Archives for category: Budget Cuts

After several consecutive years of hearing that teachers’ unions are terrible, teachers’ unions are an obstacle to reform, teachers’ unions are greedy, it’s easy to cringe when the subject of unions comes up. I personally have gotten over that. I have come to realize that the war on unions is part of the larger war on public education. The unions are the strongest political ally for the public schools, which are the workplaces of their members, and they need make no apology to the far-right that wants to reduce all working people to atomized individuals, lacking representation.

Bruce Baker decided to explore the recent attacks on teachers’ unions after reading a comment in The Economist magazine saying that the unions are a “scourge.”

Baker looked at the effect of unions overall and found that they tend to be associated with higher pay for teachers (which attracts better candidates into the profession) and with greater funding fairness. No, unions are not a scourge. Unions give teachers a voice in determining the conditions in which they teach and children learn. Why should that be left to the politicians and policymakers, who know little or nothing about education?

Leonie Haimson has some excellent ideas about where to make budget cuts and how to raise revenues to protect children in the looming fiscal crisis.

Haimson is executive director of Class Size Matters in New York City and has long been the city’s leading parent activist. Her ability to analyze research and budgets is astounding. Her courage in fighting for students and parents is unmatched.

Leonie Haimson was among the first people to be placed on the honor roll as a champion of public education. She was one of the original founders of Parents Across America.

She is a tireless and effective advocate who makes a difference in improving the lives of children.

John Hechinger has written an important critique of administrative salaries in higher education.

His article focuses on Purdue, an outstanding university known for its engineering programs.

The university has a long list of administrators who do supervision or marketing and are paid far more than full professors.

Makes you wonder if the university–and Purdue is typical, not unusual–has its priorities right.

One good thing about Purdue that comes out in the article is that, unlike so many other universities, it does not rely on adjunct faculty.

Mitch Daniels, about to leave the governorship, will assume the presidency of Purdue. As governor, he became known nationally for privatizing and outsourcing public education and undercutting teachers’ professionalism. We will see what his Purdue agenda may be.

As a show of good will, he could start his tenure in office by cutting his own salary in half (that figure is not mentioned in the article but is surely a higher figure than the highest-paid administrators).

Pedro Noguera, my colleague at New York University, took my place as blogging partner with Deborah Meier at “Bridging Differences.”

In his latest column, Pedro says that it is not enough to recognize that No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top have failed. It is necessary to shape a new agenda.

Pedro offers these three elements to a new agenda.

1. “The federal government should call for the creation of a comprehensive support systems around schools in low-income communities to address issues such as safety, health, nutrition, and counseling. This should include the expansion of preschool and after-school programs and extended learning opportunities during the summer.” Since the federal government is unlikely to fund what is needed, states and localities should develop public-private partnerships to make it happen.

2) “The federal government must support a new approach to assessment that focuses on concrete evidence of academic performance—writing, reading, mathematical problem-solving—and moves away from using standardized tests to measure and rank students, teachers, and schools.”.

3) “The federal government needs to call upon the states and school districts to undertake careful evaluations of struggling schools to determine why they are failing to meet the needs of the students they serve before prescribing what should be changed. Instead of simply closing troubled schools such a strategy would require a greater focus on enrollment patterns (i.e. have we concentrated too many “high-needs” students in a school?) and ensuring that schools have the capacity to meet the needs of the students they serve rather than merely judging them under the current accountability systems.”

I heartily agree with Pedro’s diagnosis. If children are not healthy, if they are hungry, their ability to learn is negatively affected. The value of preschool and after-school programs is well-established. In state after state, these programs are being cut, while testing is expanded. I would go even further, as I do in my book, and say that class-size reduction must be part of the new vision, especially where the children with the greatest needs are enrolled.

The problem here is that we can’t get federal or state policymakers to change course unless they recognize that the present course–the strategy of high-stakes testing, accountability, choice, and school closings–has failed. I note that Pedro does not mention the Common Core standards, which has now become the linchpin of federal school reform.

Going forward, I think, requires that we persuade President Obama that Race to the Top is not working and must be replaced by a new vision. Pedro has well described the outlines of that vision.

But we can’t assume that the President will change course until he recognizes that four more years of the Bush NCLB strategy won’t help our children or improve their education. Twelve years is enough. It’s time to think anew.

This post was written by a young teacher in New York City. A law school graduate, she teaches special education in the Bronx in one of he city’s poorest neighborhoods. She requested anonymity, for obvious reasons.

She asks: Is it worse to be called a bitch (by a student) or to be treated like one (by politicians and bureaucrats)?

She is what The New Teacher Project would call an “irreplaceable.” When the New York City Department of Education released the names and ratings of thousands of teachers earlier this year, she was rated 99%. She was not at all happy. She wrote a protest against the whole rating system (which organizations like TNTP love). She knew that this year she might be on top, and next year at the bottom. And she knew that many of her colleagues with low ratings were hardworking teachers who did not deserve to be humiliated. When people wrote to congratulate her, she thanked them and said the ratings meant nothing.

Her new post expresses her outrage towards the system and the politicians who shortchange teachers and students.

She asks, Why do teachers have to buy their own supplies? Why must they beg or borrow the most basic resources?

She understands why a student may call her names, but why does society?

Jon Stewart is public education’s best friend in the media.

Maybe because his mother was a public school teacher.

Of course.

He interviewed the director/producer of the wonderful film “Brooklyn Castle” and one of the lead students on the school’s chess team.

It will be  your heart good to hear the student, Pobo, talk about how great his teachers were and why people shouldn’t pay any attention to the rating systems that label them “bad.”

He says, “I LOVED my teachers!”

