I would try to get an outspoken parent ally to lead the charge or contact United Opt Out for advice. It’s important to keep the numbers down so they can’t data mine.
Not surprised to see the name of the redoubtable Helen Gym in the posting.
Two brief points.
1), This is the acid test for the leading promoters, enablers and beneficiaries of the “choice” crowd that claims they’re not just about charters and privatization and ROI and such. Their silence is deafening.
2), Don’t believe for a moment the argument that tweaks and fixes to high-stakes standardized tests will somehow fix the “testing problem.” The promised cures for what ails those eduproducts consists of two parts: the promise and the cure. The first, like one of those zombie ideas the owner of this blog has written about, never dies; the second just never ever happens.
😎
I think this is interesting:
“The study examined not what parents said, but how they ranked schools on OneApp. In short, while families did care about the letter grade the school earned on the state’s report card, other factors mattered more.”
The same thing happened in Chicago.
Parents are measuring schools differently than ed reformers do. This is quite literally “more than a score”. Parents are looking at the whole picture, instead of one narrow slice- the incessant ranking and grading and sorting and stacking.
It doesn’t surprise me at all, because the same thing happens here with tiny rural districts. They don’t want to consolidate with my larger district. They don’t care that we have more classes and “specials” to offer. They value their schools for all kinds of “soft” reasons- not just a test score.
http://www.nola.com/education/index.ssf/2015/01/new_orleans_school_scores_less.html
Every survey always shows that parents are mostly happy with their public schools, even many schools with low scores. I think parents want a safe, positive environment with decent academics. Tests scores don’t tell the whole story. I taught in a diverse public school with good academics. One of my ELLs moved to a whiter, more affluent district with higher scores. She then moved back, and she was so happy to be back! She described the students as snarky, nasty and materialistic. She saw the teachers as more detached. Scores don’t tell the whole story; they just give you a profile of the socio-economics.
The district system so completely intertwines schools and communities (and has a huge impact on home values) that it is reasonable to think that parents can’t possibly be unbiased when they are asked that question. Plus, how many people are going to freely admit to a pollster that they haven’t done a great job with one of their biggest parenting responsibilities?
The fact that the same surveys always show parents having a much less favorable view of their state’s or the nation’s schools is somewhat telling. They can take the kid gloves off and let ’em know how they really feel.
Tim, I believe that your explanation doesn’t mean what you think it means. I think that parents rank their own schools well because, for the most part, they really do like their schools. They rank other schools lower because of the insidious proliferation of propaganda against public schools.
Would you interpret a similar poll of charter school parents the same way?
In my children’s district, we are able to apply to Magnet schools if you think that the neighborhood school is not doing a good enough job or if you want what they are offering, Spanish-Immersion, Montessori, or Outdoor Environmental Science. I chose to try for the science magnet because, although the neighborhood school was right around the corner AND had great scores, enough to get it ranked a California Distinguished School, I was not happy with the 4-6 hour/day focus on math and ELA. I wanted science, music, art, recess, and happy children. We were sadly put on a waitlist at number 310! Three years later we got in and it has been the best decision to move schools! My kids were bored with all the drill and kill worksheets that were even sent home over Christmas breaks. I must admit though that I never made them do those stupid worksheets…I did them myself with them looking on open-mouthed and so happy!
My oldest is in middle school now and I think he and his classmates will do okay on the new state testing here in California because they are at a school that is following the Blended Learning Model of integrating technology 50% of the time in most classes. Although I don’t feel they should be on computers all the time, I do feel that they have an unfair advantage over a lot of other schools because they have a 1-1 student-device ratio. All classrooms have all the technology they need to make sure all kids have access to practice working on the very devices they will be required to use on the state tests. I wonder if kids just playing games on those same devices would work just as well?
Threatened Out West, your hypothesis works only if parents are sharp-eyed, reliable, impartial judges of school quality on a local level, but then completely clueless and easily manipulated when it comes to schools on a state or national level.
I don’t think this is more plausible than assuming there is a tendency for people to be biased toward the familiar (this happens in every area of human existence) and to exhibit “buy in” for the community where they’ve chosen to live.
In November 2014, the Philadelphia Opt-out parents group, along with the members of the Alliance for Philadelphia Public Schools, organized hearings on the many problems of standardized tests before the Education Committee of the Philadelphia City Council. Council invited representatives from the School District of Philadelphia to testify on the issue. They sent a young man who had been hired just three months prior to the meeting and could not answer most of the questions asked by Council.
