I hope you will read the opinion piece that I wrote for today’s Los Angeles Times about what priorities the next superintendent should have.
For those of you who have frequently criticized the LA Times as a tool of the charter industry, please note that I was invited to write the article.
The article is a strong plea for a leader who will restore public confidence in public education. Given that Los Angeles has a very rich, very powerful lobby for privately managed charters, it was written to counter their pressure to convert more public schools to private management. They heavily invest in school board candidates who follow their agenda. In the last election, the charter lobby managed to place a charter school operator on the district school board. Only an awakened public can defend the public sector from raids by the corporate sector on what rightly belongs to the entire community.
Los Angeles’ public schools are indeed in crisis. The solution is not to abandon them, but to rebuild them so as to meet the needs of the children enrolled in public schools.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
You pretty much nailed it. I have been reading and following you through your books and blog for almost 4 years, now.
I just retired from LAUSD after 15 years. Everyday, the stress silently hurts the teachers and the students. Currently I have several surgeries lined up and I was a good teacher. Thank you for your input. If they listen we, as taxpayers and parents will be eternally greatful. However, it is very difficult to teach an old big big dog new tricks.
Almost like the financial institutions. The greatest hope I have is in the new motivated and excited teachers that I have seen coming in this past school year. I would hope that the same would happen in the administrative arena.
It was a pleasure to open to the OpEd page of the LA Times today and to find your article, above the fold, on what skills and direction a new LAUSD Superintendent should have. So many teachers and parents write letters to the editor on these issues, but very few get published. Thanks Diane for this opinion piece.
Dr. Ravitch,
Predictable though it may be, the California Charter
School Association (CCSA) just put out an op-ed that
blasted your commentary in the Los Angeles Times,
claiming that it is full of inaccuracies (lies?) …
” … just because she repeats the same incendiary
messages over and over again, that doesn’t make
them true.”
Furthermore, it says that your commentary
“polarizes” rather than helps the situation.
The writer even puts words in your mouth, claiming
that you are effectively calling charter school parents
“traitors” and “second-class citizens”, and as
such, that you are bent on “punishing them
for seeking out learning environments that
meet their needs.” and that you are
“scapegoating them.”
It’s written by Sarah Angel,
Managing Director,
Regional Advocacy–Los Angeles
for the California
Charter Schools Association.
http://laschoolreport.com/commentary-ravitchs-view-on-charters-polarize-rather-than-help/#more-35763
SARAH ANGEL:
“In a recent L.A. Times op-ed, pundit Diane Ravitch
called on the LAUSD board to hire a superintendent
who would prevent new charter public schools from
opening. Vilifying charters as an enemy of public
education, Ravitch hurls her usual accusations against
the charter school community, including its teachers
and students.
“But just because she repeats the same incendiary
messages over and over again, that doesn’t make them
true.
“Ravitch accuses charter schools of excluding students,
but the data here in Los Angeles says otherwise.
Independent charters in LAUSD serve 1 percent
more English learners and 2 percent fewer students
with special needs than traditional schools do.
“In other words, there’s basically no difference in the
students being served. It’s also worth noting that both
English learners and students with special needs
perform better in local independent charters than in
traditional schools.
“Ravitch laments charter schools’ lack of
accountability, but charter schools are held to
greater accountability standards than other public
schools.
“How? Each charter school has to petition for renewal
every five years using data that shows how well it is
educating its students; if it has failed to perform, it
gets shut down. No other type of public school has
to prove that it is actually helping students learn.
“Ravitch also complains that charter schools have
influence in Sacramento. Meanwhile, the California
Teachers Association has long been the single most
powerful and well-funded lobby in the Capitol by
any measure.
“Ravitch’s rhetoric is forceful, but it’s not grounded in fact.
“Even worse, Ravitch demonizes parents who exercise
their right to choose the best education for their children.
She seems to suggest that charter school students are
traitors or second-class citizens, and she seems intent
on punishing them for seeking out learning
environments that meet their needs.
“There are more than 140,000 students in charter
schools in LAUSD, along with roughly 40,000 more
who have put their names on wait lists for charter schools.
“Instead of respecting their needs, values and choices,
Ravitch would prefer to scapegoat them.
“Does LAUSD need a superintendent who shares
Ravitch’s polarizing, politicized views?
