I thought Randi wrote an excellent letter in response to Mercedes Schneider’s questions. I repeat, as i have in the past, that Randi is a personal friend. We disagree about the Common Core, but that does not diminish our friendship. The fact that Randi engaged in this dialogue shows her willingness to listen to criticism and to respond thoughtfully, as she did. This is a trait I admire. I too have been the subject of harsh attacks, and I usually ignore them. I don’t have enough years left to fight all my critics, so I try to look ahead, not let them pull me down. But Randi chose to engage, and I admire her for doing so.
Many commenters have continued to criticize Randi, and Leo Casey, who has worked with Randi for many years and is now director of the Albert Shanker Institute of the AFT, responds here to the critics:
Leo Casey writes:
Mercedes Schneider’s blog post repeats a false and malicious account of Randi Weingarten’s teaching and, on this basis, accuses Randi of misrepresenting her experience. Her post is a direct attack on Randi’s personal integrity.
It is one thing to criticize, even heatedly and vehemently, political positions; it is quite another matter to engage in unscrupulous personal attacks, as Schneider has done.
What makes this personal attack by Schneider especially offensive is that it is based on a smear mounted by the New York City Department of Education under Joel Klein in retaliation for Randi’s criticisms of its Children First corporate education reforms, a smear that has since been taken up by anti-union forces on the far right.
What makes this personal attack by Schneider inexcusable is that a simple Google search leads one to an open letter from Randi’s supervisors, colleagues and students at Clara Barton High School. The letter refutes this smear and provides insight into how those with direct knowledge of Randi’s teaching viewed it and her. (The full text of this open letter is included at the end of this post.)
I am one of the signatories on that open letter.
I first met Randi Weingarten in September 1987, on the steps of a New York City courthouse. She was counsel for the United Federation of Teachers, and I was a social studies teacher at Clara Barton High School in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. In a saga I have recounted elsewhere in some detail, in 1984 the New York City Board of Education (as it was then called) had begun renovation on the Clara Barton school building—with us in it. After three years of disruption and dislocation, we had returned to our building a few days before it was to open for a new school year and found it filled with debris and a thick layer of dust. I enlisted the White Lung Association and a prominent law firm in our cause, and with their help, a court closed our building. The air and the dust were tested, and friable (loose) asbestos—a dangerous carcinogen when inhaled or ingested—was found. The school building remained closed for two months while a top-to-bottom cleanup and asbestos abatement were completed. I ended up working closely with Randi during a number of court hearings and as she negotiated, with our input, a protocol for the completion of the renovation of our school building. This protocol became the basis of protocols for all subsequent school construction work in New York City.
As we worked together, Randi and I became good friends. We discovered we had a common passion for teaching, and we shared notes on teaching students at Clara Barton and at the Cardozo School of Law, where she had taught. I was something of an evangelist for teaching in an inner-city high school, but Randi was in no need of conversion: She told me that she wanted to teach in a New York City high school, in part because she believed it was very important social justice work and in part because she felt the experience of “walking the walk” of New York City school teachers would make her a better advocate on their behalf. I told her that the Clara Barton staff was grateful for what she had done on behalf of our school, and that we would welcome her to our faculty if her work with the UFT allowed her to teach.
In 1991, Randi took up that invitation and started teaching at Clara Barton. Randi and I co-taught a class in political science, and she taught courses in American history and government, law, and ethical issues in medicine, a public policy course for Clara Barton’s nursing students. The essential facets of Randi’s teaching are addressed in the open letter from her supervisors, colleagues and students reproduced below.
Two accusations repeated by Schneider need to be put to rest. I speak from firsthand knowledge in both instances.
First, the only time during her teaching at Clara Barton that Randi and I discussed her future role in the leadership of the UFT was after Al Shanker became seriously ill with cancer and then passed away in early 1997. Sandy Feldman had taken on the job of AFT president as Al’s successor, and it was clear she could not also continue as UFT president for long. It was only when Sandy had asked Randi to consider standing for UFT president that Randi and I discussed for the first time what she should do. The notion that Randi taught at Clara Barton in order to become UFT president ignores the obvious fact that no one could possibly have known that Al Shanker would be taken from us well before his time.
Second, the “evidence” used to dispute Randi’s account of her teaching was the manufactured product of a personal attack on her mounted by City Hall and the New York City Department of Education. At the UFT’s 2003 spring conference, Randi announced the union’s opposition to the Children First corporate reforms of the Bloomberg-Klein Department of Education. The response from City Hall and Tweed was immediate. Rumors were circulated about Randi’s sexual orientation. Her personal finances were investigated. Neighbors reported that strange men were surveilling and photographing her house. Officials in the DOE passed word that they were being ordered to provide copies of Randi’s confidential personnel files over their objections. Then, two weeks after the UFT’s spring conference, Wayne Barrett published a story in the Village Voice that took up the Bloomberg-Klein cudgels. Barrett wrote that Randi had not taught real classes but was a day-to-day substitute teacher, and that she was absent three days for every day she was present. Using the passive voice, Barrett wrote that “records reviewed by the Voice” were the basis for these claims. We will probably never know what documents were shown to Barrett by the Bloomberg-Klein administration or what they actually reflected, but we do know that the conclusions he printed about Randi’s teaching were entirely false, and that they were part of a smear against Randi conducted in retaliation for the UFT’s opposition to the NYC DOE’s Children First policies.
It is passing strange that those who claim to be the strongest opponents of corporate education reform and who characterize everyone else as weak and vacillating would now be spreading these false and malicious charges. It is beyond odd that self-styled opponents of corporate education reform would be not be focusing on opposition to privatization and austerity, were we would all seem to have common cause, but in mounting personal attacks on Randi Weingarten. If nothing else, it shows their lack of confidence in their own arguments against the AFT’s principled support for the Common Core standards and its strong opposition to the destructive ways in which too many states and districts have implemented them that they have to resort to personal attacks. That’s pretty sad.
Leo Casey
OPEN LETTER
To whom it may concern,
We have learned of publications that challenge the teaching record and accomplishments of American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, disputing the account provided in her official AFT biography. The allegation is that Randi was a substitute teacher who did not teach regular Social Studies classes at Clara Barton High School from 1991 to 1997. Further, it is claimed that she was never observed or evaluated by the school’s Principal or Assistant Principals.
We were students, professional colleagues and supervisors of Randi Weingarten in the years she taught at Clara Barton High School. We have first-hand knowledge of her teaching, and know that these allegations are completely unfounded.
Those of us who were students of Randi know that she taught us in regular classes, from U.S. History and Government and Advanced Placement Political Science to Law and Ethical Issues in Medicine, and that she was in class virtually every day to teach us. A number of us had the privilege of studying with Randi when she prepared our Political Science class for participation in the national We The People civics competition, and our class won the New York State championship and placed high in the nationals. She gave countless hours, before and after school, on weekends and on holidays, to ensure that we would be able to do our very best. We know Randi to be an excellent teacher, completely dedicated to her students.
Those of us who were professional colleagues of Randi know that while teaching at Clara Barton, Randi taught the same regular classes that every teacher teaches, and that she was in her classes virtually every day. We know Randi to be a master teacher who was supportive of her colleagues. She was a welcome presence in our professional community.
Those of us who were supervisors of her know that like other Social Studies teachers at Clara Barton, Randi’s teaching was observed and she was evaluated by the Assistant Principal for Social Studies and the Principal. We know Randi to be a conscientious educator who was ever mindful of fulfilling her obligations to the young people she taught and committed to the mission of our school and the inner city community it served.
Marsha Boncy-Danticat§
Leo Casey§
Madison Cuffy*
Connie Cuttle§
Fania Denton*
Thomas Dillon¶
Tamika Lawrence Edwards*
Sean Edwards*
Jacqueline Foster¶
Zinga Fraser*
Judith Garcia¶
Karen Gazis§
Renne Gross§
Gail Lewis Jacobs*
Keith William Lee*
Joshua Medina*
Andrew Mirer§
Maurice Pahalan§
Joseph Picciano§
Elizabeth Ramos Mahon*
Judieann Spencer-McCall*
Tina Vurgaropulos§.
§: Was a Clara Barton teacher or guidance counselor colleague
*: Was a Clara Barton student
¶: Was a Clara Barton supervisor
Let me note that in my open letter, I neither mention nor link to any sources that I counted as less than credible.
Randi decided to bring names into this discourse. That was her decision.
My concerns are legitimate. Randi has been elected as AFT president. I am an AFT member. As such, I should be allowed to ask for her to account for decisions associated with her role as AFT president.
I did ask Weingarten how many semesters of full time teaching she has to her credit.
If this is malicious, then our democracy is in big trouble.
Mercedes,
You have every right to question Weingarten, and if anything, I have had harsher words for her. Your tone is always civil and professional, and I can take a lesson or two from you.
However, I would like to add my two cents, as I have had personal correspondence with Ms. Weingarten in the past year.
At this point, I don’t care if she taught for 9 months or 90 years. Yes, it says something about how power brokers with little teaching experience influence policy.
But the bottom line is that Randi Weingarten’s moves have been conflicting, confusing, contradictory, counter-productive, and indicative of playing many sides against her career’s middle. She has danced and slept with the devil(s) rather than really understanding what it means to teach and learn and therefore militantly confront and oppose this reform movement.
Weingarten is a master at playing many sides, and then putting on the most choice and specific mask depending upon who at the moment is communicating with her.
She makes Lon Chaney look incompetent.
So, Mercedes, you question her as much as you need to. I support that, and you are anything but attacking. Leo Casey is with the UFT, which is among the most corrupt and compromised of unions.
You, Ms. Schneider, are a lady and a scholar.
There is nothing in my estimate that Diane can do that’s wrong, but I succinctly disagree with her admiration of Weingarten, and I have accepted that my closest allies will never overlap with me 100% of the time in my political views, and that’s okay.
Readers of this blog are fortunate to have you and Diane comment and advocate . . . . keep it up. I for one am obliged to you.
Lon Chaney? That’s an obscure one no doubt!
You have a right to ask someone a question if you have the respect to hear the answer. You do not have a right to question [ pass judgment on] someone’s veracity or make accusations of corruption merely because you disagree with their position, succinctly or otherwise.
