Sheri Lederman’s victory over New York’s “arbitrary and capricious” evaluation system was national news. Contrary to speculation in the media, teachers’ unions did not do the research for the Ledermans. He was referred to experts by me and Carol Burris, and the expert witnesses referred him to others who had conducted research.
The following letter went to all members of AFT:
Randi Weingarten wrote:
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court of the State of New York sided with educators in the fight against VAM (value-added modeling), calling an algorithm-based teacher evaluation “arbitrary and capricious.”
Long Island fourth-grade teacher and union member Sheri Lederman bravely took on the state’s VAM-based evaluations with a straightforward argument: Using a black-box formula to evaluate and punish teachers is, simply put, wrong.
The court agreed. We urge every teacher in the country to read an excellent article about what this case means for our profession.
In Sheri’s case, the judge based his decision upon, among other things, (1) “convincing and detailed evidence of bias against teachers at both ends of the spectrum,” (2) lack of any explanation for statistically significant swings in Sheri’s evaluations when her student scores were similar year after year, and (3) that grading teachers on a predetermined “curve” that required an arbitrary number of teachers to fail and limited the number of highly effective teachers had no rational justification. Therefore, the judge threw out Sheri’s faulty evaluation.
Sheri and her lawyer husband brought in some of the top experts in the country to dismantle this flawed system. The Ledermans corresponded with one of the leading proponents of VAM and obtained a concession that VAM scores “may be too high one year, too low in another.” In a remarkable email exchange, which was submitted to the court, this renowned VAM proponent acknowledged that test scores are themselves imperfect measures of student achievement and as a result “any given VAM observation may be higher or lower than a teacher’s true performance.”
Teachers and our unions have been saying it for years: VAM is unreliable, unstable and unfair. In state after state, that’s proven true.
And, like Sheri did in New York, the AFT is working to discredit VAM across the country.
When the unions brought a case in New Mexico, a judge ordered a preliminary injunction based on our evidence, preventing the state from using its VAM-based evaluations for high-stakes purposes until it can prove that the system is fair.
In Houston, another case brought by a group of courageous teachers with the AFT’s support will be heard this summer.
Here’s the simple truth that VAM proponents and the test-and-punish crowd just can’t seem to get: Classroom learning can’t be boiled down to a number.
Learning is highly qualitative, and full of things that can’t be measured with a test score or an algorithm. Reducing student achievement and the contribution educators make to a formula grossly misunderstands the learning process.
The ruling in Sheri’s case can now be cited in litigation all over the country. The tide is turning. In New York, the evaluation system is already being rebuilt from the ground up, and politicians who originally pushed VAM testing are walking it back. In other states, the Every Student Succeeds Act is creating the leeway for educators, parents and legislators to work together to create evaluation systems designed to support education, not to punish educators.
And in places where the test-and-punish crowd is still pushing wrong-headed evaluation systems, your union is fighting in the courts, in the statehouses and in the court of public opinion to make sure educators are treated with respect and students are given a fair chance.
The AFT is deeply committed to fighting back against unfair, punitive measures that hurt teachers and students and fighting for resources that our educators need. The AFT thanks Sheri for her efforts, which will benefit teachers throughout the country. Sheri is proud to be a member of the union, which is fighting this battle. VAM—used for individual teacher evaluations—is a sham. We will continue to fight until it’s discredited everywhere.
In unity,
Randi Weingarten
and
Sheri Lederman
Disgusting that this completely self-serving, inept, corrupt, sell-out of a union “leader” has the audacity (or is it the same lack of perception that led her to drool over seats at tables?) to come out with a statement about the Lederman case. It doesn’t matter that Lederman attached her name to the statement as well. Weingarten has zero clue that the Lederman case verdict is and always will be a point of EMBARRASSMENT for her, her leadership, and the apparatus of the AFT.
Same goes for the disgusting and embarrassing leadership of NYSUT.
The Lederman verdict, while a smack in the face to VAM, which is wonderful, is a verdict on a historical item. That evaluation system is no longer in place in NY. Same crap different pile now. More court cases will, I am sure, be necessary into the future. NYSUT will not be a party to any of it I am sure.