“No. LAUSD needs a superintendent who will
advocate for all students, regardless of the type
of public school they choose to attend.
“LAUSD board president Steve Zimmer has recently
spoken of ‘healing’ and avoiding ground wars of the
past. It’s up to Mr. Zimmer and the rest of the board
to reject Ravitch’s battle cry. Instead, the board should
seek out a superintendent who does not let ideology
outweigh every student’s right to a quality public
education.”
Sarah Angel is Managing Director,
Regional Advocacy–Los Angeles
for the California Charter Schools Association.
Whether you end up agreeing or disagreeing with the piece by the owner of this blog, I urge viewers of this blog to read it.
Pardon the impertinence, but I would make only one comment about it. Some of the regular contributors on the threads of this blog may feel she pulled some punches. To be honest, I had that reaction upon first reading it. However, upon reflection, I think she got the tone—and hit the high spots—just right.
For those that don’t read the LATIMES every day, or another of the fawning MSM organs of self-styled “education reform,” that such an opinion would appear at all in a relatively high profile section like the op-ed page is more than a small accomplishment. A lot of people will surely be seeing such views for the first time, or at least presented at some length, so they will be confronted by ideas and approaches that will seem jarringly out of sync with the newspaper’s usual stance on, and presentation of, ed issues.
Venue and audience are critical factors to consider. Remember that the rheephormsters have painted the owner of this blog (as a proxy for everyone else in favor of public education and a “better education for all”) as being “shrill” and “strident’ and a “kook.” She is trying to present hard truths that will spur the enablers and enforcers of the education establishment into employing every instrument in their “sneer, jeer and smear” toolbox.
No need to give edubullies any excuse, however faint and unjustified, to launch into their fulminating tirades.
Sadly, I feel I must anticipate some shill or troll interpreting the above to mean that she didn’t say what she meant and didn’t mean what she said.
She said what she meant. She meant what she said. Get real, not rheeal; deal with it.
That’s how I see it…
😎
Agree on your last lines. Amazing that this was by invitation, and great that Diane was up to the challenge with information relevant to LAUSD.
Many of us who deal daily, both personally and professionally with LAUSD edicts and the minions who produce these damaging edicts, can tend on occasion to be shrill in reporting their many failures. I know this applies to me. So Diane’s comprehensive estimation from her vantage point 3,000 miles away, is measured and most welcome and opens up possible education of the Times readership. I would hope we, in LA, use this moment of awakening, to build a supportive pro-public education constituency.
A personal vignette…this week I was at my doc’s office and the nurse practitioner, who saw me for an infected insect bite on my ankle, told me what was happening at her teen-aged children’s high school, This led to a conversation about public schools v. charters v. home schooling. It ended with her inviting me to speak at her Tea Party group. I accepted. This same group bussed in hundreds of their members a few years ago to disrupt a meeting when I spoke with two young doctors at a Healthcare for All presentation. It became chaotic and the police had to take charge. Thereafter, the local leader of this chapter published my name, address, and phone number online, and suggested to her members that they feel free to contact me directly. It was a scary few months as they called and wrote what they thought of me. Talk about shrill…and threatening.
But this is the moment to coalesce with ‘strange bedfellows’ and help them to understand what is really happening with the billionaire takeover of our public schools.
Wow, Ellen. I am in awe of your courage and passion.
Agree with what you said Krazy. Even the LA Times must think Diane Ravitch has a good point or two.
Perhaps the LA Times has had an epiphany. While they committed to endorse the charter operator, Ref Rodriguez, just a couple of days ago they published an editorial decrying the “Voteria” that was instituted to increase voter turnout.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-voteria-20150721-story.html
Too bad they didn’t write about this before the runoff election.
In fact, the Voteria was announced around April 20th, just as absentee ballots were mailed out. Timing is everything….and in this case, Rodriguez dodged a bullet when two scathing audits revealing serious issues involving his charter schools were reported at the end of April, after most voters had mailed in their ballots.
http://laschoolreport.com/can-a-25000-giveaway-increase-voter-turnout-in-district-5-lausd/
Please note the final paragraph that contains an admission that “Rodriguez will do better.”