My admiration for both Diane and Mercedes is unbounded, but Diane was wrong once before! : )
AKA laMissy
I think the Lon Chaney reference was
to the actor’s legendary status as “The
Man of a Thousand Faces”, in that
he transformed himself via makeup
and performance into an untold
variety of the wildly different “faces”
of the characters that he played.
Had you not been aware, you would
never have guessed that these
characters are performed by the same
person.
It’s also the title of the movie biopic of
Chaney, where Chaney was played by
James Cagney.
The point is that Weingarten exceeds
Chaney “thousand-faces” ability as
she can done even more multiple, and
wildly different “faces” / personas /
policy decisions, depending on
where and to whom she is speaking,
or with whom she is dealing.
Her various actions are bizarre, to
say the least. She invited noted
privatizer and union-buster Bill
Gates to address the AFT national
convention. She supported him
to the extent that when anti-Gates
protestors started shouting, she
egged other members of the
convention to heckle, harass,
and shoo the anti-Gates folks
from the hall. The AFT teachers
assisting Weingarten in this were
primarily being older retired,
or soon-to-retire members.
A few days later, however,
Gates showed his gratitude to
those supporting him that day
by giving a speech at a different
event where he excoriated
unionized teachers for receiving—
or will eventually be receiving—
pensions that were bloated
and undeserved—based on, yes,
student “test scores”. Gates
further said that these pensions
must be eliminated, or at least,
gutted to the bone.
A strange way to say thanks
for the support that he received
from them and from Randi at the
AFT convention.
Randi, of course, never commented
on the second speech.
That same summer, NEA, the other
national union for their national
convetnion, had a radically different
guest speaker: the owner of this
blog.
Randi Weingarten was extremely effective and helpful to me as a UFT chapter leader, in a large NYC high school, on several occasions. She helped us contend with a principal who routinely unsatisfactorily rated high numbers of our teachers as a management strategy. She went to bat for our teachers when they were accused of following an assistant principal’s orders to remark and change test scores. She came to our rescue when we held a demonstration to stop out of control violence due to overcrowding and security budget cuts by a new Mayor Bloomberg. Safety eventually returned to my high school as we became the first impact school. Our teachers were exonerated from any charges of cheating. The principal who had caused so much terror eventually left the school in shame. Through our trevails, Randi Weingarten was there every minute to have our back. When I asked for help, Randi came through. If students and teachers were at risk, Randi was there. Dr. Leo Casey and Randi Weingarten have demonstrated common sense, reason, and care for public education. Today I am still a teacher in a badly damaged school system which has followed a national tide of gimickry and mimicry. I look forward to a time when the zealots on all sides allow hard working pedagogues to have the discretion that they need. I look forward to the time when the classroom is the highest rung in the system. I see Randi as a strong part of that process and look forward to her continued advocacy.
John Bartley, I’d love to hear the answers.
Let’s start with the first question on full time teaching experience.
I really do not understand what is getting Leo Casey all wound up. There are lots of references to people and situations that I don’t see in your open letter, Mercedes. As a lawyer, I would have thought Randi would know to only answer the questions asked and not volunteer information on the basis of assumptions. Leo appears to lose it over rumors that are not available to a lot of us, and his attack on you does Randi no service. I have not been pleased with Randi’s apparent concessions on CCSS although I understand that lawyer obsession with negotiation. There is no reason why any professional teacher should accept standards not designed by educators and there is plenty of reason to reject any national testing of them.
From a personal point of view, the local unions to which I belonged have done a decent job of serving the membership. I never received tenure, so there was a lot that locals could not do for me. Tenure works against most newer teachers because local contracts generally do not provide any job protection. Above the local level, unions seem to operate their own independent agenda. Karen Lewis is a notable exception to the myopia power seems to produce. Perhaps we should start producing a list of union heroes.
I used to say I didn’t care about politics. Just leave me alone and let me teach. How incredibly naive I was! You operate as a teacher within a system that rates you on much more than your connection with the kids. There is a hierarchy to every building that must be acknowledged, and knowing and finding “your place” are equally important. I think that “the building” is trying to put you in your place. I like you right where you are.
Thank you, 2old. I did not read your comment until now, and let me say, your encouragement moved me.
It is morally wrong for me to be silent on the issues I presented in my open letter. It was a matter of conscience for me. That sealed the deal.
I was careful about the information I included in my open letter. I realize that any attack on me for information I chose to exclude is bizarre.
What is also telling is that the pro-Weingarten sentiment is concentrated on my blog. It has not shown up here. That bespeaks a directive behind the commenting.
Early this morning, I did a redirect of the pro-Weingarten comments to Diane’s blog. Why not take up for Weingarten in this more public venue?
I left my note five hours ago. The influx of pro-Weingarten comments to Diane’s earlier posting of my open exchange piece has yet to happen. And the barrage of pro-Weingarten comments to my blog has stopped in these several hours, with the exception of one commenter who attempted to leave about seven comments in rapid succession.
And she dignified you with a comprehensive and honest answer. If you cannot acknowledge that as democratic, then it is malicious.
Nope. Not a comprehensive answer.
The seemingly simplest question to answer Randi has dodged.
Why? Why not directly answer the simplest question?
Tip of an iceberg, that’s why.
It’s one thing to defend one’s friend. It’s another to suggest that, because you don’t like what someone said about your friend, that Common Core opponents lack faith in their arguments. I’m a Common Core opponent, and I’ve yet to see anything remotely persuasive as to its effectiveness. It’s never been tested anywhere, and parents of young children find it to be a disaster.
We are on the wrong side of history here.
In science the burden of proof on the claimant. Where is David Coleman’s proof that implementing the CCSS will ensure that students are “college or career ready”? Where is Arne Duncan’s proof that teachers can be fairly and accurately evaluated using standardized test scores? Where is John King’s proof that Enrage NY instructional modules in math and ELA work? Where is Pearson’s proof that their CCSS aligned tests are reliable, valid, and developmentally appropriate?
For a bunch so-called educational experts who’s entire argument for pushing the CCSS reform rests on the importance of data driven instruction, it’s remarkable how little data that they have to back their claims.
Great comment!
I’ve noted before – here and elsewhere – that those who claim to be “data-driven” don’t really care about the “data” because all too often it proves them wrong. For example, the overarching purpose of the Common Core is to restore American “economic competitiveness.”
But the U.S. already IS internationally competitive. The World Economic Forum ranks nations each year on competitiveness. The U.S. is usually in the top five (if not 1 or 2). When it drops, the WEF doesn’t cite education, but stupid economic decisions and policies.
Randi Weingarten already signed ON to the Common Core standards. She endorsed them, and implicitly stated that most teachers endorse them too.
There is no reason she should not be getting criticism for her stand.
Arthur
Opponents of CCSS/PARCC/APPR are on the right side of history.
The reform firm of Coleman, Duncan, Broad, & Gates is on the wrong side of history.
I meant to say that the AFT is on the wrong side of history. While I oppose CC, I’m also AFT. Sorry that wasn’t clear.
I’m sad to report that I am a NYSUT/AFT member. Our leaders will rue the day they sold their members down the river.
I am not so sure about this. I wish that I could confidently say that these totalitarian tendencies will soon be reversed. However, there are very powerful forces now working diligently to create centralized, totalitarian command and control of U.S. education, and these forces have met with little resistance, as yet, and with enormous success. They have, for example, unilaterally foisted national standards and tests on the country and a centralized database of student information on many states with little opposition and with considerable assistance from those whom one would expect to be opposed to totalitarianism.
Everywhere one looks in our society, today, one sees this trend toward centralization and concentration of power, information, command, control, authority, and wealth. The folks in charge are typified by Arne Duncan, who characterizes opposition to his policies as the ravings of a lunatic fringe.Our leaders are mere wind-up toys or, at best, unwitting tools of the oligarchs.
Eventually, of course, totalitarian systems fail because they stifle innovation and creativity and autonomy and because distant authorities, in their arrogance and ignorance of specific local conditions, make incredibly stupid decisions. Their hubris catches up with them. But it often takes them a long, long time for totalitarianisms to collapse of their own dead weight, and they do a lot of damage before that happens.
There are so many enablers and collaborators with the current deforms and so many people who aren’t paying attention and so many who are so ill-informed, that I very much fear that we’re going to have to watch this horror play out. I hope that I am wrong about this.
Advice for CC$$ “trainers.” All you need to know is modeled in this passage from Orwell’s 1984:
“You are a slow learner, Winston.”
“How can I help it? How can I help but see what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”
“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.”
Teachers need to learn that in the new order, they are not meant to think. The thinking has been done for them.
I have the same concerns as Robert Shepherd. I’ve posted some questions but I’m not expecting any answers from the pro Unity folks. Yet I feel as though my questions are legitimate and worthy of consideration.
I’m also reading an interview in NYSUT United magazine with author Peter Edelman, a leading anti-poverty advocate and author. He compares the “fringe” element in education that says everything about Common Core is terrible to the “fringe” that says Obamacare has to go. He sees this type of questioning as possibly widening the already gulf like wealth gap.
Why does this all have to be so stark? I just don’t get it. It makes no sense that such a large undertaking with so many holes in it would be rammed down our throats like this without first seriously considering the objections of so many recognized professionals.
Here’s one of many reason good reasons to oppose the Common Core…
Coleman insists that teachers should keep students focused “within the four corners of the text” when interpreting a reading passage. Anyone who has even a casual understanding of the reading process, literary theory, or legal history knows that a text does not have four corners. (Even if you’re trying to construe the language of a contract, which apparently is where the term “four corners of the text” came from). There’s either an ideological bias operating here, or an ignorance bias.
Instead of making extravagant claims about how the “Standards” will revolutionize learning, Weingarten should be paying attention to critics who view them as wasteful, reductive, stultifying, developmentally inappropriate, too wedded to standardized testing, and, in many instances, just plain wrong.