The district had its chance to speak on the issue. In fact, they have an opportunity at every monthly School Reform Commission meeting. They have chosen to remain silent. They know how disruptive these tests are and how harmful they are to children.
Now they want to silence the teachers who have the courage to tell parents what they can do to protect their children. Shameful.
For articles about the Opt Out movement in Philadelphia and video of teachers testifying about standardized testing at City Council, see:
http://appsphilly.wikispaces.com/home
Florida’s legislature is in a panic about opting out too and is asking the state director for a list of punishments for teachers, parents, and students.
Therms are beginning to see and feel the pushback now. Good!
good to hear you happy about something, Chris. I’m glad something good is possibly happening there.
I guess this looks sort of like punishing nurses if they were to tell patients about refusing a medication or choosing another one if the powers that be had an interest in pushing certain medicines. It’s crazy! Thank goodness for opt out.
You teachers have the right to remain salient, but anything you say to parents can and will be used against you in the (kangaroo) Court of Reform.
Opting out, even under the table, is the only weapon against the corporate domination.
There ought to be a sort of Miranda rights for students. The school should be required to tell parents and students of their rights.
Absolutely. I think it will come to that, eventually. If it happened in medicine, it can happen with education. We just have to keep pushing.
I am constantly putting Opt Out info on my Facebook page to friends and family. I have family in NY, CO, AZ. I think the more we all do that, the more parents will know about it and understand. Getting media attention would be good, as well. Anything we can do to educate parents about their rights is a good thing. I also constantly put information from Dr. Ravitch on my Facebook page to share.
I used to do the same thing, until the threats to my license came from my state office of education.
Can’t anybody shut teachers up. Teachers will get the message out on their own time and at home, church, and in the community if they have to. Of all the nerve! That’s why the school systems seek out non-teachers and foreigners to work in the schools, because a real teacher cannot be manipulated.
A lot of newspapers have anonymous comment sections in the electronic editions or you can use a fake facebook name and get the word out. Sometimes you can take out an advertisement in the name of a company if you can afford it. If the Koch Brothers can get the word out to elect Republicans without revealing who is paying for it, so can teachers. It’s called a PAC. A lot of teachers together might each be able to donate a little money and form one and do some TV ads. The only names on it, however, would need to be retired teachers who cannot be fired.
Here’s John Kasich promoting the newest unfunded mandate to Ohio public schools:
“Part of the problem is today politicians are running to try and to get votes … We run out here trying to solve problems. And we have a problem with our education standards and our children’s ability to compete in the world,” Kasich said. “We’re not gonna turn this over to Washington, or even to Columbus, our state capital. It’s local schools with local school boards and high standards.”
This is an absolute crock. What Kasich has done is collect state tax money and KEEP it in Columbus. We used to get some back for public schools. We get less every year under ed reform. Because of that, we have to raise local taxes.
He “supports” higher standards in a purely theoretical sense. It’s NCLB, RttT all over again. Public schools got the giant stick, but ed reformers reneged on the funding that was supposed to go along with it.
Bravo to twinkie1cat’s idea. That is the absolute truth about your statement – “a REAL teacher CANNOT be manipulated.”
As some other blogger identifies that Dr. Ravitch will be exactly the same as she is now forever regardless A BIG IF Dr. Ravitch would raised in private school or not. That is an absolute truth in humanity and in human conscience which CANNOT BE MANIPULATED.
Thank you for your idea. I hope that parent united opt out group will take your advice. It will be worth for their money expense on their children’s future better than to be abused by today corrupted system. Back2basic
This testing only enables certain groups to segregate more and point to testing as the excuse. A parent should always have the right to determine what they want for their children. Punishing teachers for informing parents of this right is illegal and wrong. This happened to me when I informed a parent of her right to due process with her special ed child and I told her she wasn’t receiving this at the school. I subsequently was falsely charged and forced to resign my position. I’d do it again in an instant.
Here is some advice for teachers:
Speak privately (no witnesses) in person (nothing in writing) to parents that you trust and ask them to talk to other parents. If someone does use your name, deny, deny, deny.
It worked for me.
Bravo Linda,
We must learn from those corporate backers and corrupted union leaders, and politicians.