“If overall turnout is higher, it’s hard to say what the effect would be,” said Dan Chang, executive director of Great Public Schools: Los Angeles, which supports Rodriguez, according to the Times. “If there is higher turnout among Latinos, the conventional wisdom is that Ref Rodriguez will do better — a Latino candidate with a Latino surname.”
Thanks Educator for this info. There are letters to the editor in the Times today, adjacent to Diane’s article, complaining of this bribing voters to get them to the polls.
The Superintendent position along with all the administrative positions are totally superfluous to the educational process. It’s time to eliminate these fraudulent overseers, and let the someone from the senior staff act as the administrator (support) for their colleagues. I’m sure that they will perform the task quite well. The taxpayer is paying
” new money for old rope,” and public education is on parasitical overload. These administration positions are filled by former colleagues who jumped ship because it paid better and got them put of the classroom. If we eliminated the Supt, the Asst. Superintendent, all the Principals, Asst Principals and their entourage, what changes would take place in the classroom? The answer is nothing. That’s because education takes place in the classroom, and not one of them would dare to model their directives with a live student body. All they can do is make intuitive decisions, because they are trained in only one subject matter, and who certified them as master teachers. They received their certification after taking classes in CYA to protect themselves, and now role play the part of expert. I know, because I have certification, and was thoroughly disgusted by the courses that are taught by people who never entered a classroom, but the wrote those expensive required texts on the theory and practice of education. When the media refers to educators they are not talking about teachers. “Educator” is a term that describes someone who claims to know it all, even though they never taught a stitch. Adding insult to injury, many districts are now hiring people for the Superintendent position with zero experience in the classroom . How ludicrous. It’s time to change the culture in the school system, eliminate administrative titles and change them to support positions. The only people who count in the process of education are the teachers and their students. Everybody else is superfluous.
Ian Kay
I agree 100 percent, changing the structure of the district will only benefit us. There are way too many administrative positions that overlap like having 4 vice principals at one high school in addition to a principal. I agree that the superintendent position could be completely eliminated and BOE should be an elective advisory body. Efficient, new administration and classroom dominated decision making.
Paula,
What is the student population figure for that high school, 1,000, 1,500, 2,000??
TIA
Duane, part of the budget and oversight problems is the plethora of middle managers making 6 figure salaries at the district’s Beaudry building. This is eating up the budget, rather than those VPs in mainly huge inner city high schools.
I was part of a study in the late 1970s on this very issue, and we found that, even then, there were too many of these unnecessary officials…and it is far worse now. It is the hiring process at LAUSD, and the nepotism, that needs investigation. It would be a huge community service if the LA Times would do an in-depth investigation of both the academic and the business sides of LAUSD.
Diane
In your eloquent Op-Ed piece in todays LA Times you state “Some charters are good schools, but what is the value of having two publicly funded school systems? ”
I have been following LAUSD for quite some time. There has been many good and a few bad outcomes in this district.
Charter schools in LAUSD have taken on a greater share of the student body because of the parent trigger law that exists in California. The existence of the charter schools is due to the disenchantment of the parents of the performance of the public schools. It has nothing to do with Arnold stacking the State Board of Education with charter proponents.
Having said that, I do have an answer to your question. Two publicly funded schools systems add value to education in LAUSD. Because of over 21% of the students attending charters in LAUSD, the entire school district has shown improvement during the last few years. Schools both public and charters are performing better now than before. The public schools have to change or improve and charters have to provide a viable option to continue to exist. This results in keeping both systems on their toes with the children reaping the benefits. LAUSD still have a long way to go but it is in the right path.
Raj,
For many years, we had two publicly funded school systems. It was known as a dual system, one for whites, the other for blacks. The new dual system is one for “strivers,” the other for non-strivers.
No other nation has a dual system of publicly funded schools. It is classist.
Diane,
Sorry to disagree. Your comparison is invalid.
Old two system model: one for whites and one for blacks. Whites would not attend the black schools and blacks were not allowed in the white schools. They spent less money on black schools. These systems were mutually exclusive, there was no choice.
New two system model: Public schools and charter schools. Both systems spend nearly the same on a per student basis, but slightly tilted towards the public school. Both are open to one and all. Charters are replacing failed public schools via the parent trigger mechanism. No one is forcing the child to attend one or the other. The parents make the best choice for their children. It is not comparable to the old black and white school systems.