It’s VoteCOPE season in schools throughout NYState now. After clearly stating that I will no longer give even one penny to NYSUT outside of my dues, the building rep told me that we need vote COPE more than ever because “NYSUT is leading the fight against the NYS constitutional convention that Cuomo wants!”
Hahahahahhhahahahahahaha!
After that, my response was “well, if NYSUT is involved, I will assume we have already lost our pensions, and lots more.”
So true- all of it. Vote/Cope is a scam and Randi just let the Lederman’s do all the work and then take credit. Shill-much?
NYS Teacher:
I am Sheri’s lawyer and husband and want to set the record straight.
Sheri and I started our case totally on our own, We financed this case, at very substantial cost in terms of both contributions of time from myself and my law firm without any support from any union or anyone else. My wife endured insulting comments (some of which were vile) posted on mainstream media in response to articles about our case. We will not get a single dollar for having won this case. We undertook this case solely to do what was right and defend Sheri’s reputation.
Once we filed our lawsuit, and it became public, we placed a note on this blog. To our pleasant surprise, Diane contacted us, and introduced us to some of the key experts (who then introduced us to other experts) that were critical parts of this case. We will be forever grateful to Diane and cannot understate the “value” she added to our victory.
After spending 18 months of our lives, and after an enormous legal effort, Sheri and I wanted to share our victory with as many people as possible, in the hope that our victory will help other teachers who have been hurt by the VAM system. For this reason, having Randi so-sign and send out a letter with Sheri, was in our view appropriate and a good idea. The letter included a link to an outstanding article written by Carol Burris and published in Valerie Strauss’s blog in the Washington Post, which explained what our case means for the profession of teaching.
For this reason, as Sheri’s lawyer and husband, I ask all reading this blog to avoid dragging us into your issues with Randi. Instead, I suggest that everyone appreciate that Randi helped publicize our case and share Carol Burris’ excellent analysis.
Bruce
Randi? The same person who negotiated a teacher contract with an eval system that tied 50% of a teacher’s evaluation to test scores in New Haven? Her? Please. Stop.
Linda: Please see the response I posted above about why Sheri and I were pleased to have Randi blast out the story of our victory and a link to a wonderful analysis by Carol Burris. We worked very hard to protect Sheri’s reputation and in doing so exposed the flaws in VAM. We now hope our victory will help teachers throughout the country. Please do not detract from our victory.
Bruce
Bruce,
In every article I read on this case, Randi was never mentioned. This is why the co-letter is very suspicious. She got involved in New Mexico but not NY where she sold union members on the benefits of VAM and never stood up to John King.
Forgive us our skepticism but this alliance rings false unless she helped with the cost.
If anything, it was the many FB education pages and teachers that spread support, not the AFT or NYSUT.
Randi has no business making any statements on this matter. She lifted not one finger to help this teacher.
NYC Teacher: Please see the response I posted above about why Sheri and I were pleased to have Randi blast out the story of our victory and a link to a wonderful analysis by Carol Burris. We worked very hard to protect Sheri’s reputation and in doing so exposed the flaws in VAM. We now hope our victory will help teachers throughout the country.
You are correct that the AFT was not involved in our case. However, Randi’s help in making the results known to people who might not otherwise hear our story about it should not be denigrated.
Please do not detract from our victory.
Bruce
“The Little Red Hen”
Where was AFT
When Sheri brought her suit?
Quiet as a tree
And motionless, to boot
Where was AFT
When Sheri needed them?
Nowhere ’round to see
To fight the test and VAM
Where was AFT
When Sheri beat the state?
“Here I am, it’s me!
Committed to your fate”
I suggest we commission a marble monument dedicated to Sheri Lederman and her esteemed husband, and place it in virginiasgp’s backyard or in clear view from his office window. And buried beneath it would be symbols within a time capsule of the reputations of Arne Duncan and John King. Somewhere in there would be a broken pair of Bill Gates glasses and soiled fake dollar bills representing the intellectual bankruptcy of a host of billionaires, each with a crinkled, ruptured face on a bill.