Read Alan Singer’s article in today’s Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/a-serious-flaw-in-common-_b_4212340.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
The four corners of the text notion has some pedagogical validity to some extent. But it is ONE of MANY approaches. The idea derives from the New Critical theorists of the early part of the 20th century–from people like Wimsatt, Empson, Tate, Brooks, and Warren. There are, of course, VERY different approaches that one can take to literature AT ALL LEVELS of childrens’ educations. It is possible, for example, to take a New Historicist approach with 3rd graders. This is one example of the authors of these amateurish “standards” making unwarranted decisions for everyone else and precluding many alternative pedagogical and curricular approaches. There are two possiblities here. Either the authors of these “standards” were so ignorant that they didn’t understand that New Criticism is very controversial and is only one of hundreds of different possible approaches to texts OR they didn’t give a d&*$&*$&*@ what other people think and believe that they have the right to impose their authoritarian vision on everyone else.
Robert D. Shepherd:
Formalist approaches like the New Criticism that de-emphasized both context and the reader’s response were already under attack in the 1960s and have since been superseded by a raft of other theories. You could even say the approach has been thoroughly debunked. Yet the Common Core approach to literature study is based on what Susan Ohanian has called the “the New Criticism on steroids.”
I have no problem with high school students doing a cold reading of a story or poem without teacher interference–at least from time to time–with the idea of making sense of it as a self-contained work, but to insist that they pay attention only to the “words on the page” is a bad idea. And to have students do this over and over again starting in the early grades is even worse.
As for taking “a New Historicist approach with 3rd graders,” I’m afraid you lost me. Should third graders be asked to do literary criticism at all? Should sixth graders? No, not in my opinion. In third grade the emphasis should be on all dimensions of response and appreciation (especially of student-selected readings), not on a “close reading” search for literary devices and themes. It looks like that’s what kids are in for, though. You can do more with sixth graders, but to reduce their reading of literature to a series of formulaic exercises in interpretation–which is what the Standards threaten to do–is a crime.
Again, it looks like both the AFT and NEA have uncritically bought into a set of “ELA standards” that will do more harm than good. The National Council of Teachers of English and ASCD “(formerly the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development),” have done the same. It doesn’t take any critical thinking to understand one of the reasons why. All four groups have received hefty grants from the Gates Foundation.
This parody of NY State Ed.
Commissioner John King
with his aides, as he reacts
to parents who want to opt
out of Common Core testing
or criticize Common Core
in any way:
This video never gets old.
yes, it does.
After reading the opening of this “defense” I already have lost all respect for Leo Casey. He outright lies about the content of Mercedes’ posting — I read it myself and it is in the form of legitimate questions. not malicious smears. If his “defense” starts out with lies and exaggerations I’m afraid I don’t give the rest of what he says any credence at all.
And here in Florida, where I am a member of the AFT, testing is being used to fire teachers right and left and end the careers of anyone who dares to teach poor children. I do not feel that the AFT has my back in any way and I was a building rep in NYC and worked with and knew Randi.
Our unions have failed to protect our jobs, our profession, and our integrity and they are now partners with those who wish to destroy us. There is no other interpretation that can be made.
I whole heartedly agree with you. When I hear Weingarten say we must have a “moratorium” on the common core testing, I want to scream – WE DON’T NEED A MORATORIUM, WE NEED AN END TO THIS TESTING INSANITY. How Weingarten can think that corporate initiated standardized testing is acceptable is an abomination to the teaching profession. I assess my students everyday and I DO NOT NEED this uninformative, expensive testing.
What Chris said. It’s really baffling that Casey believes he can get away with characterizing Mercedes letter like that. Mercedes never “smeared” her, but Randi pretended to answer politely while she enlisted a surrogate to smear Mercedes. This is all a distraction from the real issues, which both Randi and Leo ducked.
The bottom line is, the presidency of the AFT is a plum career move. If Randi responds to the membership’s call for divestment in the Gates foundation gravy train, she’ll forfeit her six figure sinecure with the corporate reform apparatus when she leaves. Therefor, the kindest thing we can do for her is to vote her out.
I hadn’t seen Mercedes’ letter when I found Randi’s post yesterday. My comment on Huffington in response was perfectly civil, except that I called the billionaires at her table cheats, liars and frauds.
She chose not to post it. I have to assume there were many other messages from teachers and union members she chose to hide and discard.
The problem with Mercede’s open letter is that she has already decided the answers. A punctuation mark cannot transform her accusations. The truth of this can be seen in her non-acceptance of any of the reply. Your baseless accusations of someone’s future career intentions are irresponsible and libelous. There is nothing perfect or civil about calling anyone a liar, cheat and fraud in a public forum with only your opinion as proof. I will state publicly that I hold your opinion in low regard, but that does not entitle me or anyone else to defame your reputation.
John, I didn’t call Weingarten any of those things. I said she was sitting at the table with them, and joined Mercedes in asking her to get up and move. Here is the exact text:
“President Weingarten, the AFT does not support the Common Core. The AFT is composed of its members, the teachers in America’s public schools, and you know you don’t speak for them in this.
“No, we don’t “wonder why so many people think they should play an important role in American education.” It’s because you made a deal for your yourself, thinking you were getting “a place at the table” of a pack of wealthy and arrogant cheats, liars, and frauds.
“The Common Core has nothing whatsoever to do with critical thinking or creativity or even teaching and learning. It promotes double-speak and gibberish formulaic essays for machine scoring. It’s a battering ram for intrusive, continuous “data-driven” control of American children and teachers.
“All over the country, the real AFT are calling on our members to stand together with our communities and fight the imposition of profit-driven corporate control on American children.”
“Due to the potentially sensitive nature of this article, your comment may take longer to appear publicly.”
John Bartley, you are correct when you note that I “had already decided the answers.”
Here is the question: “What would it take for me to believe in Randi Weingarten as AFT president?”
If the president of a national teachers union cannot in a single sentence clearly delineate her teaching credentials, then I cannot believe in her. What I can believe is that some agenda prevents such a seemingly easy task.
If the president of a national teachers union accepts millions from a noted corporate-reform-promoting, so-termed “philanthropist,” then I cannot believe in her. What I can believe is that the philanthropist’s agenda holds sway over the actions of such a president.
Bill Gates has shelled out $173 million toward Common Core to date.
If the president of a national teachers union expresses unswerving devotion to a set of “standards” despite the now-public numerous concerns over both the origins and effects of such, then I cannot believe in her. What I can believe is that some agenda other than teacher and student welfare truly holds her attention.
In her response, Randi Weingarten demonstrated where she stands on the three issues above. Based upon her response, I now know that she is too much of the corporate reformer in union garb for me.
There you have it.
If you are in a war, and you find out that your general is collarborating with the enemy, does it make any sense to follow that general into battle? The lives of the next generation depend on this corporate educational reform not destroying our public schools.
If your union leadership is in Collective Bargaining and fights to get the most for its members by negotiating with the other party is it a conspiracy? Union leadership on the national, state and local levels has and should use more sophisticated strategies than extremist ranting to defend public education.
“Fights to get the most for its members”?
Is taking over $11 million from Bill Gates– a man who capriciously dabbles in ed reform according to his liking and disrupting lives in the process– “fighting for members”?
When “negotiating with the other party” involves mega bank drafts from established reformers, that’s a purchase, not a negotiation.
And who is being sold?
Me.
Yes, Randi got us the most in the 2005 contract and support for mayoral control and support for merit pay and support for co-located UFT charters undermining the public schools they occupy. Tell us more.
I for one was confused about where Ms. Weingertner stood as well. I feel like the discourse between the two was very helpful and put some of my fears at rest. I do not get all the stuff going on but no one that I know could explain Ms. Weing.’s position I heard she took gates money. I heard she was on the board I did not know what to believe. Now I feel like it is out in the open and a sigh of relief. We need everybody on the same page. We know who the enemy is and it’s not us. btw I heard Scholastic took money from gates as well. so how could we trust them to have an accurate pole. One more thing about the teachers and the poles… I was against ccss in the beginning and then learned a little about it like going deep and not wide. I have been a teacher since 2000 and have been very concerned about how much they expect us to cover. Common core let a lot of thing out and that was thrilling to me. However, this year has been nothing but testing baseline and pre testing and post testing. For Goodness sakes I teach 5 year olds. We are supposed to love school. There was no time for learning routines it was down to testing right away. I have it. hate it. I am grateful to have both of these wonderful smart women on my side. I hope we can all move forward and stronger.
The teachers are crying, the students are crying. Please tell me, how much more proof do we need that this is not working?
These are Mercedes’s three requests:
1. Clearly outline your classroom teaching experience in your (American Federation of Teachers) AFT bio.
2. Return the Gates funding still in AFT possession.
3. Drop support for CCSS.
#1 Should take all of a line or two.
#2 A simple yes or no with a line or two explanation would have sufficed.
#3 See #2.
Mercedes is being too haughty for Randi’s taste even though Randi runs with the true haughties of the highest echelons in New York whereas Mercedes, well let’s just say she’s down there in the lowland backward bayous of LA (and no, not Los Angeles).
Duane,
Brilliant.
Go, Mecedes go,
Sorry Diane, not with you on this one. But, I respect the value you place on your friendship, blinding as it is.
Duane Swacker & Galton: I agree with your comments.
Notwithstanding the above, I greatly appreciate the posting on this blog of the remarks by Randi Weingarten, Mercedes Schneider and Leo Casey, along with the comments. I am guessing but it may be somewhat uncomfortable and awkward for the owner of this blog to publicly air such contrasting opinions and sentiments. However, in doing so she demonstrates something that is too often in short supply in our civic life—
Character and integrity, by setting a good example for public discourse even when it may be personally jarring.
Thank you, Diane.
🙂
agreed!
1. I’m more interested in a union president’s credentials as a negotiator and labor organizer. The fact that Randi responds to dissenting rank and file members shows she’s in touch with those she represents.
2. The response outlined the way the foundation money was in support of public education.
3. A moratorium on using CCSS high stakes testing is an achievable goal and the first step to revising them. A position of no standards, no tests, no way is not going to be supported by our allies in the legislature who can help us bring about change.
I’m not sure if Mercedes is haughty or naïve but I doubt she is backward. My personal experience with Randi is she is far from haughty and prefers the company of fellow teachers. Yet, she can hold her own in the toughest of battles.
Another commercial.
You know how Randi responded to the leading opposition party in the UFT? She bought them by giving them Ex bd seats in exchange for not running against her. You see she didn’t want to have anyone run against her in the 2004 union elections — like any dictator. I’ve been at delegate assemblies since 1970 and Randi constricted democracy there further than Shanker and Feldman every did.