I see that you say strivers go to charters(21%) and non-strivers(79%) that go to public schools are the two systems. Are you saying that the charters are better?
Finally, Sweden has public schools (86%) and publicly funded private schools (14%). By no means Sweden is a classist nation.
I still like your Op-Ed piece overall in the LA Times.
Raj..counter to your repeated claim that the ‘parent trigger’ law, flawed as it is, is responsible for the rapid proliferation of the many (276) charter schools in the LAUSD, you are wrong.
There are only three or four instances of inner city LA parents using this hammer to charterize in the past few years since the Parent Involvement law was passed, and always with the urging and help (and conniving) of Ben Austin’s original baby, Parent Revolution, which is financed by the Walton Family Foundation, and Eli Broad Foundation.
Austin now works for Broad full time and is assigned to perpetuate Vergara – type lawsuits in California districts and nationwide. His partner in this new job is John Deasy, the failed former Superintendent of LAUSD who is now under investigation by the FBI and the SEC.
error…only 264 charter schools in LAUSD.
Raj, segregating students by ability into separate schools goes against the egalitarian ideals of the nation. Should special ed or ESL all be segregated into their own schools? What does the term, “a jury of your peers” mean? Should our courts be segregated by education level? There is a case for socio-economic integration being part of democracy.
The ‘new’ system is “open to one and all”?
Your BFF Michael J Petrilli knows it’s for the “strivers” so they can escape, and be protected from, the “non-strivers.” Not been opening your Fordham Institute emails lately? Like, say, the last two years?
😳
And the ‘new’ system is bringing back, under the up-to-date version of segregationist choice, the ‘old’ system of separate schools for different races/ethnicities with an added and unhealthy dose of increased separation by SES.
What’s old is new again. Same disgraced and putrid “choice” in new bottles. And like the separate but equal purveyors of yore, I don’t expect self-correction to rear its ‘ugly’ head.
“You can’t teach an old dogma new tricks.” [Dorothy Parker]
😎
I disagree with you in that parent triggers are responsible for the increasing number of charter schools. You state that because of this dual system, schools are improving. Wrong. Schools were improving when some programs were instituted by teachers before Dz and this charter rush. Charter increases are a result of greedy corporate involvement in public education with no education background and very little oversight. If you don’t know that basic fact, you don’t know public Ed in L.A.
A nice take on why “hedge fund guys” might be supporting charters-
https://nt2ny.wordpress.com/2015/03/11/charting-the-charters/
Paula is 100% correct.
In various high schools around the district, teachers, administrators, staff, parent, and students worked together to build strong academic programs. This hard work was succeeding until Broad brought Deasy in as Superintendent when Cortines retired.
Deasy, with affable smiles and forked tongue, told these schools they were doing well, and then within weeks shut down their programs, transferred and/or fired their supportive principals, and embedded Broad-trained principals in their place. The morale of many quality teachers dropped so low that many quit or asked for transfers.
See the evidence of this mendacious shredding, at Crenshaw, Verdugo, Hamilton high schools as exemplars of the Broad Rheeformers dirty work. Graduation rates had climbed under the cooperative programming, but Deasy took the credit for that.
A: This is a good link that shows how the federal government is underwriting the war on public schools so hedge funds can get a 40% tax credit along with other incentives that make investing in charters attractive.
Diane has written extensively on the parent trigger and she has posted information from other writers. I’d suggest you check them out. You could start here: https://dianeravitch.net/2015/01/08/the-story-of-the-parent-trigger-an-education-fad-that-failed/
The “parent” trigger is almost inevitable initiated by PRev, a phony billionaire-backed group pretending to be “grassroots”. They go around presenting misinformation and badgering parents to pull the trigger. It creates huge community division. It only takes 50% + 1 of the *current* *parents* of the school to pull the trigger. Past and future parents and non-parents are not consulted. Once the trigger is pulled, only those who voted to pull the trigger are allowed to “choose” (from maybe two or three choices) which charter operator will run the school. The trigger cannot be unpulled, even if parents testify that they wish to remove their signature because they realize they were duped.
Go ahead, Raj, defend all of that.