That “it” named Virginiasgp lives a personal hell every day. Its children have to live with what it does every day. Its wife, its family members. I would write its friends but I’m not sure it has any. It is an awfully mean spirited thing. It will self-combust someday. There is no reasoning with it. Better to ignore it, block it, and let the chips lie where they may. Its victories are hollow, and it can’t admit it….yet.
Thank you.
Bruce
A modicum of fairness to Randi: She did say, ‘VAM is a sham.’
While simultaneously pushing test scores being tied to evals. She and HRC have much in common. Sheep, wolf, lies and spin.
Sorry to see this joint statement.
The 74million is using the case to cite contrary “evidence” and to conflate the issue with tenure. The 74million want to see more teachers fired, even if the evaluation instruments are wrong.
The association of this case with the union leadership gives the 74million and others fuel to claim that the problem with VAM and other sham evaluations is with the union.
The joint statement distracts attention from the experts and the teachers, principals, superintendents, and parents and lawyers who have legitimate concerns and evidence of the sham ratings. in this case, the independent sources of expertise were essential. A union presence would probably have made this case more difficult.
https://www.the74million.org/article/ny-teacher-wins-court-case-against-states-evaluation-system-but-she-may-appeal-to-set-wider-precedent
Laura: Please see the response I posted above about why Sheri and I were pleased to have Randi blast out the story of our victory and a link to a wonderful analysis by Carol Burris. We worked very hard to protect Sheri’s reputation and in doing so exposed the flaws in VAM.
Also, I spoke with the reporter from the 74 Million. I understand that this media outlet speaks for the “other side,” but I was glad to have them publish the following.
“Bruce Lederman said that in his view the true harm of test-based evaluations is not the direct dismissal of teachers but the broader, systemic demoralization of educators. “The system is so insulting and dispiriting to teachers,” he said. “Sheri was within days of turning in her resignation because of this.””
This was once of the point of our case in the first place.
Bruce
Wonder why Sheri signed the letter?
Dotconnect: Please see the above posts about why Sheri co-signed a letter to get the story out to people who might not otherwise read about it.
Randi Weingarten is the cancer that plagues the teaching profession, much the same way that a Chris Christie is to our government.
These are parasites masquerading as “professionals”, who show their true colors from their bully pulpits, and then attempt to play both ends against the people.
This is the Randi Weingarten who has always supported Michael Mulgrew…who not too long ago threatened to “punch anyone in the face” who threatened to take away the Common Core, and negotiated a horrific contract that required a signing bonus of $1000 to whet appetites for public school teachers, while delaying retroactive money to 2020.
And the Danielson Destruction, unleashed across the spectrum to take aim at any and every public school teacher in New York.
Compliments of Michael Mulgrew.
Compliments of Randi Weingarten.
Steve,
It’s horrible to compare Weingarten to cancer, and yet, words cannot be harsh enough for her; I know how you feel.
I will not berate or show disapproval for Sheri having co-written the letter with Randi. I grew up in the same region as where Sheri teaches and attended schools there. Long Island has a certain sensibility unlike almost any other part of the country.
I am sure Sheri felt it was better to have the voice of the president of such a large union than not to have it at all. I cannot blame her, and at the same time, I still picture her turning against the AFT and making position statements positing that the Lederman case is a direct by-product of the AFT’s decade-plus cooperation with the reform movement.
But this did not happen, and while I am disappointed, I can only support Sheri and her husband for their intelligence, bravery, and tenacity. Sheri is a doll.
Of course, Weingarten was going to swoop down like a predatory opportunistic raptor and dish out her snake oil. Randy has always supported the enemy’s perpetuation of the war and has come to the aid of those wounded in the battlefield, hoping the enemy won’t really pay too much attention.
Yet both the enemy and those casualties are paying great attention to her and see her for the fiend and outright fraud she really is. No one here ever needs to be anti-union; they need to be anti-Randi.
Michael Fiorillo, care to chime in?
I write this with all seriousness. THIS story should be Lifetime movie. Perhaps the Ledermans could recoup their financial output. Bless them both.