>Mercedes Schneider’s blog post repeats a false and malicious account of Randi Weingarten’s teaching and, on this basis, accuses Randi of misrepresenting her experience. Her post is a direct attack on Randi’s personal integrity.
Is it? I didn’t find anything malicious in Ms. Schneider’s writing at all. Nor did I find she attempts to discredit her opponent’s teaching credentials. If questioning her opponent’s teaching credential or her position on CCSS or relations with rich private donors is considered as a personal attack, then, accusing her of making ad hominem with no evidence should be considered as a vicious ‘personal attack.’ It does nothing but undermines the arguments, I think.
I agree with your last sentence wholeheartedly Ken. The letter and the dialog it has created diverts the various positions from working together towards a Common Creative Solution Soon. The frustration within the profession that has been growing for over a decade has caused many to vent it upon our own members and leaders. It has been exploited by a few whose rancor and animosity towards union leadership has existed long before CCSS, Randi Weingarten or Apple computers.
The CC$$:
One ring to rule them all!
(teachers, students, parents, administrators, curriculum developers, curriculum coordinators, that is)
Welcome to the plan for training of the proles, brought to you by the Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth.
I’ve designed these guys a new logo. Around the central CC$$ figure is the motto: “No on gives a $^@$^^@ what you thinik.”
That phrase is, of course, from David Coleman, who was appointed absolute monarch of English language arts education in the United States.
I sincerely hope that that motto comes back to bite Coleman on the backside.
I’m tring to find the “no one gives sh#@”
video of Coleman, but I did find this;
Pretty creepy.
Found it —The godawful
“no one-gives-a-sh@#!”
quote from David Coleman.
It’s even more creepy to actually
watch and hear Coleman say this
infamous quote at a speech in an
auditorium at the New York
Department of Ed. in April, 2012.
Watch how smug and creepy he
comes across… apart from the
potty-mouth… and how the
crowd laughs along with
this educational war crime:
No parent protective of their
children would want this skeevy
mountebank or his deranged ideas
about education within a 100 miles
of any school of any kind.
(That’s why John King pays
tens of thousands of dollars to
keep his own children as far
away from Common Core as
his money will allow—while
forcing it on millions of other
children.)
HEY DAVID!!!
KEEP YOUR FREAKING HANDS
OFF OUR CHILDREN’S MINDS
AND OUT OF OUR CHILDREN’S
LIVES AND FUTURES,
YOU PIECE OF SH#@!!!!
“. . . apart from the potty-mouth. . . ”
“HEY DAVID!!!
KEEP YOUR FREAKING HANDS OFF OUR CHILDREN’S MINDS AND OUT OF OUR CHILDREN’S LIVES AND FUTURES,
YOU PIECE OF SH#@!!!!
Ze pot calling ze kettle black!
That’s a better choice of video to post all over. This isn’t just a running internet meme; this man put his own heel on my students, to hold them accountable to his distorted business plans, and here he tells them nobody cares what they think or feel.
Their teachers care, and the world cares.
Can we get Coleman’s infamous remark in Latin? Every now and then Mr. Coleman needs to be reminded that his remark applies particulary to the man in his mirror.
Someone who is better at this than I am needs to check this:
Non curamus quid sentias.
“We don’t care what you think.” This will make a great motto for the new Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth.
No, Robert. Sorry, but we need to do better. He didn’t just say we or they don’t care, he said NOBODY cares.
Nemo curat quid vobis videtur vel sentitur.
According to Google translator.
We certainly don’t give a €£¥$$ about what David Coleman or his trolls/orcs/uruk hai think. Nor do we support what AFT/UFT leadership supports. Pause the tests? More like send them to Mt. Doom. They have sold our salaries and pensions for their own ease. Mercedes, simple questions demand simple answers. Randi didn’t answer clearly or simply.
I disagree. Simple minds simply say statements that lend credence to Coleman”s crude comment.
And since Nimbus claims UFT membership I know his salary scale, pension and health benefits are better than most AFT locals.
Sorry but as a non-union bystander (parent, free-lance educator), I find the fact that Randi Weingarten bought into Common Core— & not to be forgotten, including student test scores as a measure of teacher evaluation– to be simply a sign that teacher’s unions have lost their clout & are on their way OUT. Face it, it’s a sign of the poor economic times. Middle class people are not going to stand by & accept lousy wages & poor-to-no benefits while paying taxes to see their public employees out-do them.
Common Core? What sensible person would support a national Common Core of Education Standards? What does it have to recommend it? From states which are at the bottom of educational achievement, & who (by the way) put as little $ as possible into their public education, high standards are a revelation. Fine, let these standards be a model– borrow them if you like them, & give it a shot. For states which already had fine core curriculum standards (like mine), which put lots of $ into public education & get high results– why, Christie, why? (yes, I am from NJ). Christie, if your poor urban schools are not implementing your excellent [former] core curriculum standards, do something about it. That you would rather import lesser stds from the fed & test your schools & teachers against them tells us exactly what you’re up to, & it’s not about improving ed in your state.
For any state which finds that its high-$ districts perform well & its poor-$ districts perform poorly, get a clue. This picture has something to do with how you fund your schools. For parents of poor kids: if your state doesn’t have high ed stds, that’s what you want to push for. Once you get them, if your schools don’t apply them, that’s what you want to push for.
& for all those mealy-mouth people who claim they want nationalized ed stds so they can move from state to state & find you can slide right into the same curriculum, again I say, get a clue. There’s a reason why my friends from NJ move to Fla & find their kids are immediately bumped up to the next grade. It has something to do w/why they moved to Fla: it’s cheaper there…
Re: “Middle class people are not going to stand by & accept lousy wages & poor-to-no benefits while paying taxes to see their public employees out-do them.”
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Everyone should be fairly compensated, and if necessary, freely organize. If we have a free market, labor is free too. Unions are only anachronistic if employers with employees are anachronistic.
Today AFT went down the chain to reach my local union president and ask her to “rein me in.” My school union rep told me. No kidding. But my local union president doesn’t try to make teachers follow her wishes. She finds out what teachers want to do and then helps us do it.
AFT communicated down the chain that they are concerned I will incite a protest. I don’t incite protests. When told to “talk to me” by one on the regional level, my local union president responded, “And tell her what?”
Funny– the Common Core protests have already transpired and brought about results in my district– including open support from our local union president:
http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/11/03/my-local-teachers-union-and-superintendent-stand-against-common-core-and-parcc/
Mercedes- what’s up with this comment? I don’t normally answer comments on blogs–even Diane’s but your implication is untrue and required a response. You and I emailed frequently over the last 2 weekends, and you thanked me for answering you open letter- which you posted in many venues….and now after the very public exchange of views this allegation that I or someone in the 1.5 million member AFT tried to silence you. Cmon. The AFT is a big tent with many points of views- and my actions (which on Sunday you applauded, and now you criticize) quite obviously demonstrate my sincere welcoming of debate
The fact that the directive came from above to quiet me speaks to the manner in which AFT is run. You can try to distance yourself from it, but ultimately, as president, you are responsible.
That’s the problem.
Operative phrase, Randi: “Many point of views” . . . . . And funny how yours and your Unity Party is always the one that prevails.
Listen: Your number is up because you are starting to be found out, and you probably are uncomfortable with it.
Deny all you want and continue to deceive the public about who you are and how you are doing a fair, just, and moral job in your leadership. But the truth, as I have said ad nauseum, always seeks its own level just like water.
I extolled your virtues years ago in an article I wrote for the New York Teacher. . . . and since then, I have done a 180, realizing that the person I supported was the opposite in reality of my initial perceptions.
But I would posit that I am not the only one that has done a 180 in their views of education policy. . . . . . .
To each his own. Live and let live, but you are and never will be seen as an ally. What the teachers and students and their families need in this nation is a broad swath of satin and not a patchquilt of odds-and ends-policies.
if you continue to speak out of more than one side of your mouth, I fear your voice will one day become speechless . . . . .
During lunchtime, I walked in on the phone call. I wasn’t supposed to know about the “request” since locals did not plan to pursue it.
The very fact that this situation happened highlights that I have struck an upper-echelon AFT nerve.
Ms. Schneider,
Keep on striking it. . .. . hard as you can.
I’m afraid the narcissim, disconnect, hubris, and denial are all forms of anesthesia that have dulled the nerve and prevented it from transmitting signals to the brain . . . . .
You’re getting into trouble with the union the way I get into trouble with administrations-ha ha
Getting into trouble?
Do you mean I (or “we”) won’t get any protection from such a large expensive organization that does not protect us to begin with?
I am confused, Duane . . . .
You guys ought to go see the number of responses that read like AFT commercials on my blog.
To the viewers of this blog: IMHO, deutsch29 is not exaggerating when she speaks about “AFT commercials” on her blog.
I would add that they are not very good commercials either, especially with respect to CCSS. In fact, at least as far as I am concerned—and I admit, following Diane’s cautious but wise lead I was not neutral on this particular topic—I am more convinced then ever after reading those “AFT commercials” that if the CCSS picks up any more steam they may well make the LAUSD $1 billion [and counting] iPad fiasco look like small potatoes.
deutsch29: through all the noise and tumult, good counsel can be hard to hear. I offer the following for your situation—
“I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence.” [Frederick Douglass]
“Nothing is gained, everything is lost, by subordinating principle to expediency.” [William Lloyd Garrison]
Keep on keepin’ on.
🙂
That’s because the AFT is one big sparkly commercial. . . lights, camera, action, deceit . . . . .
What strikes me is that I posted in three places, plus Diane posted the original and this follow-up– so that’s five places where “the commercials” could appear. Yet they are concentrated on my original blog.
Wonder why none are here.
I did have one that ended with “this is not a commercial.”