Dienne, I broke the story on PRev in my article here in on the Oct. 29, 2013 orchestrated disturbance produced by PRev and United Way to sway the LAUSD BoE to vote to renew the Deasy contract…despite that he had just gotten a 91% vote of NO CONFIDENCE from the district’s teachers. Hope you all go back in Diane’s listings and read about it since it is pertinent to this discussion.
Reading this in the morning made my day. Thanks to LA Times for doing something right.
Thank you, Dianne.
YOUR voice is THE voice.
Good work.
As a teacher in LAUSD, I appreciated your column today. I am sure that if you had had a bit more space you would have included a requirement that the new superintendent would be someone with actual teaching and administrative experience in public schools. As with many politicians in the recent past, too often lack of actual experience may work if one’s mission is to destroy the public institution, but not if one wants to actually build it.
Unfortunately LAUSD has been quite unlucky in the recent past in hiring a superintendent. As Kurt Vonnegut said about the office of US president, you have to be crazy to want the job. Politics always seems to trump pedagogy. The system continues to be woefully underfunded. Even good ideas are often subverted during implementation because everything must happen immediately. That said, if we hire someone who is grounded in the reality of classrooms and schools, who understands that public education is not a business but a public trust, that teachers and students are more than a test score, then maybe we’ll have a chance to move forward.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. We here in LA are starved for commentaries that actually support public education and make it clear why we need to preserve it.
Good job. At last, the conversation about the travesty in LA begins… too bad 17,000 teachers bit the dust after Cortines transported himself to LAUSD after his destruction in NYC, and Deasy finished the job.
Keep talking and do go to Perdaily.com and listen to the voice of Lenny Isenberg who has followed and exposed the facts for almost a decade.
http://www.perdaily.com/2014/03/lausd-and-utla-collude-to-end-collective-bargaining-and-civil-rights-for-teachers-part-2.html and follows the Esquith case
http://www.perdaily.com/2015/06/there-is-a-great-deal.html
He writes forCitywatch. You should read this one.
http://citywatchla.com/8box-left/6666-lausd-and-utla-complicity-kills-collective-bargaining-and-civil-rights-for-la-s-teachers
Something he wrote about in 2011
http://www.perdaily.com/2011/03/lausd-and-utla–connecting-the-dots-of-blattant-corruption.html
This is his most recent http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/LAUSD-OR-TARGETED-TEACHERS-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Deception_Evidence_Fired_Innocence-150720-360.html#comment555646
Thank you, Diane – what you say for one community holds true for all communities… we need to preserve/support public education!
What LA (and every other school district) needs most in a superintendent is honesty.
Without that, you can pretty much forget about everything else.
Folks,
How about a little hard truth my friends. the charter schools were originally created to give the white middle class a means to circumvent the desegregation laws. Corporate computer gangsters took advantage of the situation and created for-profit schools by bribing administrative personnel and government officials, who acquiesced to the de-professionalization of teachers by focusing on a “few bad apples” and indicting all teachers. The salary for a Superintendent skyrocketed because one hand washed the other, and the local boards were either naive or complicit in the game. Do you know that the ex superintendent of Philadelphia earned more than $600,000 plus percs, and was fired for malfeasance. That is par for the course with these superfluous positions that do nothing but act as a buffer between the educational establishment and the community. It’s become cost prohibitive to hire people who have zero affect on the process. Wake up, please, and state the truth or at least, open up your eyes to the truth.
Only the teachers and their students count in the educational process. Everyone else is superfluous. We may win these battles, I’m referring to Opt Out, Common Core, Charter Schools, Vouchers etc., and still lose the war. Let’s begin to talk about changing the school culture from authoritarian leadership to one of SUPPORT FOR TEACHERS. Our profession is on the verge of imploding.
Ian Kay
I agree with the points you make, Ian. I and my fellow LAUSD muckrakers who also write here, have been working for years to change the culture at LAUSD.
The only thing you do not stipulate is how to make this change of culture.
Some of us are the boots on the ground in this battle, and stick with it by attending meetings, speaking all around the district, and writing articles and letters to editors. We are not making much of a dent in our vast community. The LAUSD administration threatens teachers who even speak out loud on opt out and CC…and they are being punished.
The major media does not invite us to present our points of view though we keep trying. it is only alternative media sources that publish us.