Every teacher who is evaluated on the basis of students’ standardized test scores should vigorously oppose the evaluation, citing the authoritative “Statement on Using Value-Added Models (VAM) for Educational Assessment” made by the American Statistical Association (ASA) that — quoting The Washington Post — “slammed” VAM. Teachers should be vigorously backed-up in this opposition by their unions because the ASA Statement completely shreds the phony foundations of VAM.
A copy of the seven-page ASA Statement should be posted on the union bulletin board at every school site and should be explained to every teacher by their union at individual site faculty meetings so that teachers are aware of what it says about how invalid it is to use standardized test results to evaluate teachers.
Even the anti-public school, anti-union Washington Post newspaper said this about the ASA Statement: “You can be certain that members of the American Statistical Association, the largest organization in the United States representing statisticians and related professionals, know a thing or two about data and measurement. The ASA just slammed the high-stakes ‘value-added method’ (VAM) of evaluating teachers that has been increasingly embraced in states as part of school-reform efforts. VAM purports to be able to take student standardized test scores and measure the ‘value’ a teacher adds to student learning through complicated formulas that can supposedly factor out all of the other influences and emerge with a valid assessment of how effective a particular teacher has been. THESE FORMULAS CAN’T ACTUALLY DO THIS (emphasis added) with sufficient reliability and validity, but school reformers have pushed this approach and now most states use VAM as part of teacher evaluations.”
The ASA Statement points out the following and many other failings of testing-based VAM:
> “VAMs typically measure correlation, not causation: Effects – positive or negative – attributed to a teacher may actually be caused by other factors that are not captured in the model.”
> “Most VAM studies find that teachers account for about 1% to 14% of the variability in test scores, and that the majority of opportunities for quality improvement are found in the system-level conditions.”
“System-level conditions” include everything from overcrowded and underfunded classrooms to district-and site-level management of the schools and to student poverty.
Fight back! Never, never, never give up!
“Contrary to speculation in the media, teachers’ unions did not do the research for the Ledermans. He was referred to experts by me and Carol Burris, and the expert witnesses referred him to others who had conducted research.”
On behalf of my children and my students, thank you to the Ledermans, and for the help you and Carol provided for fighting for our schools, teachers, and children. This was the first step to defeat VAM and restore education back to what it use to be for NYS and hopefully the country.
PS
All ps teachers in NYC should vote MORE, not Unity.
Little late to the party, eh Randi? Riding in on coat tails will do that.
Hopefully someone will take on SLO and SGO growth models next. Virtually every teacher in NYS will be evaluated using these fraudulent methodologies.
Some school districts are about to evaluate every teacher by using a composite Regents test score. Yes, the kindergarten teacher will be evaluated on the test scores of high school subjects they obviously do not teach and students they never taught! Making a bullet-proof mockery of the APPR system is exactly what Cuomo deserves.
I used to be in an interesting position. I was the only HS French teacher. By the way, I’m glad to see there are some French teachers that remain out there since French is being eliminated at many NY schools – especially smaller ones. This amazes me since we are only 3-4 hours from Canada. But I digress. Students would take the French Regents exam at the end of the sophomore year. The next year in French 4, I would have these same students look at the previous year’s exam and ask them why they missed the questions they got wrong. Some students said they didn’t know. That didn’t help me much. Some said they didn’t know a word or expression in French. Well, I could have “improved” my teaching by teaching that word or expression but I had no clue it would be on the test. Some students were caught by tricky or advanced sentence structure. I knew students would miss this question. Even though we had read a lot of French, students would obviously have difficulty with this kind of sentence structure. They did in class, and I did my best to teach them how to navigate it. My point is that I had the opportunity to go over my tests with the students and EVEN THEN it didn’t tell me much about how to “improve” my teaching. We could practice previous regents exams and I knew much of the vocabulary that would recur and the format and general difficulty level of the questions. I can’t imagine preparing students for these common core tests where the level of difficulty is above student grade level and the capriciousness of the test maker makes it difficult or impossible for a TEACHER to find the right answer. Not only that, I believe teachers don’t even get to go over the test with students. So, what’s the point of it all? And even if teachers could review the test with students, they often don’t know why they answered as they did. But, still, teachers will be evaluated on how students do on these tests. 😦
Wonderfully stated!