Deny, deny, deny. No witness and no written statement are the only way to deal with unaccountable legislators regarding CCSS imposing on students and teachers. Back2basic
If you are reading this and live in PA, we are lucky to have a perfectly legal opt out (on religious grounds). Here’s a link to a simple handout / form letter you can use to start the process. Please circulate widely: http://appsphilly.wikispaces.com/file/view/Opt%20Out%20Form%20Generic%201-10-15.pdf/536838998/Opt%20Out%20Form%20Generic%201-10-15.pdf
Fascinating. Do other states have similar “religious/philosophical conviction” legislation empowering parents, that can be deployed to opt out of testing? This seems like a politically practical way to provide a legal opt-out that might work in many states.
Reblogged this on Mobile world.
Free Speech Rights of Teachers?
The following are a series of excerpts from various articles concerning the free speech rights of teachers as public employees. This information is intended to shed some light on the general sense of fear that many teachers are feeling in regards to speaking out against the federal test-and-punish reform movement. I am a teacher, not a lawyer, but perhaps this information will help some teachers of conscience make a more informed decision about voicing their concerns about what many of us perceive as the harmful effects of the federally coerced Common Core standards and the required companion assessments, as well as linking said scores to teacher evaluations. In the opinion of many educators, this toxic mix of bad educational policies are undermining classroom environments and often constraining the professional judgment of teachers and limiting or use of best practices.
From the ACLU: https://aclu-wa.org/news/free-speech-rights-public-school-teachers
Teachers do not forfeit the right to comment publicly on matters of public importance simply because they accept a public school teaching position. Teachers cannot be fired or disciplined for statements about matters of public importance unless it can be demonstrated that the teacher’s speech created a substantial adverse impact on school functioning.
A teacher appears to speak for the school district when he or she teaches, so the district administration has a strong interest in determining the content of the message its teachers will deliver. Washington courts have upheld the authority of school districts to prescribe both course content and teaching methods. Courts in other jurisdictions have ruled that teachers have no free speech rights to include unapproved materials on reading lists.
Depending on the precise form of message displayed on the teachers’ clothing, a school may have legitimate concern that a teacher’s display of a political message is more likely than a student’s to disrupt the school’s intended educational message. This right may be limited only if there is good reason to believe that the speech would cause a substantial and material disruption to education or violate the rights of others. Washington courts have not considered the question, but courts in other jurisdictions have differed over whether teachers have the same right as students to display personal political messages on their clothing. In one case, a court upheld a dress code that prevented teachers from wearing political buttons in the classroom because school districts have legitimate authority to “dissociate themselves from matters of political controversy.”
From the New York State Association of School Attorneys:
http://www.guerciolaw.com/school-employees-right-to-free-speech-appears-limited-when-job-related/
School employees’ right to free speech appears limited when job-related.
Does a school employee’s right to free speech stop at the schoolhouse door? While the outcomes of employee disciplinary cases and other cases involving adverse job actions always depend on the facts, court rulings suggest that there has been a deterioration of public employees’ rights to free speech in the workplace. Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark 2006 ruling in Garcetti v. Ceballos, courts have been taking a different approach when public employees claim to be protected by the First Amendment in connection with an adverse job action. All such lawsuits now involve an examination of whether the employee was speaking pursuant to his or her job duties. According to Garcetti, if speech was made as a result of an employee’s job duties, no First Amendment protection applies (see sidebar below). For school districts, the change raises a question that is not always easily answered: What do the “job duties” of a specific school employee entail? Some New York courts have closely examined the employee’s “actual duties” as opposed to the employee’s job description in an effort to afford the most First Amendment protection. Nevertheless, the Garcetti decision appears to have made it harder for public employees to successfully assert First Amendment protection.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which has jurisdiction over all of New York State, made this ruling about free speech rights: “The general principle … is that, when a public employee airs a complaint or grievance, or expresses concern about misconduct, to his or her immediate supervisor or pursuant to a clear duty to report imposed by law or employer policy, he or she is speaking as an employee and not as a citizen.” In light of Garcetti, “the First Amendment does not protect the employee’s speech from discipline or retaliation by the employer,” the court said. The court continued: In such circumstances, the employer is free to “discipline” the employee without violating the employee’s First Amendment rights. If, however, the employee goes outside of the established institutional channels in order to express a complaint or concern, the employee is speaking as a citizen, and the speech is protected by the First Amendment.
For instance, the Second Circuit ruled that statements by a special education counselor to administrators about the lack of physical education and art classes at a satellite BOCES facility were made within the scope of employment and were not protected by the First Amendment. On the other hand, conversations with other teachers about the same issues were not part of any official duty. Therefore, a teacher might be able to prevail in a free-speech defense against any alleged retaliation for critical comments about the school made to colleagues but not if the adverse job action stemmed from similar comments made in the line of duty.