Please, rather than lecture to the choir, come up with some concrete thoughts to expand our battle.
It’s a big job, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_largest_school_districts_in_the_United_States_by_enrollment
“Countries that do the best job at educating their citizens — Finland, Korea, Japan, Singapore and Canada — do it with strong and equitable public school systems, not charter schools or private school vouchers.”
It is pretty obvious that there is no system that can be pointed to by the free market folks that puts their agenda in a positive light. All of these systems, especially Finland, have strengths worth noting. We would be wise to remember those things for which other countries have admired our public education system before it is gone.
Diane,
There is a strong indication that LAUSD is considering Thelma Melendez De Santa Ana for the position. She graduated in the same Broad Academy class as Deasy. I am hoping they won’t make this same mistake again but I am told that her name is on the top of the list.
I scanned all the comments above on this topic and found the following words:
1. Rheephormsters,
2. Shrill
3. Kook
4. Edubullies
5. Conniving
6. Fulminating tirades shill or troll
7. Talk about shrill…
8. Dual system, one for whites, the other for blacks.
9. Segregationist choice
10. Strivers and non-strivers
11. Mendacious shredding
12. War on public schools
13. Forked tongue
14. Rheeformers dirty work
15. Corporate computer gangsters
16. Travesty in LA
17. Broad Academy class as Deasy
What does this indicate about this blog? Who does this help/convert/change? Where is the “discussion for all”?
In response to Raj, and the need for discussion with out the bombast.
Here is a rRationall piece that is the context for what is occurring in LAUSD.
http://www.perdaily.com/2012/03/brave-new-world-no-public-education-no-democracy-by-simone-harris.html
While this discussion takes place now, here, for a decade Lenny Isenberg has chronicled LAUSD. Go there and you will find the entire history. Particularly like post, from 2013. Here ARE 2 POSTS on Deasy FORM 2012.
http://www.perdaily.com/2012/01/is-lausds-superintendent-john-deasy-guilt-of-malpractice.html
http://www.perdaily.com/2012/12/lausd-superintendent-deasy-lies–knbc-lets-him-get-away-with-it.htm
http://www.perdaily.com/2013/01/now-is-the-winter-of.html
Anyone who wants to see the story, as Deasy took over for Cortines, and the fabricated charges began, because it worked so well in the largest school system of the 15,880, NYC,. before VAM, they had to silence the professionals in the practice, so they removed all civil rights for the American who just happened to be teachers.
http://www.perdaily.com/2011/01/lausd-et-al-a-national-scandal-of-enormous-proportions-by-susan-lee-schwartz-part-1.html
Lenny wrote this at city watch. If you want to go PAST all the chatter about what needed to be done years ago, read this.
http://citywatchla.com/8box-left/6666-lausd-and-utla-complicity-kills-collective-bargaining-and-civil-rights-for-la-s-teachers
and this
http://www.perdaily.com/2014/06/lausds-treacherous-road-from-reed-to-vergara–its-never-been-about-students-just-money.html
Here is a small portion of most recent post. Erudite, rational and to the point, meet LENNY ISENBERG, who lost everything and is suing… he did not run. He rents his house and lives over his garage, does dome per diem for a private religious school and fights for THE KIDS AND THE TEACHERS. ISN’T IT TIME someone you followed his site!
http://www.perdaily.com/2015/06/there-is-a-great-deal.html
“There continues to be a great deal of rewriting history at the Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) to make it seem that teachers only got targeted after Miramonte to protect students. That outright lie is at the root of LAUSD chief attorney David Holmquist’s incessant comment also echoed by Superintendent Cortines that, “We will always put student safety first, when dealing with teachers, which is why we are so cautious in dealing with alleged teacher impropriety.” One need only look at the frequency and number of individual cases against teachers long before Miramonte to expose this lie. The figures show that the war against teachers and the huge number of teachers forced into retirement or brought up on fabricated charges started in earnest after then LAUSD Director Office of Risk Management & Insurance Services David Holmquist published figures in 2006 showing that teachers at the top of the salary scales (93% of all charged teachers), were pushing the District into bankruptcy. Something had to be done and LAUSD chief attorney did it, despite the necessity of trampling on thousands of teachers civil rights.
And of course, none of this illegality would have been possible if our “free press” had just asked the same questions I’m posing here.”