The point you make here is often overlooked: just what a crapshoot the whole standardized testing business is – and how significantly scores can swing on random factoids or poorly written test items. And lets say by chance you did teach that tested word expression, you simply got lucky – and if you didn’t and failed to show student growth.
Thanks, and I didn’t even address the whole issue of the idea of “improving teaching” as being able to get students to answer test questions correctly. And this is what “improving teaching” has become!
AND…I was lucky enough NOT to have students arrive at my regents exam with bloody hands and no shoes because they had just been in a fight as some other teachers did. Imagine these kids sitting for a 3 hour exam and having their grades reflect the “effectiveness” of their teacher!!!
And those poor Regents teachers with seniors. They’ve mostly been checked out since February, and when college acceptance packets arrive – bye, bye HS!!!
My district is planning on rating all K to 12 teachers on the composite score of the five required Regents exams. I was told that they have crunched the scores from previous years and they are certain that all teachers will score “effective” on this 50% component of the APPR.
The only exceptions will be teachers that have state tests in place including the Regents teachers. Good luck to that poor Global History teacher. In the mean time the testing pressure will be taken off 90% of the staff and all pre-testing will be eliminated. Its a great plan, except for the 10% left hanging.
So this is what it has really come down to – games with numbers.
Diane, we all know that there are people who choose to jump on board the proverbial gravy train after an outcome has been determined. You, Carol, and every “University expert”, classroom teacher, public school administrator, and parent invested in and publicly supportive of our efforts had the foresight and the integrity to be participants in our case. Bruce and I thank you on behalf of every student, teacher, and school that has been affected by the destructive use of VAM.
Sheri Lederman
“Diane, we all know that there are people who choose to jump on board the proverbial gravy train after an outcome has been determined.”
Are you referring to Randi?
If you or someone else can provide a link to Randi making a statement in support of your lawsuit prior to the verdict this week, I’d love to see it.
Arthur Goldstein, the “NYC Educator,” addresses this bandwagon jumping on his own blog He cites how UFT President Michael Mulgrew has stated numerous times at Delegate Assemblies (DA) of the NYC teachers union UFT how great the New York state’s VAM system is — the one just discredited in your lawsuit. Mulgrew even bragged about how he even contributed to its design — the same system that the lawsuit’s verdict just discredited. Mulgrew’s AFT superior Randi has never, to my knowledge, ever contradicted any of Mulgrew’s pronouncements.
Read NYC Educator here:
http://nyceducator.com/2016/05/lederman-wins-unions-pay-valuable-lip.html
———————
NYC Educator:
“The question, really, is why Shari Lederman had to do this on her own dime. I mean, why didn’t NYSUT stake her? Why did her husband have to do the whole case pro bono? What about all the other teachers rated by this nonsense who suffered for no reason? I know a teacher who was rated ineffective only because of test scores, but she hasn’t got a lawyer for a husband. Is NYSUT or UFT going to jump to her aid?
“Well, not hardly. Michael Mulgrew boasted of having helped write the law that enabled this junk science. Did he really do it? Who knows? And what difference does it really make? He was proud of it. And he still boasts about the 700 teachers who got ineffective ratings last year. I can tell you for a fact that not one of them shares his joy, and that the consequences of this rating are far more severe than that of the unsatisfactory rating.
“After all, in 70% of the cases, the state no longer has to prove these teachers are incompetent. These teachers have to prove they are NOT incompetent, and how the hell they do THAT I have no idea.
“And even as Mulgrew boasts of how few teachers are being rated ineffective, he thanked Cuomo’s Heavy Hearted Assembly for passing a new APPR designed to rate even more teachers ineffective. And what has NYSUT and UFT done to help teachers like Shari Lederman?
“Nada. Zip. Diddly squat. Why the hell aren’t our leaders footing the bills of teachers wishing to challenge these ratings?
” … ”
“Then there was the great victory of the UFT transfer plan, and the subsequent great victory when excessed UFT members became ATRs. There was the great victory when we won Common Core, and the great victory when we were suddenly against it and no longer threatening to beat the crap out of those who opposed it.