Allow me:
“Ms. Schneider. You’re attack on President Weingarten’s credentials is a personal affront to educators who have had other careers prior to teaching. In NYC, many of our Career and Technical educators have had other professions prior to becoming teachers. They attend evening classes to obtain education credits. They are Educators and bring knowledge and background of their former profession to our students. I work in a Career and Technical High School, Not one person questions any of our educators credentials. President Weingarten’s time in the classroom should not be an issue. The fact is that she was and to my opinion, still is, an educator. As President of the UFT, she won the trust and support of her members. When she became President of the AFT, she still received the support of the UFT. As for the CCSS, if implemented correctly with a curriculum that is age appropriate, without high stakes testing, as we have in NY, it can work. We, as educators, have extremely hard jobs. To attack the President of the AFT and try to divide the union is not the answer. We should forge a united front and fight the real battle. Educate our children across the nation with uniform standards. Hire Administrators that have been in the classroom more than a minute, ( those are the people you really should be questioning, not President Weingarten). Stop being divisive. I proudly support President Weingarten and this is not a commercial.”
“. . . is a personal affront to educators who have had other careers prior to teaching.”
Mercedes, your very pertinent requests of the person who should be in service to you and the members and not the other way around aren’t an affront to this veteran teacher who didn’t start teaching until he was 38.
And you’re “divisive”. Heaven forbid!
And this one was the gooiest yet:
“Having met Randi a dozen years ago, I was immediately impressed by her ability to grasp the situation and quickly create a strategy to ensure the UFT was at the table for the discussion. Her ability to see several steps ahead of the competition kept the union flourishing and left the UFT in a better place than it was before. The common core is a reality, whereas Mercedes your comments are perception. The common core’s implementation has been heavy handed, while it should have been phased in by true educators. Attacking Randi for the poor implementation of the CCLS and the over-the-top testing culture is mere scapegoating for your own personal gains. Ossie Davis once said that the best advice is a good example…….we could all learn from the example of Randi Weingarten.”
Time to get out the toilet paper and wipe one’s nose of all that brown stuff coming from Weingarten.
Perish the thought . . . . .
What a revoltin’ development this is . . . . . . .
That isn’t helpful, Robert. Can you reconsider, and ask Diane to remove it?
Chemtchr,
Yours is SUCH an American response. . . . . Diane can do what she pleases. I respect that, and if she removes it, I accept and respect that also.
But I not only think we teachers across America have not been political enough to really know how much of a fraud Randi Weingarten is, but most Americans are, I would venture to say – or at least the average American – is far too apolitical, so unspeakably unlike my European counterparts in Madrid and France.
And so, by this I mean that there has not been enough confrontation, militancy, and outright non-violent aggression exhibited as a result of intense awareness and enlightenment of the general shift in power and wealth in this country, and Weingarten is just one of many examples of the corruptions and hypocrisies that fuel the plutocratic, seismic shifts.
I do not apologize one molecule for my comments. Not even a quark’s worth of regret.
And as an activist, I am doing everything I can over time to unseat Ms. Weingarten. The list is endless . . . .. her support of Bloomberg’s mayoral control, her inviting Gates as a keynote speaker, her facilitation of merit pay in – what was it – Newark, I believe.
Sorry, but you cannot act like the ally and the enemy and expect your constituents to support you. The messages are confusing, inconsistent, contradictory, and really ignore the people who pay and vote for protection and true justice.
If she were a man, I’d challenge her to a boxing match . . .
She contributes to the injustice of millions by partnering with reformers.
It’s a rather kind choice of words, considering her pernicious behavior.
We can’t. you posted that finding so many supporters of AFT leadership within the union have democratically replied with opposing views you are refusing to post them any more.
As for commercials for the AFT? You bet. I am proud of my union.
I’m proud of mine, too. The St. Tammany Federation of Teachers just supported my district’s resolution against Common Core:
http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/11/03/my-local-teachers-union-and-superintendent-stand-against-common-core-and-parcc/
And my state union is constantly in the courts fighting against teacher evaluations based upon test scores. The next court date is December 20th.
Diane is wise and astute, as usual. The “left” has a long and agonizing history of self-immolation – with more time spent bickering among themselves than fighting the other side. Seemingly very little has changed. The teacher unions, both at the local and national level have the resources to pursue policies and the political clout to back it up. I give Randi credit for answering Mercedes in such detail.
Leo Casey was more offended at Mercede’s letter than Randi.
Change is made at the polling place and in the corridors of power: in city halls, in state legislatures and in the halls of Congress. Changing the direction of education means changing “No Child Left Behind,” and that is an extraordinarily difficult lift. To simply say that anything Gates or Broad supports is inherently bad is emotionally satisfying but politically ineffective. Changing long established laws requires coalitions – you may not love your coalition partners – you need each other to bring about change.
To bring about change Diane and Randi and Mercedes and the blogging networks must work together.
I see the Common Core, at least at the secondary level as aspirational goals- not significantly different than the standards of the past.
Railing against “corporate takeovers” must be converted into achievable policies … Randi has the ability to coalesce divergent groups, and to write op eds for the NY Times. Each attack on Randi is applauded by the Murdochs and the Rhees.
I attend each and every monthly Delegate Meeting in my local. Teachers are frustrated by the implementation of the Common Core, by the paperwork burdens, an administration fixated on data for the sake of data, I hear little criticism of the CC itself. The just-released teacher evaluation data in New York State found 91% of teacher “high effective” or “effective” and 1% “ineffective.” (this does not include NYC that is a year delayed in implementation).
I was at a political event last night, and chatting with a local businessman, he worries about rising taxes the slow economic recovery and asks, “Is there an answer? Can you guys really teach all kids? Do parents really care? Are we pouring money down a black hole?” It took me a half hour , hopefully, to convince him that we can make a difference, we can educate kids, and, our tax dollars are well-spent.
If we spend our time attacking each other the public will turn their backs on schools.
What can we agree on? Can we develop an action plan to achieve agreed upon objectives? Or, we can bash each other and post comments for those with whom you already agree?
Mets2006, I’m assuming you attend all your union delegate meetings as a hanger-on of Weingarten’s failed leadership. You insult other union members with your arrogant dismissal of this vital discussion as “bickering”. No, this is what democracy looks like.
“time spent bickering among themselves”
“Railing against “corporate takeovers” must be converted into achievable policies…”
“Randi has the ability to coalesce divergent groups, and to write op eds for the NY Times.”
Randi and her entrenched faction have tried to tighten their grip on the union by their alliances with “the corridors of power”, instead of with the union membership. Your mealy-mouthed argument is that any challenge to Weingarten’s policies is off-limits. But your faction used your own corrupted union hierarchy to slither down to Louisiana and try to “rein in” a principled and effective leader like Mercedes. It’s time for a new delegate assembly, and new leaders.
Mercedes has raised two demands:
1. Divest our union of the $11 million slush fund that compromises our independence from corporate control.
2. Oppose the imposition of the Common Core.
Mercedes isn’t guilty of the diatribe you espouse. Is this another of your perfectly civil posts? Mealy-mouthed? And in case you have missed a few DAs here in NY, Weingarten hasn’t presided for quite awhile. Perhaps your dissatisfaction would be best assuaged by starting a union of your very own? I’m sure you have the intelligence and drive to do better than a UNITY lackey like Al Shanker. Good luck in your endeavor.
Randi Weingarten isn’t Al Shanker, and I have a union of my own. It isn’t a hereditary permanent fiefdom.
But I don’t understand, “Mercedes isn’t guilty” …okay, so far, so good… “of the diatribe you espouse.”
I have read all sides on this particular discussion and have come away with a few things. 1. Casey simply got it wrong in accusing Schneider of smearing Weingarten. 2. For teachers in the trenches on the front lines, life is mostly black and white, the no man’s land of the toxic reform agenda is obvious and all too real. For those at the rear who engage with politicians and oligarchs of all stripes, the sand is constantly shifting along with the terrain even though the truth of the front lines remains the same. Weingarten is fighting on a different battlefield with different rules and power structures. Those on the front lines are hard pressed to see this clearly as they expend so much energy and effort trying to teach and defend their students. Here is a page of quotes from a man who passed from this life about 300BC and is still being read and revered. Those on the front lines will benefit from knowing what the generals battlefield looks like and how it operates. It will make them better warriors. It will make them better able to speak truth to power, to all power in a way that improves their own chances at survival and victory. These are not political/policy disagreements and power struggles, teachers and other education professionals must understand that they are at war. http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/1771.Sun_Tzu
For example:
“Build your opponent a golden bridge to retreat across.”
“You have to believe in yourself. ”
“If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.”
“Be extremely subtle even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent s fate.”
― Sun Tzu
I would add that we must understand that the reformers know all this as well, yet their alliances and true goals often prevent them from acting effectively on this knowledge or even knowing and agreeing on what the battlefield reality is. We should enable them to maintain this conflicted position.
Casey’s defense is aggressively offensive. Neither he nor Weingarten really attempted to answer Mercedes’ questions in the spirit in which they were asked, and Diane’s heading is misleading.
This is how and why we are making progress.
“To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the
opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.”
― Sun Tzu
This situation is evidence that many who make decisions about education, and to a greater extent – those who seek to turn public education into a ‘for profit’ institution, are more than willing to resort to underhanded tactics to discredit their foes.
I didn’t know or work with Randi in the 90’s,or now. As a proud AFT member (Toledo Federation of Teachers), I’ve had the opportunity to hear her speak, meet her in person, and to participate in AFT led teacher leader programs that she has championed. I’ll take Randi’s dedicated, educated and sometimes fierce approach any day. Despite the smears and misinformation say, public educators are fortunate to have Randi as a leader.
Here’s misinformation:
Teachers “overwhelmingly support Common Core”:
http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/hart-weingarten-and-power-point-deception/
Mercedes, you are forever so formal and elegant. . . . . I’m too lazy to craft such language, and have discovered that “Lie” has far fewer letters and syllables than “misinformation” . . . . . .
Here’s some more misinformation:
“Teachers created Common Core”; “Common Core is ‘state-led'”:
http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2013/10/14/the-common-core-memorandum-of-understanding-what-a-story/
I can understand why Leo Casey would offer a lot of details about the malicious history behind the circular attributions questioning Randi Weingarten’s teaching experience. We should all hope we have left such an impression on our coworkers that they would write such a defense about us.
I don’t understand why it is such an enduring question. I don’t get the fixation. I do agree with Diane Ravitch that Randi regularly and admirably discusses differences of opinions in many venues. I have read her answers in Twitter, in blog posts, etc. I have read her defense of those answers.