Read more at the link above the quote.
Susan,
Thanks for these comments that show the other side of the story.
They are well written without denigrating anyone. (Remember the saying no animals were harmed in making this movie.) These are well expressed viewpoints not necessarily news. I have always known that there are two sides to a story, not just one sided stuff in these blogs. I do read both sides, but my take is there is some truth on both sides.
In the private sector, the rumor was that they always got rid of the top salaried employees first to save money. It always seemed to touch a nerve, until I got older I did not see this happening, instead I saw the most productive were kept and the least productive were let go. A managers bottom line is the most productive make him look good and he makes more money as a result. There are exceptions to this rule, when a project is cancelled, all assigned to that project are let go. Some are hired back by other parts of the corporation. I worked on two projects that were cancelled, but I was picked up immediately by other projects, because I was known to be a hard worker. My experience shows that the most productive always land on their feet.
I also realized that the most productive were about two to three times better than a new employee. The cost differential vanishes. Also in the private sector, to let anyone who is over fifty go requires a lot of home work on the part of the corporation because they are protected by federal non-discrimination laws.
Therefore I am a sceptic when I hear anyone saying that they are firing older teachers to save money as God’s truth. My experience points me to the other direction.
Yes, Your experience governs your belief.
You are dead wrong.
The process IS to rob the schools of every cent they can get their hands on.
Diane chronicles right here, the fraud and corruption, and offers the facts…but mY experience, and that of Lenny and Lorna, and Karen points to the reality… they get to keep between 40k and 80 k per teacher if they never get to vest.
One year,in LAUSD 800 teachers about to vest in benefits faced allegations… all were FIRED.
This not only allows them to save bucks, it ensures that no novice will stay for long.
The evidence, at this blog, and at the NYC Teacher blog, not your experience proves that there is not a shred of support for LEARNING, and the mandates to use anti-learning curricula are proof positive that the absence of the VOICE OF THE veteran, experienced TEACHER-PRACTIONER is at the crux the deform that is called ‘reform.’ The evidence at Perdaily.com. is beyond conjecture.
Yes, there will always be less gifted teachers, and workers that need to be monitored and assisted in their practice, and some who need to try another career….but my experience over 40 years of teaching, is that teachers bring best practice and great dedication to their ‘job!’
And FYI, business models are for businesses.!
YES! The educational workplace needs good management… that (ACCORDING TO THE REAL NATIONAL STANDARDS for which I was a cohort) ) is the JOB of administration, who must organize the school’s programs, support learning with a safe, clean well-supplied site. But to apply the business model to what it takes to teach…. what needs to be in place to enable the human brian to learn… there are other considerations… IF, of course, the goal is “THE COMMON GOOD.”
Take a look at this school system which does just that: http://blip.tv/hdnet-news-and-documentaries/dan-rather-reports-finnish-first-6518828
And then compare it to this, what resulted when Businessmen took over NYC schools.
I taught in 1963, when I MET — in age-appropriate ways –THE STATE OBJECTIVES FOR MY CONTENT AREA! My experience says that was the rule… until the rules changed and top-down replaced BOTTOM-UP!
So RAJ, like the CSI guys say, “show me the evidence,” because I base what I know on MY experience, and the observable reality… i.e. TRUTH!
Raj, it takes very little homework to get rid of an employee over fifty. Since they frequently are the more expensive employees, a company can easily make the argument for cost savings which seems to be the case every time we have a significant “correction,” and middle management definitely has taken a hit in the past. Companies can thin the ranks knowing that proving age discrimination is expensive and time consuming as well as being counterproductive to the task of finding another job. Suing your former employer is not a good way to attract a new one whether you are in the public or private market.
Raj – don’t know who you represent here but it’s insulting when you say you don’t believe they are firing older teachers to save money. In fact that’s just one of their goals. I taught for 30 years with LAUSD. I’ve had five friends sent to teacher jail. All were 20+ years teachers who were dedicated and caring teachers. Four left. One luckily got the job back. It’s a shame you won’t listen to people who have been through this process. Your comparisons to private sector are insulting. We are not private and we used to not be for profit.
Thank you Diane for helping LAUSD see the light. Don’t think they’ll heed your advice, sadly.