“So let’s get with the program and get on the right side of things. Most teachers can’t afford the prolonged and costly lawsuits it will take to bring sanity to New York State law.
“Randi Weingarten is praising the Lederman decision. She’s the big cheese, right? So let’s put our money where her mouth is and back up working teachers.
“Problem is, at every DA I go to, Mulgrew defends junk science, saying it subtracts from the judgment of principals. But if the judgment of principals is so bad that a crap shoot improves it, the problem is the principals. Let’s stop pussyfooting around, lobby for principals who are not insane, and get off the junk science train once and for all.”
—————————————
Don’t get me wrong. It’s better that Randi’s finally getting on board with praise of the Lederman lawsuit and verdict… than if she remains silent like Mulgrew is apparently doing. NYC Educator (unsarcastically) calls Randi’s latest letter “valuable lip service” on Randi’s part, and I agree. Better late than never.
Wow, I’ve been impressed by Weingarten’s capacity for disingenuousness for many years now, but this is just beyond the beyonds.
It may not be disingenuousness. There is another quite plausible possibility.
Physicist Paul Dirac once posited that for every particle in the universe there is an equal and opposite anti-particle, an idea that has been verified time and again in high energy particle accelerators.
We can just hope that Randi and anti-Randi never meet, for they will surely annihilate themselves with a gigundo release of energy far surpassing the yield of all the H-bombs ever produced.
The problem is that, when Randi encounters Anti-Randi, it will be teachers that get blown up.
She will simply re-materialize at another one of Bill Gates and Eli Broad’s tables, where teacher tartare is always on the menu.
I said more than two years ago on this blog that I didn’t grasp why Diane keeps promoting Randi Weingarten. I also said that I don’t understand why Weingarten defended the Common Core standards when they were written without teacher participation and when they are based on a demonstrably faulty premise.
In a Huffington Post column Weingarten concluded her support for the Common Core with this:
“We can’t reclaim the promise of public education without investing in strong neighborhood public schools that are safe, collaborative and welcome environments for students, parents, educators and the broader community. Schools where teachers and school staff are well-prepared and well-supported, with manageable class sizes and time to collaborate…schools with wraparound services to address our children’s social, emotional and health needs.”
Was Weingarten serious in implying that Common Core is the necessary ingredient to achieve what she outlines in that paragraph? If so, then she really should not be heading up an education organization of any kind. Common Core has little if anything to do with neighborhood schools that are “safe, collaborative, welcome environments.” It has nothing to do with “manageable class sizes” and “wraparound services” that “address…social, emotional and health needs.”
Moreover, the Common Core is predicated on the notion that “rigorous” standards (and the testing of them) are needed – are imperative – to prepare students (and the nation) “to compete successfully in the global economy.” Nothing could be further from the truth. The U.S already is economically competitive. When it drops in the World Economic Forum competitiveness rankings – as it has done over the last several years – it’s because of really stupid economic policy choices it’s made, policies that have been pushed aggressively by many of those who now insist that schools and teachers must be the ones to remedy the fallout from their bad economic choices. Very sad. And very cowardly. But, Randi Weingarten sided with them.
Diane Ravitch attacked me for that criticism, and for using a pseudonym.
I responded to her by saying that I appreciated her passion and advocacy for public education. And I told her that my use of a pseudonym was purposeful, because the name – ‘democracy’ – is the message.
I pointed out to her that I believe in Horace Mann’s concept of public education as “the balance-wheel of the social machinery” in a democratic society. And I agree with University of Chicago social scientist Earl Johnson that “the supreme end of education in a democracy is the making of the democratic character.” I’m an ardent supporter of the development of critical intelligence –– what Gordon Hullfish and Philip Smith called “reflective reconstruction of knowledge, insights and values” –– as an absolutely essential element in the maintenance of a democratic society. And I subscribe to John Dewey’s philosophical foundation for public schooling:
“What the best and wisest parent wants for his own child, that must the community want for all its children. Any other ideal for our schools is narrow and unlovely; acted upon, it destroys our democracy.”