It feels similar to the haranguing of President Obama for his birth certificate, then his college credentials, etc. President Obama was never going to give those folks a satisfactory answer and it seems that this question is setting up President Weingarten the same way. It does not feel productive to me.
Productive is passing ENDA so our coworkers can feel safe from discrimination.
Productive is passing Comprehensive Immigration Reform so our students and our families have a real path to citizenship and we can begin to end the exploitation of undocumented workers.
Productive is an Affordable Care Act that begins to make health care accessible and affordable for all.
Productive is ending the trafficking of women and children so we can offer real hope for healthy futures for everyone.
Productive is the vigorous debate over Common Core so that it can be implemented well, as it seems to have been for my children and my fellow teachers.
That’s just scratching the surface. We have a lot of work to do and we need to do that work together.
Wait, what? Mary Kathryn, did you just say Randi is on track to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and end “the trafficking of women and children so we can offer real hope for healthy futures for everyone”?
None of those things are happening at that famous table where she got her seat with her billionaires.
Mercedes asked her to give Bill Gates’ money back, and oppose the Common Core. There are plenty of people for whom the rollout isn’t going well, and comparatively few actually on board the Gates gravy train.
Leo Casey’s response won’t make the common core cut due to the amount of fiction. While I can agree that the exact time Randi taught is not the crucial issue, what irks people is the attempts to mislead. Leo Casey attacks the messenger, Wane Barrett, who wrote the May, 2003 piece in the Village Voice about Randi’s teaching time. You may or may not choose to believe it but apparently there are some records. Below is a pertinent selection from the Barrett piece (by the way, Barrett deserves to be criticized for a very anti UFT position over the years but if he has facts then they should be addressed and not by misdirection. The entire piece can be read at: http://www.villagevoice.com/2003-05-13/news/weingarten-s-war/full/
“The grandiose conclusion of the speech—a challenge to Chancellor Joel Klein and his deputies to teach a weekly class—was designed to portray them as out of touch with school realities, culminating with her snickering offer to allow UFT officers “to mentor” Klein et al. “during their internships.” Ironically, Weingarten is an attorney like Klein and represented the union until 1998, when UFT president Sandra Feldman moved up to the national presidency and installed Weingarten as her successor, handpicking her over a cadre of elected union leaders who were also career teachers.
In urging Klein “to walk in the shoes of teachers” on Saturday, she described how she’d done it, claiming that she “taught, sometimes full time, sometimes part time, at Clara Barton High School for six years.” Actually, records reviewed by the Voice indicate that she taught 122 days as a per diem teacher from September 1991 through June 1994, roughly one in four days. She then did what she told the Voice was her only full-time term in the fall semester of 1994, followed by 33 days as a per diem teacher in the spring of 1995.
Strangely, while she told the Voice she was a per diem for the 1995-96 and 1996-97 school years, her records list her as a full-time teacher. Because she was credited with the required two years of full-time service she doesn’t even claim she performed, she was given a permanent certificate in September 1996. She has been on union leave since 1997, accumulating a total of nine years of pensionable city time though she only did one semester of full-time teaching.”
And let me say one more thing about Casey’s response. Randi after being invited by Leo to teach goes through a miraculous career change and decides to teach with no long term political motive. – until Shanker dies and she changes her mind? Funny but everyone seemed to know she was Sandy Feldman’s successor by the early 90s and she entered teaching as a “celebrity” teacher — like Tony Danza. And she was treated that way — not a normal newbie learning the ropes.
She goes into a high school as a per diem sub — the lowest position with no seniority protections or rights – and lands the plum comp time position of debate team coach which any really qualified teacher in the school could have over her — instead of teaching a class you get comp time — time to coach the team — not exactly like teaching a 5th class of over 30 students. I do affirm from contacts in the school that Randi taught one full semester like all the other teachers and did lunch duty too. One semester is roughly 90 days. So let’s for sure give her that and be done with it. (By the way – Joel Klein also claimed to have taught for a semester when he was avoiding the VietNam War in the fall of 1968 – except there was a teacher strike throughout that fall — and he resigned to go into the national guard when the strike ended. Did he break the strike and teach? Or was he on the picket line? I once asked him that and there was no response. I can’t tell you how much fun it was to deal with both Randi and Joel.
Norm, you left out how Randi manipulated the election process for UFT executive board to allow you and Jeff to get elected.
Here’s the bottom line: Randi Weingarten, a teacher union president, has limited teaching experience. Weingarten admits it, writing this: “…for one semester I taught five periods and did lunch duty. During the other five and a half years, I taught one, two or three courses.”
Incredibly, since she’s been gone from the classroom for going on two decades, Weingarten says this: “Public school teaching was the best job in my life, and I miss it today.”
So my question to Weingarten and to other so-called teacher “leaders” is this: If teaching is so important, if “the promise of education” is so vital to democracy, then why do so many union “leaders” never return to the classroom? And to Weingarten specifically, if you really “miss” teaching so much, what’s stopping your return to it?
It appears that AFT leaders are circling the wagons. Leo Casey’s “defense” of Randi Weingarten should be seen for what it is, and nothing more.
Diane, when your critics attack you, it is worlds apart from AFT members questioning desicions of our president, who seems to completely ignore our outcry against CC. We are fed up with her brand of collaboration which has brought strife and misery to our union. In my school district, Providence, R.I., our union leadership is also following the Randi way, and we have lost seniority. Our union leader signed on to RTTT, which affected all teachers in the state. And now has brought in Robert Weil from the AFT, who will negotiate a “slim contract,” containing merit pay, adding hours to the school day, and making teachers lives miserable, just as he did in Cleveland and Baltimore. I know Randi is your friend, but please don’t compare your situations. She is a fox in the hen house, and you are speaking truth for all teachers
Your post seems right on the money to me. As an outsider, it’s easy enough for me to stand back & observe that these cave-ins by Weingarten simply illustrate the weak position of unions in a long economic downturn. But if I were a union member, you bet I’d be calling out my union president, in public, on the unconscionable failure to fight tooth & nail for her members’ daily bread! Come on, that’s her job.
Even as an outsider, I am an educator, & a citizen concerned with strengthening the public schools. CCSS has been promulgated as part and parcel of the accountability movement, which denigrates the professionalism of teachers. It is simply ingenuous to argue as Weingarten does that the standards are fine if implemented properly.
@Robert Shepherd: you comments are right on the mark. I so hope the public wakes up before public education is NO MORE!
As for Weingarten, I have heard countless times from the teachers I know who are 30 years into the NYC public school system… the word “duplicitous” come up with the mention of Weingarten. So I do think that many a NYC teacher have no trust in her. It is ultimately ironic that perhaps Weingarten’s latest stand indicates positive upcoming changes in the wind for those of us so opposed to “corporate ed reform” – for this we can rejoice as she does seem to be a “barometer”. Weingarten is somewhat of a barometer and seems to follow what the perceived “winning or more popular” policy is. Many a public school teacher in NYC claim she had made MAJOR concessions enabling “corporate ed reform” inroads which public school teachers saw as detrimental (supportive of destructive “ed reform” policies). This was in the Bloomberg/Klein heyday. The winds are changing and more and more parents are starting to see what is going on nationally with this testing and data mania. Let us hope that her seemingly complete support nowadays of anti “corporate ed reform” is indicative of which way the winds are blowing. We who want public educate to be returned to educators can only hope that the “barometer reading” is indicative of positive change coming.
When time permits I follow educational blogs as this seems a good way to keep in touch nationally with hot button topics. I comment, only when I think it’s important to do so. So I comment today. CCSS has become a four letter word. Why?? All ‘highly effective’ educators understand that guides are needed. In NYC the ‘Learning Outcomes’ of years ago provided guides for new teachers and those guides were ‘highly effective’. The same opportunity should be given to CCSS. Ms. Weingarten’s support of CCSS does not contradict support for good teaching. I think that we all need to take a deep breath and relax. As for the attack on Ms. Weingarten’s credentials – it does seem to me to disingenuous. She has been president of AFT for 4 years. Why question now? Mercedes timing is suspicious. Likewise, when Randi’s credential were questioned years ago, Clara Barton HS refuted the misinformation. Mercedes should check her facts before questioning. It’s sad that such energy is wasted on negative talk. Let’s unite and find a way to bring growth and professionalism back to our profession.
When Randi says, “yet at the same time you conclude the comments on Diane Ravitch’s blog are a far better sampling”
A little subtle humor? I had to smile.
All the news I can use comes from the Diane Ravitch comment section. A better sampling of sound thought is no where else to be found!
These anti Randi comments disappoint me because the focus should on education. And say what you will, but she has always been a champion for the children and ensured the Union had its proper seat at the table. Randi’s ability to be ahead of the game and put the AFT in a better place will help all teachers for as long as her voice is heard.
Assured “the union had a proper seat” at WHOSE table? And at what cost to the actual union?
The union never had a seat at the table — they had a little stool. Certainly when they supported NCLB in exchange for that stool basically sitting by and actually supporting programs like RTTT while the teaching profession was undermined right under their feet.
I want to thank the many commenters who have been so willing to write on my behalf on the comments section of this post. It is a surreal experience being on the wrong side of those who are well financed and well connected.
Thank you for fairly weighing my words.
I want to also thank Diane for her willingness to post my work– even my controversial pieces that inadvertently place her in the middle. I know that both posts– my open letter piece and this subsequent spinoff Leo Casey piece– have certainly placed Diane in an awkward spot.
Diane, I appreciate you.
In the spirit of Diane’s blog, I hope you leave up all the responses!
Duane, I will leave all responses up to the point where I redirected. I am tired of being the recipient of political machinations. So, if pro-weingarten commenters wish to record their sentiments, they may do so here.
They are avoiding Diane’s blog. Let them ante up.
It is interesting that Mercedes Schenider tells us she is now censoring comments on her blog that disagree with her. That follows naturally, I suppose, from insulting everyone who disagrees with her as a “commercial.” And it shows how different she is from Diane.
Weingarten “censored” my comment on her blog. It was perfectly polite (unlike Leo Casey’s attack).
The formulaic commercial comments Mercedes did post give us a flavor of the kind of orchestrated campaign we’re dealing with from our union leadership.
chemtchr: please help me understand this. deutsch29 redirects certain comments from her blog to this blog—one of the hottest and most viewed ed blogs on the world wide web—in the interest of “censoring comments on her blog that disagree with her”? Is it possible that this is the equivalent of what you describe as your comments being censored on Ms. Weingarten’s blog?
