California State Superintendent of Schools Tom Torlakson is
one of the best education leaders. As an experienced classroom
teacher, he knows what teachers and students need. As a veteran of
the Merchant Marine, he has a steady hand on the tiller. As a
former legislator, he knows how to work with the legislature. He
had the wisdom and foresight to avoid Race to the Top, knowing that
a “win” would cost the state $3 billion to comply with federal
mandates. Naturally, the billionaires can’t stand Torlakson because
they don’t control him. Worse, he does not share their ideology of
blowing up public education and calling it “innovative.” So they
are running a candidate against Tom Torlakson. He is Marshall Tuck, who ran Mayor
Villaraigosa’s 15 schools and compiled a mediocre and unimpressive
record. He has also been president of the Green Dot charter chain.
One of Tuck’s big issues: he wants teachers to be evaluated by student test scores.
This is a bad policy that has led to teaching to the test,
narrowing the curriculum, and firing good teachers who teach the
neediest children. With the support of the corporate reformers,
eager to privatize as many public schools as possible, Tuck can
count on big money from the big-money guys who tried to unseat
Steve Zimmer (and lost) and then got beaten by a teacher with no
outside funding, Monica Ratliff.
Tom Torlakson deserves to be
re-elected. He is a fighter for kids, teachers, and public
education. He understands the importance of public education in a
democracy.
I worked harder for teachers in subjects in which I had a particular interest and my grades showed it. I was “bright,” but I didn’t work as hard when I found the work to be boring or confusing. Again, my grades showed it. I seldom sought extra help; I can’t say that I ever knew that was an option. I was an obedient, run-of-the mill student. I generally liked my teachers or at least didn’t dislike them. It would have been incredibly unfair to my teachers to make their careers dependent on my grades on a high stakes test. Thank God, nobody was stupid enough to propose it.
I am a teacher at Roosevelt High School. We are a Partnership for Los Angeles Schools that has been almost reformed to death by Marshall Tuck. I challenge any one who would like understand why Marshall Tuck is unqualified to lead any educational institution to visit Roosevelt High School in Boyle Heights.
Marshall Tuck isn’t only a neoliberal education reform ideologue on the leading edge of school privatization project, he’s also compiled a record of closing down culturally relevant programs and heritage language classes. At best he’s ethnocentric. I’ve begun compiling some old articles on Broad’s boy Tuck: http://bitly.com/bundles/rdsathene/s
I don’t know if Tuck is the best opponent without doing more research on him, but Torlakson gives honorary doctorates to school superintendents who do not deserve them. I didn’t even know he could do this.
If California, with a democrat in the governor’s office, and two legislative chambers with marjority democrats, and national representation in the senate cannot defeat a man like this……then what hope for the rest of the country will there be? And I just heard Ed say on MSNBC that California has a balanced budget. The only thing republicans could possibly be whining about would be…….”democrats are not letting poor people destroy public education to be able to loan us money on the backs of them and their worthless children.”
Right-wing poverty pimp Marshall Tuck isn’t qualified for the seat. He is not an educator. He is ignorant about pedagogy and the nuances of education policy. Under his “leadership” Green Dot Corporate Charters had some of the lowest API and SAT scores in the county, while simultaneously having some of the highest remediation rates of up to 98%.
Tuck’s tenure at PLAS was even criticized by the privatization friendly LA Times, which admitted that the neighboring public schools were doing better than PLAS schools. The distinguished Professor Diane Ravitch said that during Tuck’s stewardship at PLAS he “compiled a mediocre and unimpressive record.”
Lastly, Marshall Tuck’s disdain for people of color led him to shut down both ethnic studies at Santee, and heritage language programs at Ritter. Parents frequently protested Tuck since nearly all of his decisions were unilateral without community input. California doesn’t need a State Superintendent of Instruction with Tuck’s background or record.
Instead we need a life-long professional educator who understands how children learn and how to best facilitate that. Tom Torlakson certainly fits those requirements, although he’s sometimes a little weak on issues like Corporate Core (CCSS).
California Public schools have been a disaster for decades…I graduated in the early 70’s and it amazes me the absolute lack of knowledge graduates have today. Honestly, I went to Catholic School until 8th grade..then I went to public high school where they were teaching things I learned in 6th grade…Children will rise to the level we set..set a low level and that is exactly what you will get. When I raised a family I was at odds continually with the school system as it had become a politically charged good old boys club where what was taught was more politically correct instruction than real education. This has become a serious disservice to every student in California and the taxpayer that pays for it all. The current educational cabal has put the union and those involved with administration over the needs and right of the kids…If Torkelson is the current leader of this clown act then I certainly won’t vote for him….but I’m sure that if he has the support and money of the teachers union…he will be re-elected because that is how it all works now…Results mean nothing connections is the driving force behind all politics now….
Torlakson is a sore subject for many CA teachers right now. His stubborn insistence on support for SBAC and Common Core despite the outcry from teachers is disappointing. I do agree that he is the best candidate we have and I will continue to support him but reluctantly. His connections to West Ed and pushing of SBAC testing is fairly inexcusable to me but I don’t feel that we have much choice at this point. If anyone could get through to him, it just might be Diane. Above all, we must keep Marshall Tuck from this position but once the primary is over and the third candidate is eliminated, the votes of those who are staunchly anti-Common Core remain up for grabs and Torlakson’s shilling for Common Core isn’t going to help him one bit.
Torlakson has many faults–support for Common Core and SBAC being high among them–but at least he will listen to us. He is a terrible candidate, completely lacking in charisma. But…..he is not a reformer ideologue or a DFER type. He and the state board have reduced the relevance of standardized testing in the API and suspended the state standardized tests until the SBAC is fully “field tested” and “baselined.” This is big handicap for the ed deform folks as they have no test scores to based evaluation on. Tuck, on the other hand, is an amiable ideologue back by the billionaire boys club.
No major newspaper, including the L.A. Times, is endorsing Torlakson. Unfortunately, he is also an “amiable ideolgue” in that he gives honorary doctorates to undeserving high administrators in certain low-performing districts. Sorry, but my vote’s not going to Torlakson, and I have written him and told him why.
Changemaker,
I support Torlakson because his major opponent Marshall Tuck is a spokesman for the privatization industry. Whatever Tom’s faults, he respects public education.
All we need to know about Tuck is right here http://www.laprogressive.com/marshall-tuck-unqualified/