From Joshana Jones, Esq. Atlanta, GA:
http://theeducatorsroom.com/2012/12/teachers-freedom-of-speech-rights/
Public school teachers are in a unique position. They are employees of the state and therefore school districts have an interest in making sure that messages from teachers are in line with the goals and vision of the district.
The following factors will help a teacher understand if their free speech is protected:
1) The speech must touch on a matter of public concern
2) The teacher’s speech must outweigh the district’s interest in efficiency. The courts may consider any of the following:
a) The effect of the speech on the harmony of the staff
b) Whether the speech has a detrimental impact on working relationships
c) Whether the speech interferes with the normal operation of the employer’s business
The Pickering Balance Test: http://publicpersonnellaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/essentials-of-pickering-balancing-test.html
Essentials of the “Pickering Balancing Test”
Pickering v Board of Education, 391 US 563
The so-called Pickering Test is applied in balancing the interests of a public employer with its employees’ right to Free Speech and requires the court’s consideration of the following:
1. Did the individual demonstrate that his or her speech address a matter or matters of public interest and concern?
2. Did the individual demonstrate that his or her speech was a significant or motivating factor in the employer’s decision?
3. Did the court balance the interests of the individual commenting on matters of public concern as a citizen and the public employer’s interest in “promoting the efficiency of public service?”
From Sherrod v, School Board of Palm Beach County, FL
http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020101012611
Protected Speech
In determining the threshold issue of whether a public employee has engaged in speech entitled to constitutional protection, the court first asks “whether the employee spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern. If the answer is “no,” the employee’s speech is not entitled to First Amendment protection. If the answer is “yes,” “the question becomes whether the relevant government entity had an adequate justification for treating the employee differently from any other member of the general public.”
In Abdur-Rahman v. Walker, 567 F.3d 1278 (11th Cir.2009), the Eleventh Circuit discussed the rationale behind the requirement that a public employee speak “as a citizen” to receive constitutional protection for his speech: First, because “government offices could not function if every employment decision became a constitutional matter,” “Supreme Court precedents do not support the existence of a constitutional cause of action behind every statement a public employee makes in the course of doing his or her job.” Second, government employers, like private employers, need a significant degree of control over their employee’s words and actions; without it, there would be little chance of the efficient provision of public services. Because of the unique trusted position that public employees occupy, they ought not to receive constitutional protection for speech that “expresses views that contravene governmental policies or impairs the proper performance of governmental functions. Third, when complaints under the First Amendment are limited to instances in which a public employee proves that he “spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern,” courts avoid “judicial oversight” of workplace communications and “permanent judicial intervention in the conduct of governmental operations to a degree inconsistent with sound principles of federalism and the separation of powers.”
Garcetti v. Ceballos (Wikipedia): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garcetti_v._Ceballos
Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, ruling in a 5-4 decision delivered by Justice Anthony Kennedy that the First Amendment does not prevent employees from being disciplined for expressions they make pursuant to their professional duties.
Kennedy’s majority opinion
The Court wrote that its “precedents do not support the existence of a constitutional cause of action behind every statement a public employee makes in the course of doing his or her job.” Instead, public employees are not speaking as citizens when they are speaking to fulfill a responsibility of their job.
Though the speech at issue concerned the subject matter of his employment, and was expressed within his office rather than publicly, the Court did not consider either fact dispositive, and noted that employees in either context may receive First Amendment protection. The “controlling factor” was instead that his statements were made pursuant to his duties as a deputy district attorney. Restricting such speech, which “owes its existence to a public employee’s professional responsibilities,” did not in the Court’s view violate any rights that the employee had as a private citizen. Instead, the restrictions were simply the control an employer exercised “over what the employer itself has commissioned or created.”
NYSUT “Free Speech” lawsuit:
http://www.nysut.org/news/2014/october/lawsuit-charges-state-education-department-ban-on-discussing-tests-violates-free-speech
ALBANY, N.Y. Oct. 9, 2014 – New York State United Teachers has filed suit in federal court seeking to invalidate confidentiality agreements the State Education Department requires teachers to sign before scoring state tests, saying the prohibition – with its accompanying threats of discipline, including dismissal, license revocation and criminal prosecution – is an unconstitutional prior restraint on teachers’ free speech rights.