Just to be clear. Ms. Weingarten redirected your comments somewhere else on the www, right? Because she wasn’t trying to suppress your comments, rather she felt that they more properly belonged to another setting? Perhaps one that has many more views like this one? That is, she exercised her discretion in allowing, or not allowing, comments she felt were appropriate on her own blog? As is her right, btw, since it is her blog…
Or could it be that Dr. Mercedes Schneider doesn’t understand that by redirecting [aaka {=apparently also known as} “censoring”] certain comments on her blog to this blog they don’t actually disappear, or go underground, or are unseen because they no longer appear on her blog? So censoring to folks in Louisiana like deutsch29 means making something even more visible and viewable and open to comment? Could it be that, unlike others, she has no discretion to determine what are appropriate or inappropriate postings on her own blog?
Perhaps I need help sorting this out. Or could Oscar Wilde be right: “Questions are never indiscrete, answers sometimes are”?
Not holding my breath…
🙂
Krazy TA, it’s hard to sort out which of them is complaining about what. Diane most certainly does remove objectionable comments from her blog, so it’s perfectly possible somebody’s post actually did disappear, as they seem to be claiming.
In any case, mine never appeared at all on Randi’s blog, but fortunately I copied it with the little Huffpost disclaimer, and redirected it to Diane’s column.
I sent your comments to a more popular blog.
Is that an insult to you?
And for the record, History Teacher:
I am perfectly fine with anyone insinuating that Diane Ravitch outclasses me. To me, she is tout le monde.
Look it up.
History Teacher
How nice to see our old Unity Caucus designated hit man out and about once again leaving a trail of crumbs. Tell us about the democratic UFT where 100% of the executive board is endorsed by your caucus, something Putin wishes he had. Remind us of those co-located UFT charter schools in Brooklyn undermining the public schools they occupy. Did you endorse de Blasio hoping he won’t charge you rent? Nice teacher evaluation system you foisted in the teachers of NYC. How are those baseline tests for kindergarten kids working out? AFT/UFT support for the ed deform agenda for so long are leading the chickens to come home to roost.
Mercedes has done us a great service here, and I understand how she feels now. Educators inside and outside the AFT who are actually in the path of VAM and Common Core Gibberish know what how tiring it is to live under a regime of angry, aggressive denunciations for telling simple truths.
Our own unions won’t defend us when we resist the straight-jacket of Common Core doublespeak! “Higher ups” are instructing us to participate in crafting bogus “district metrics”, to deprive union members of standing to overturn “accountability” to them.
There is a time to change leadership.
Unions are democratically controlled, and membership can be mobilized to do that. This isn’t a case of “bickering”, and we have no obligation to fold up and drop our opposition just because somebody holds an office in our unions. “Unity” caucus has no claim to permanent office.
We fully intend to follow Chicago’s lead, and in Massachusetts that means unseating Paul Toner.
Randi has a proven track record of working with education leaders across the country and comes with a tremendous source of knowledge. She is one of the most well-respected, hard working and highly intelligent union leaders this union has had. Your premature talk of “unseating” her sounds silly and amateur hour. Now is not the time for change, but for proven consistency.
Randi will work with you if it is her agenda. If you want out of Common Core, forget it.
I’d love to see a letter in my school mailbox from Randi Weingarten congratulating the St. Tammany Federation of Teachers for supporting the school board’s referendum against Common Core.
Oh yes. All that working with educators around the country to sell them on signing contracts with merit pay and evaluations based on test scores, the very things Diane goes after in her book. Your common core assignment TRUEEeducator: Comment on the contracts in Washington DC(Where Randi collaborated with Rhee to sell them a contract that gave Rhee the power to fire), Detroit, Newark – where teachers have turned against the contract and the union leadership that worked with Randi, Baltimore, Hartford, NYC with the infamous 2005 contract that killed seniority and opened the doors for Bloomberg to close 160 schools. We can go on but I’ll let you fill in the blanks.
Regarding the “education leaders” Randi has a “proven track record” of working with, do you really want to include Bill Gates and Eli Broad? In my mind, that should disqualify her as a bona fide educator or trade unionist.
Ms. Weingarten is indeed an extremely intelligent and hard working person, but that doesn’t eliminate the nagging question raised by her persistent enabling of so-called education reform: who is she actually working for?
To put this discussion back in context, here’s a comment I posted here Sunday, pointing out Weingarten’s column in a discussion titled “Reform” is Destroying Humane Values, Creating a Hatred for School”
https://dianeravitch.net/2013/11/02/24050/
chemtchr
November 3, 2013 at 6:54 am
Whatever anybody did in the past to win a “place at the table” where this attack on human childhood is being dealt out and strategized, it’s time to own up that you were wrong.
It’s not just more of the same old opportunism. The harm done to living children does outweigh whatever business or career advantage you thought you were buying.
Randi Weingarten has another whining defense of the indefensible Common Core up this morning, on Huffpost: She claims the brutality parents have witnessed during the rollout is just a procedural error, due to hasty implementation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randi-weingarten/will-states-fail-the-comm_b_4206013.html
Here’s my comment, which still hasn’t appeared online:
“President Weingarten, the AFT does not support the Common Core. The AFT is composed of its members, the teachers in America’s public schools, and you know you don’t speak for them in this.
“No, we don’t “wonder why so many people think they should play an important role in American education.” It’s because you made a deal for your yourself, thinking you were getting “a place at the table” of a pack of wealthy and arrogant cheats, liars, and frauds.
“The Common Core has nothing whatsoever to do with critical thinking or creativity or even teaching and learning. It promotes double-speak and gibberish formulaic essays for machine scoring. It’s a battering ram for intrusive, continuous “data-driven” control of American children and teachers.
“All over the country, the real AFT are calling on our members to stand together with our communities and fight the imposition of profit-driven corporate control on American children.”
“Due to the potentially sensitive nature of this article, your comment may take longer to appear publicly.”
Diane, please don’t post this, because I already did. i took out a link so it wouldn’t need moderation.
Thank you for standing up for what is best for students. The students are crying, the teachers are crying, the parents are worried. What other proof do we need that the CC are not working in their copyright format? Again, when you bypass the democratic process you can expect these results. How do we know reading 70% informational text 9-12 will ensure our students are college and career ready? Just because this is someone’s theory doesn’t make it so–where is the research? Child psychologist are concerned that k-3 CC are developmentally inappropriate. We follow best practice in education. Where is the best practice research that supports these standards? It is time to put the children first over egos, power, money and everything else standing in the way of making this right for our students.
Well said, AlwaysLearning.
To put this discussion back in context, this is from Sunday’s discussion,
“Reform” is Destroying Humane Values, Creating a Hatred for School”
It includes my full comment to Randi’s post.
https://dianeravitch.net/2013/11/02/24050/
chemtchr
November 3, 2013 at 6:54 am
Whatever anybody did in the past to win a “place at the table” where this attack on human childhood is being dealt out and strategized, it’s time to own up that you were wrong.
It’s not just more of the same old opportunism. The harm done to living children does outweigh whatever business or career advantage you thought you were buying.
Randi Weingarten has another whining defense of the indefensible Common Core up this morning, on Huffpost: She claims the brutality parents have witnessed during the rollout is just a procedural error, due to hasty implementation.
Here’s my comment, which still hasn’t appeared online:
“President Weingarten, the AFT does not support the Common Core. The AFT is composed of its members, the teachers in America’s public schools, and you know you don’t speak for them in this.
“No, we don’t “wonder why so many people think they should play an important role in American education.” It’s because you made a deal for your yourself, thinking you were getting “a place at the table” of a pack of wealthy and arrogant cheats, liars, and frauds.
“The Common Core has nothing whatsoever to do with critical thinking or creativity or even teaching and learning. It promotes double-speak and gibberish formulaic essays for machine scoring. It’s a battering ram for intrusive, continuous “data-driven” control of American children and teachers.
“All over the country, the real AFT are calling on our members to stand together with our communities and fight the imposition of profit-driven corporate control on American children.”
“Due to the potentially sensitive nature of this article, your comment may take longer to appear publicly.”
I understand the need for solidarity but I don’t understand why anyone within our profession would advise us not to express our skepticism. Especially when you consider the magnitude and impact of the decisions that are being made. I consider it our duty to question.
We can still maintain solidarity while questioning our leaders.
Since Michael Bloomberg became mayor and then head of the DOE in New York City, we have seen nothing but mandate after mandate directed towards teachers and administration. Choice has been taken away, limited, and/or stifled. Much of what’s been put on our shoulders has been redundant and has taken away our ability to teach the kids. As Bloomberg is a very influential proponent of education “reform”, it’s no surprise that this has become a national trend.
Like Bloomberg, Bill Gates is solidly in the center of education “reform”. Randi has accepted large sums of money for the AFT from him. Also akin to Bloomberg, he has not been kind to our profession. So Randi invites him to speak at the annual AFT national convention.
How could anybody possibly expect us not to question these actions?
Enter CCSS. This, for me, is the ultimate insult, as a teacher. The sheer SIZE of this decision is beyond comprehension. Forget about the speed of implementation. That, imo, is the smoking gun. The fact that it’s a mandate. Another MANDATE. Except now it’s huge. Regardless of your school’s past successes or failures, you still need to tow the line and just blindly accept this change. Change directed from sources and methods that are unproven and leave out the accumulated knowledge of education and child psychology experts, worldwide.
We’re not supposed to question this? Teachers and parents, alike? Are you serious?
I keep reading that the majority of teachers like the CCSS, but I know precious few who feel this way. And I know and speak to a lot of teachers. A school or district can’t be trusted to make an informed decision as to whether these standards will work for it or not. It’s a mandate. Of course we’re going to question it. I’d be embarrassed to call myself a teacher if I didn’t.You’re taking away localized control and placing it in the hands of a much larger entity that will be far more difficult to contact and institute change through.
I just don’t understand how Randi could be so solidly behind the CCSS with so much evidence that would tell someone with an education background to please “STOP!!!” and take a serious look at what you’re doing here. Forget about the testing. Look at the roots of what’s happening here.