Stewart asked why New York City was willing to cut the funding for the school’s championship chess team while not cutting the amount of standardized testing.

We all wonder the same thing.

Governor Jerry Brown led a successful campaign to raise taxes to fund the state’s public schools and universities.

His Proposition 30 passed with heavy support from Los Angeles County.

Had it not passed, the cuts to education would have been devastating.

Hats off to Governor Brown and Superintendent Tom Torlakson for fighting to increase taxes to pay for educating the state’s children.

Due to prior anti-tax activism, California is now 47th in the nation in education spending.

Proposition 32, which was intended to hobble labor unions’ political activities by eliminating automatic dues checkoff for political contributions, was defeated.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder was rebuked by voters yesterday as they repealed the law that gave dictatorial powers to emergency managers appointed by the governor to control fiscally distressed districts.

Public Act 4 of 2011 was rejected by a vote of 52-48.

Snyder installed emergency managers to take control of public education in Detroit, Highland Park, and Muskegon Heights. The managers in the two small districts abolished public education and handed the students to for-profit charter chains to run. The Detroit emergency manager imposed a drastic plan to lay off teachers, privatize many schools, and increase class sizes.

The law enabled the governor to suspend democracy and impose one-man rule. It also allowed him to evade the state’s responsibility to provide public schools on every district in the state and to deal with fiscal crises with draconian measures.

If you live in one of the battleground states, I urge you to vote to re-elect President Obama.

Though many of us oppose his Race to the Top, please vote for him for other reasons.

We can’t allow a reactionary, backward-looking Republican Party to take charge of this nation’s future. We can’t allow a rightwing administration to shape the Supreme Court.

I urge you to vote for President Obama. Once he is re-elected, we will continue to pressure him to strengthen our nation’s essential public education system. He might hear us. Romney won’t.

If you live in Washington State, vote NO on 1240 and show the billionaires that you won’t let them start the process of privatization.

If you live in Georgia, vote against the ALEC initiative and preserve local control.

If you live in Bridgeport, Connecticut, vote against the Mayor’s attempt to take away your right to elect the school board.

If you live in Los Angeles, vote for Robert Skeels for LAUSD school board.

If you live in Ohio, vote for Maureen Reedy for the legislature.

If you live in Minneapolis, vote for Patty Wycoff for school board.

If you live in Idaho, vote NO on Props 1, 2, 3: Repeal the Luna laws.

If you live in New Jersey, vote for Marie Corfield.

If you are in Perth Amboy, NJ, vote the “New Visions” slate: Nina Perkins Nieves, Benny Salerno, Jeanette Gonzalez and Maria Garcia for Board of Education.

If you live in Pennsylvania, vote for Richard Flarend.

If you live in California, vote yes on 30 to support public education and no on 32, meant to hobble unions.

Wherever you are, support the candidates who believe in democratically controlled public schools.

Wherever you live, oppose privatization and diversion of public funds to private hands.

Strengthen our democracy by supporting public education.

Support the schools whose doors are open to all.

Support the candidates who will fight for equality of educational opportunity.

This teacher in Houston reviews what is happening in HISD schools.

Anyone know the HISD superintendent Terry Grier?

The teacher’s evaluation:

Another transplanted North Carolina education experience. I teach in Texas in the largest school district that has inherited one of North Carolina’s education mediums, T. Grier. In his ready, shoot, aim masterplan, all teachers are graded on the growth of their students on a year to year basis, as the statistical junkies decide that growth will be measured on EVAAS- a nonpeer reviewed performance analyis program. This is in addition to a whole slew of other tests. We personally ran into an issue where our social studies students were passing 95% of the tests or higher provided by the State, but when the results did not grow past 95% the teachers were penalized! There is no average of, say, three years performance, or a plateau of achievement where the grading stops, but a slap for high achievement – the District refused to reconsider our highly validated protests.

Teachers were baited with the prospect of “bonus” money, and assumed we were like pipe salepersons who would do more for a bigger payday. A teacher might earn up to $7,000…great, but there have also not been any raises for over 4 years. The bonus money available has been reduced by half, so the District reduced the teachers who could obtain a bonus – no senior level teachers, art, electives, nor foreign language because??? those subjects do NOT have to be tested. In our case, high performance ran into an effective ceiling. So now, bonus money has shrunk, teachers salaries have been reduced, a bait and switch incentive atmosphere has been created. Incentives in business are great, this is not business. Teachers do not get to select inputs and the inputs change, perhaps dramatically, year to year; or we average over 37 kids in a class compared to 30, but that should’nt really effect performance. It defies good science to measure unlike test groups.

Morale in our District is terrible, particularly with the school administrators who cringe when the headquarters decides on some new hoop teachers and students need to jump through. For example, we are supposed to drop students into category buckets within the first month so we can establish their goals…what sense does that make? who knows kids after a month? and then the system crashed, or dropped data or just didn’t work. Nobody holds senior administration accountable.

So fair is fair, how are Grier and the District grading themselves in the Broad competition they flaunt? 1) on the basis of how many kids take the SAT 2) how many kids take Advanced Placement courses and 3) how many more kids graduate. Fine as it goes, but a) the District paid for the SAT for all 10th graders b) it pays for any AP tests and recruited teachers and kids who were completely unprepared for this incredibly rigorous course load (SpEd kids were enrolled in some cases!) and c) created an on-line self paced Grad Lab program that is never backstopped for performance nor any real check on comprehension. There are no effective teacher unions in Texas (no strike state), so no one can blame that factor on Texas’ dismal performance of Houston’s. Maybe it is the super? From North Carolina Greenboro, then San Diego…any comments from other teachers who taught under T. Grier and dealt with the North Carolina experience?