The suit, filed Wednesday by NYSUT’s Office of General Counsel on behalf of five teachers, charges the State Education Department with violating teachers’ First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights by preventing them from speaking out on matters of public concern. The suit charges SED’s rules unconstitutionally make teachers’ speech conditional on government approval while establishing a “system to police the free exchange of ideas and opinions regarding its compulsory and costly testing regime.”
Bobby Jindal’s Executive Order: http://eagnews.org/bobby-jindal-issues-executive-order-protecting-anti-common-core-teachers/
BATON ROUGE, La. – Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal has issued an executive order to protect teachers who are critics of Common Core national standards. Teachers statewide are feeling pressure from all sides, saying they are overworked and students are over-tested, and now many are saying they aren’t allowed to voice concerns or dissenting opinions.
The newspaper reports today, “Jindal issued an Executive Order to protect freedom of speech and the rights of teachers.”
The order reads, in part:
FREEDOM OF SPEECH PROTECTIONS FOR LOUISIANA TEACHERS
NOW THEREFORE, I, BOBBY JINDAL, Governor of the State of Louisiana, by virtue of the authority vested by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Louisiana, do hereby order and direct as follows:
SECTION 1: As part of the ongoing discussion among state and local education officials, teachers, parents, and stakeholders regarding classroom curriculum and testing, and as part of the larger discussion of the quality of Louisiana’s educational system, legal guarantees afforded to all citizens shall be maintained and provided to teachers;
SECTION 2: State and local school administration officials are not authorized under the existing laws of this state to deny a teacher’s constitutional freedom of speech in order to stifle the discussion and debate surrounding curriculum and standardized assessments by teachers.
Gag orders on teachers violate the rights of parents too. When my wife and I were trying to figure all this out, I was shocked to discover I couldn’t have an open conversation with our children’s teachers about testing. That for me was one of the first and clearest signs something was terribly wrong. No one has a right to interfere with open communication between teachers and parents about matters affecting the children they are jointly raising. The Miranda-like principle broached above is great (requiring schools to inform parents of their rights), but it’s bigger than that: those who promulgate gag orders on teachers are the ones who should be fired, not teachers who refuse to be cowed by unconstitutional and just plain immoral orders from above!
The so-called “gag orders” are actually legal restrictions placed on free speech for public workers. Limited free speech rights are the end result of constitutional court rulings. There are no individuals that can be fired. What needs to done is to promote legislation that allows teachers to speak out, with full legal protections, against any and all district/state/federal policies or practices that are inflicting harm on children.
As teachers we are mandated reporters – one of the groups of professional required to report instances of child neglect or abuse. Yet this requirement does not extend to policies and practices imposed by state and federal education departments. This needs to be changed through the proper legislative channels.
Thank you Governor Bobby Jindall for your consideration of
“FREEDOM OF SPEECH PROTECTIONS FOR LOUISIANA TEACHERS”
It is worth to repeat your order as a part of an excellent example for Governors in NYS and NJS:
“State and local school administration officials are NOT AUTHORIZED under the existing laws of this state TO DENY A TEACHER’S CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM OF SPEECH in order to stifle the discussion and debate surrounding curriculum and standardized assessments by teachers.
God blesses Louisiana State with you whose leadership has shown a respect for humanity, conscience, and civility to Louisiana teachers, parents and students. Very respectfully yours, May King from Canada.
From my heartily cheers to you, here is the link of a song that celebrates a spirit of joy and peace.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoIXPgPQ-Gk&index=22&list=PLB949BA0F032E53D2
Deep blue sky 2010 from Song Zuying
I hope others sign the petition calling on the union to support these teachers and stand up for kids. Emails to them as individuals are nice for sure, but we need to push, really push, the PFT (their union) to defend them and the profession.
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/support-philadelphia-1?source=s.icn.em.mt&r_by=4527449
Those that oppose Opting Out, are THE ones profiting from the tests!!!
They are fighting for THEIR GAIN: the profit they will make by stealing the public’s tax dollars by promoting needless tests.
TEACHERS have always made their own tests!!!
And do you know why? Because THEY are the true experts; THEY are the ones that know the material being taught; THEY are the ones that know the children under their charge.
For anyone to come in and talk about “standardization” and “across the nation”, as if learning was a mechanical product made in a factory, shows their total ignorance about the learning process. Just because they ATTENDED school does not make them knowledgeable about education.
Eating at a restaurant does not make you a chef. Nor does getting a vaccine make you a doctor. We have no need for “school reform” by outsiders. If any reform is needed, it is to come from the EXPERTS, and NO ONE else.
And here, THE EXPERTS ARE THE TEACHERS!