As an AFT and UFT member, I need more information from our leadership when it comes to issues as serious as this. I’m sure Randi has many fine virtues and she really might be doing the right thing, for all I know. But I’m a professional teacher and anything but a slacker. I do everything I can to “get it right”. And it’s my nature (and that of many) to try to make correlations when being faced with mandates and changes that don’t make sense to me. Large events that are coming from outside our immediate sphere of personal experience.
As such, when I look at the two points of contention that I detailed, above, it’s not unreasonable to at least CONSIDER the idea that Randi is on board with the views of the school reform movement. The concept that our education system is failing our future generations and needs overhaul. As Bill Gates and company believe. Or perhaps she just doesn’t think we can compete with this reform movement. In either scenario, as president of the AFT, she still wants to preserve our union. Even if it means paring down our power.
If someone else can come up with a different slant that makes sense, I’m open to reading or hearing about it.
As educators we see the importance of having standards across the country. It is important that students on the East coast are being taught the same principles as those on the West Coast. President Weingarten has been fighting to ensure that as we adopt these standards, teachers receive proper meaningful professional development.
While some people sit back and find fault with every solution leaders come up with Leaders like Randi Weingarten are solution driven. As President of the AFT her solution is not to rewrite history but to concentrate on ensuring that our students have proper standards, that our teachers have meaningful PD and that our schools receive adequate resources, so we can ensure that our students receive the quality education they need to be College Ready. President Weingarten has proven to be As educators we see the importance of having standards across the country. It is important that students on the East coast are being taught the same principles as those on the West Coast. President Weingarten has been fighting to ensure that as we adopt these standards, teachers receive proper meaningful professional development. We need to roll the common core out in a responsible manner. As the President of the AFT, President Weingarten has been leading us on a national level to ensure that Common Core is being rolled out correctly. As educators we have to be careful when phrasing our message. Common Core as President Weingarten says can enable students of all states to be taught on similar principles and standards. As educators we know that these standards are imperative in ensuring that our students are receiving a quality education. As Unionists, we need to stand behind our President to ensure that Common Core is rolled out properly to benefit our students, teachers, and schools. While some critics have spent most of their time criticizing President Weingarten has been a solution driven leader getting us the support we need. I applaud our President for her hard work and stand behind her.
I hope you’ll take a moment to answer some questions I have, regarding your post, teachurkid:
1) Why do you think it’s so important to have the same “principals” taught on the East coast as the West? What exactly is your definition of the word “principals” in this context? I was brought up to believe that our diversity was a national strength. That students from different areas of the country would meet in colleges and share these differences, thereby fostering new concepts and ideas. It fosters our innovative nature.
2) By making this assertion that we need to all be taught the same “principals”, from coast to coast, I sense that you’re saying we’ve been “lacking” in at least this one area of education for some time, now. My logical conclusion is to think that you’re saying that our education system is in need of “reform” I mean, the fact is that the CCSS is a huge change for many of us and can easily be read as being part of the reform movement. It’s taking the control of smaller entities and putting it into the hands of a much larger one. This is no small stuff. In this respect, I see a strong correlation between your philosophy and that of the Gates Foundation. Is this our AFT’s “common ground” with the reform movement and the reason why we’ve accepted such large sums of money from Mr. Gates?
3) If question 2 is, indeed, your mindset; what makes you think that the CCSS, in it’s present written form, is the best available tool available to make the changes that you feel must be made? Do you put any stock in the criticisms of the CCSS that are being put forth by experts in the field of education and child psychology? Can you give me the names and credentials of the experts who wrote up the CCSS?
I hope you’ll take the time to answer these questions. I don’t profess to know everything, and I do tend to ask questions when I recognize that I don’t have all the answers.
btw: my apologies for the spelling error. “Principals” should be “principles”. Oh dear. The principal is, after all, our “pal”.
As educators we see the importance of having standards across the country. It is important that students on the East coast are being taught the same principles as those on the West Coast. President Weingarten has been fighting to ensure that as we adopt these standards, teachers receive proper meaningful professional development.
While some people sit back and find fault with every solution leaders come up with Leaders like Randi Weingarten are solution driven. As President of the AFT her solution is not to rewrite history but to concentrate on ensuring that our students have proper standards, our teachers have meaningful PD and that our schools receive adequate resources, so we can ensure that our students receive the quality education they need to be College ready. We need to roll the common core out in a responsible manner.
As educators we have to be careful when phrasing our message. Common Core as President Weingarten says can enable students of all states to be taught on similar principles and standards. As educators we know that these standards are imperative in ensuring that our students are receiving a quality education.
While some critics have spent most of their time criticizing the AFT, our President has been a solution driven leader getting us the support we need. I applaud our President for her hard work and stand behind her.
As educators we see the importance of having standards across the country. It is important that students on the East coast are being taught the same principles as those on the West Coast. President Weingarten has been fighting to ensure that as we adopt these standards, teachers receive proper meaningful professional development.
While some people sit back and find fault with every solution leaders come up with Leaders like Randi Weingarten are solution driven. As President of the AFT her solution is not to rewrite history but to concentrate on ensuring that our students have proper standards, our teachers have meaningful PD and that our schools receive adequate resources, so we can ensure that our students receive the quality education they need to be College ready. We need to roll the common core out in a responsible manner.
As educators we have to be careful when phrasing our message. Common Core as President Weingarten says can enable students of all states to be taught on similar principles and standards. As educators we know that these standards are imperative in ensuring that our students are receiving a quality education.
While some critics have spent most of their time criticizing the AFT, our President has been a solution driven leader getting us the support we need. I applaud our President for her hard work and stand behind her.
District UFT rep offers this “let’s be friends” post:
http://mets2006.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/finding-common-ground-the-complex-task-of-building-coalitions-and-understanding-the-difference-between-friends-and-enemies/
Mr. Stern’s comment about a “…curricular wasteland…”, of course implies that our current education system is broken and in need of reform. This is the true debate here. Without the CCSS, we are all doomed to remain the failures that we so obviously have shown ourselves to be on the international stage.
Randi’s assertion:
“But they…” (the CCSS) “…have the potential to disrupt the cycle of increasing poverty and economic and social stratification by making essential skills and knowledge available to all children, not just some.”
Am I wrong or have I heard this before from another source?
There has never been a proper definition of leadership, but I will try to supply. Doing the unpopular things because the larger picture urges, saying the controversial because it needs to be spoken, and having the courage to actually initiate what is right. Randi, although not always popular with her agenda, has never backed away from creating the image in this profession that it covets. Of course, there will be critics who manipulate the truth, who scream betrayal, and who tarnish reputations, but it is history that will judge. That said, I have never seen a person work so incredibly hard and be so overtly diligent as Randi W. She leads the true leaders in this country, and for that, she ought to be saluted. Thank you.
The concept of the Common Core is excellent in that it addresses the needs of a diverse population of students from across the nation.
That said, here in New York State, its implementation was haphazard in its coupling with high-stakes testing. Throw in problematic teacher/principal evaluations, scripted teaching “modules” and an unfair tax cap and we now have educators who are upset and quite stressed, not only because of the impact on their lives, but primarily due to what has now been heaped upon our children. In essence, we have been tossed into a veritable “perfect storm.”
We need to reclaim the promise of public education. Our children are entitled to be college- and career-ready, taught by the practitioners who are trained in properly conveying important concepts to their students.
Thanks to Ms. Weingarten for representing us. Her voice as an educator, leader and unionist is vital in this turbulent educational climate. She personifies the meaning of solutions-driven unionism and we are most fortunate to have her at the helm of the AFT.
“The concept of the Common Core is excellent in that it addresses the needs of a diverse population of students from across the nation.”
One thing the Common Core does NOT do is address the actual needs of students. It’s pretty much silent on that score. Instead it prescribes a reductive list of outcomes that a small group of insiders decided would be needed for the stereotypical knowledge workers of the future. There appears to have been no attempt to accommodate students who might not fit that mold. This is one of the many glaring flaws built into this ill-conceived, untested project.
Randal,
You quote me in your first line, but your response does not address my point. I stated that the “concept” is excellent, not the way that it was implemented and agree that there are flaws.
I reiterate my statement regarding our need for Randi Weingarten – a fine unionist, a leader and model for us. She is the beacon that we should follow during this storm.
Her transparency and coverage is apparent through blog posts, Twitter, NY Times pieces, etc., etc., etc. I, for one, am proud to have her as a leader and hope that you are, too.
I think the concept behind the Common Core–national education “standards”–is a wretched concept. Other than her embrace of the CCS and Gates Foundation dollars, what I know about Randi Weingarten comes mainly from her appearances on MSNBC and CNN, in which she sounds equivocal on most topics and gives ground to those who are assaulting public education. One blog commenter wrote, “She couldn’t defend teachers with a baseball bat.” I was inclined to agree with him, but of course, you know her better than I do.
This has nothing to do with “knowing someone better,” as you state. Rather, it has everything to do with standing by a proven leader who fairly represents AFT members from across the country with passion, grace, eloquence and courage.
What is the “concept” of the Common Core?
Is Randi for the “concept” of the Common Core or is she furthering the CCSS as they’re written?
Randi Weingarten has proved time and again that she is committed to the best possible education for our students and the means for their teachers to provide it. The Common Core is one way to ensure consistency and equity within a flexible framework. Teachers are now able to engage in conversations with each other that facilitate professional learning, which we transmit to our students. Many teachers I speak with remark that the Common Core lets them share their expertise with colleagues, have their voice heard, question their practice and advocate for their students. This is hardly the dystopian uniformity warned of by those against the Common Core.
In addition, I doubt there is any credence to be lent to the aspersions cast on Randi’s teaching credentials. What principal would employ for six years a per diem substitute with a 75% absence rate, as claimed in Wayne Barrett’s “Village Voice” article? And to anyone inclined to question Randi’s transition from law to pedagogy, I will point out that in my school, 10% of the teachers were once practicing attorneys. At any rate, I would rather critique the motives of those like Michelle Rhee who switch FROM service to students and teachers; not TO it, as Randi did.
Peter…?
What is the “concept” of the Common Core?
Is Randi for the “concept” of the Common Core or is she furthering the CCSS as they’re written?