The record is more than clear. As head of the AFT, Randi Weingarten took the Common Core money from Bill Gates, signed on to the Common Core standards, and endorsed the Common Core accountability and evaluation measures. Weingarten even joined a and a Gates Foundation nabob to wrote that it was critical for American public education to “align teacher development and evaluation to the Common Core state standards.” The NEA (Dennis Van Roekel) essentially did the same. In essence, both the AFT and NEA bought into the corporate “reform” myth that public education was “in crisis” and needed rigorous standards and a healthy dose of “accountability to recover and to make the U.S. “economically competitive.” And this was AFTER the disaster of No Child Left Behind. So, what kind of “vision” is that?
It was only after a backlash that Weingarten and the NEA began to reconsider. What they signed on to is an awful lot to walk back. And yes, I’m pleased to see that Randi Weingarten is making, as you say, “incremental steps” to undo what she’s helped to set in motion. I too would welcome, from both AFT and NEA, “more changes.” Weingarten has now said she will no longer take Gates cash, and she has distanced herself from value-added evaluations. There’s another step, the big one. And that’s disowning the Common Core.
Diane Ravitch told Salon that “Public schools today are under siege…The policy agenda should be one of equity.”
I agree. Strongly.
However, the explicit purpose of the Common Core is to prepare kids “to compete successfully in the global economy” (that rationale was recently scrubbed from the CCSI website). And that’s what the AFT and NEA agreed to.
I don’t mind pointing out that this is a pretty dumb “vision.”
Public education has a vital – and historical – mission. And that is to develop citizens in a democratic re[public who are critically thoughtful and reflective, and who both understand and are committed to the core values of democracy: popular sovereignty, equality, justice, freedoms for all citizens, tolerance, and promoting the general welfare of the nation.
But do the current “leaders” of the AFT and NEA believe in it? Actions tend to speak much more loudly than words.
That is precisely why Weingarten is getting so much criticism on this thread.
The simple fact is that the AFT and the NEA and NYSUT and the UFT all sold their souls to Bill Gates. End of story.
Randi jumping on Lederman’s bandwagon will cause her to lose any shred of credibility she had left. No one is buying her BS. Her words have no meaning to anyone plugged into the hostile takeover of public education.
Some folks are very good at chess.
Others, not so much.
Democracy,
I don’t understand your personal criticism of me. I have posted many articles opposing the Common Core. I have stated clearly that I do not support the Common Core or the testing or the VAM that goes with it. I have many times shown the flaws in all of these initiatives. I have made it clear repeatedly that schooling is about developing human beings for life and for citizenship, not for the global economy. I don’t “promote” Randi. When she says or does something that matters, I post it. She is the president of the AFT. We don’t see eye to eye about Common Core or other subjects. But she is a friend and we disagree. I have my views, and she has hers. I don’t have to attack her to prove my bona fides.
Democracy: Please see the comments I posted at the beginning of this series of comments I’ve made it clear that Diane was instrumental in introducing us to initial group of the experts who were instrumental in our victory. For Sheri and I, this case was always about principle and defending Sheri’s reputation. We never looked for money and will not receive any money for having won the case. We have gone public with the case because we believe Sheri’s story, and now her victory, are important to the profession of teaching. We are not involved in union politics and would appreciate if our story does not become intertwined with union politics.
Dianes’ comment below is dead on. Regardless of what you think of Randi, she has the capability of speaking to hundreds of thousands of teachers. Therefore, please do not criticize us for allowing Randi to share our story and thank Sheri for work. Diane has been a wonderful supporter and we do not wish to see her criticized in any way related to our case.
Bruce
OMG! It wasn’t Randi who got the word out until after the verdict!! Teachers around the country already did that!!!! Instead you give Randi the glory!!! You are a lawyer….show me one example of union support from Randi because we, collectively as teachers, did that while out “leader” was silent.
In fact it was Mulgrew, Randi’s partner in VAM and Reform, who sneered at Carol Burris and the other principals who publically spoke against VAM.
What a slap in the face to give her credit for doing nothing. You took a great victory and made Randi the national hero instead of your wife.
So sad and disappointing. I can only hope there is a retraction.
This is why I voted for Jia Lee and MORE who did keep Sherri’s case out in front.