Archives for category: Chicago

Just received from AFT press office:

AFT Statement in Support of Chicago Teachers Union 

WASHINGTON—Statement of AFT President Randi Weingarten in support of the Chicago Teachers Union.

“Yesterday, on a call with her fellow AFT executive council members, including the union’s three national officers, Chicago Teachers Union President Karen Lewis reported on the status of the CTU’s ongoing negotiations with Chicago Public Schools, the CTU’s hope for a settlement, and its preparations for a strike if a settlement is not reached.

“Chicago’s teachers want what is best for their students and for Chicago’s public schools. And they want to work in an environment that respects their work and their role as partners with administrators in ensuring that every Chicago child has a chance to succeed. The AFT and its members stand with the CTU.

“Chicago teachers have already agreed to a longer school day—and offered ideas to make it not just a longer day but a better day by investing in art, music and other subjects that expand and enrich our children’s minds. And they’ve galvanized parents and community to support these ideas.

“No one takes a strike lightly. CTU members feel that a clear message has been sent by the school district that they and their work are not valued. This message is demonstrated not simply by the school board’s denial of agreed-upon pay raises, but also by Chicago Public Schools’ exclusion of the CTU from conversations it had with outside groups about potential school closings.

“CTU President Lewis and CTU members are committed to working around the clock to reach a fair, substantive agreement that keeps them where they want to be: on the job, in the classrooms, educating Chicago’s students. That will remain their goal if a strike is not averted.”

 

The Heartland Institute in Chicago, a major advocate for charters and vouchers, has issued a statement supporting Rahm Emanuel and urging him to be firm in resisting the demands of the Chicago Teachers Union. Is Mayor Emanuel at the right convention?

Heartland Institute Education Expert Reacts to
Chicago Teachers Union Strike Threat

The Chicago Teachers Union on Wednesday filed unfair labor practice charges against Chicago Public Schools, and CTU President Karen Lewis says the union will not extend its Monday, September 10 deadline to reach a new contract or go on strike.

The following statement from Joy Pullmann of the Chicago-based Heartland Institute – a free-market think tank – may be used for attribution. For more comments, refer to the contact information below. To book a Heartland guest on your program, please contact Tammy Nash at tnash@heartland.org and 312/377-4000. After regular business hours, contact Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org and 312/731-9364.


“The Chicago Teachers Union is playing a game of chicken with taxpayer dollars, parent patience, and children’s futures. Their threats to strike, bluffs or not, should be seen for the craven malfeasance that represents what’s wrong with the incredibly expensive and ineffective Chicago Public Schools.

“Chicago teachers make about a third more than the average Cook County worker, and they receive far better pensions. The city is as broke as its hobos. Mayor Rahm Emanuel shouldn’t blink, and voters should demand the union stand down.”

Joy Pullmann
Research Fellow, The Heartland Institute
Managing Editor, School Reform News
jpullmann@heartland.org
312/377-4000

 

Thanks to loyal reader Prof. W. for forwarding this story.

Chicago public schools have been under mayoral control since 1995.

Mayor Daley hired Paul Vallas to reform the schools. He went on to reform the schools in Philadelphia, New Orleans, and Haiti, and now he is reforming schools in Bridgeport while running a national consulting business on reforming schools.

Then Mayor Daley promoted Arne Duncan to reform the schools. Duncan called his reforms “Renaissance 2010.” Before he left for DC in 2009 Duncan opened 100 new schools and closed many neighborhood schools.

Then came Ron Huberman to continue the Daley reforms.

And now Mayor Emanuel carries on in the Daley tradition, having recently instructed his hand-picked school board to close or privatize more schools.

And what’s the upshot of nearly two decades of reform?

“Twenty years of reform efforts and programs targeting low-income families in Chicago Public Schools has only widened the performance gap between white and African-American students, a troubling trend at odds with what has occurred nationally.

Across the city, and spanning three eras of CPS leadership, black elementary school students have lost ground to their white, Latino and Asian classmates in testing proficiency in math and reading, according to a recent analysis by the University of Chicago Consortium on School Research.”

The Consortium report had the following conclusions:

• Graduation rates have improved dramatically, and high school test scores have risen; more
students are graduating without a decline in average academic performance.
• Math scores have improved incrementally in the elementary/middle grades, while
elementary/middle grade reading scores remained fairly flat for two decades.
• Racial gaps in achievement have steadily increased, with white students making slightly more
progress than Latino students, and African American students falling behind all other groups.
• Despite progress, the vast majority of CPS students have academic achievement levels that are
far below where they need to be to graduate ready for college.

Some more quotes from the report:

“Chicago schools are not what they were in 1990. Graduation rates have improved tremendously, and students are more academically prepared than they were two decades ago. ACT scores have risen in recent years, and elementary math scores are almost a grade level above where they were in the early 1990s. However, average test scores remain well below levels that indicate students are likely to succeed in college.

This is not a problem that is unique to Chicago. Nationwide, the typical high school graduate does not perform at college-ready levels. Chicago students do not perform more poorly than students with similar economic and ethnic backgrounds at other schools in Illinois.” p. 78

Over the course of the three eras of school reform, a number of dramatic system-wide initiatives were enacted. But instead of bringing dramatic changes in student achievement, district-wide changes were incremental -when they occurred at all. We can identify many individual schools that made substantial, sometimes dramatic, gains over the last 20 years, but dramatic improvements across an entire system of over 600 schools are more elusive.

Past research at CCSR suggests that that the process of school improvement involves careful attention to building the core organizational supports of schools -leadership, professional capacity, parent/community involvement, school learning climate, and instruction (Bryk, et al., 2010).

Building the organizational capacity of schools takes time and is not easily mandated at the district level. Nevertheless, the extent to which the next era of school reform drives system-wide improvement will likely depend on the extent to which the next generation of reforms attends to local context and the capacity of individual schools throughout the district.” p. 79

It is hard to see how this rate of change will eliminate poverty or close the achievement gaps (which have widened).

And will anyone be held accountable?

On Labor Day, Karen Lewis addressed 20,000 teachers about their struggle with Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Do you know how hard it is to get 20,000 people to turn out for anything?

When Karen Lewis met with Rahm Emanuel after his election, he told her that 25% of the children in Chicago would never amount to anything. She was outraged.

Karen Lewis is a plain-spoken yet articulate leader of the teachers. She was elected because teachers were sick of the compromises and wanted someone who would speak up for them and for the children they teach. She has done that.

Rahm sends his own children to the University of Chicago Lab School, which is his right as a parent. But he doesn’t think that the children in the public schools deserve equal opportunities to the education he requires for his children.

The public schools may not be the Lab School, but shouldn’t he be rallying the business community to make every school in Chicago a great school with a great curriculum, reasonable class size, and excellent facilities? Instead, the board he appointed recently voted to close more public schools and hand them over to private management.

The fight between CTU and Rahm Emanuel is not helpful to President Obama.

The mayor should sit down with Karen Lewis and figure out how to resolve this impasse so he doesn’t have a strike on his hands. And he should figure out how to put himself on the side of public education and the children in the public schools.

A reader in the U.K. sent this editorial about business leaders’ complaints about poorly educated workers. He thought it was interesting to note that the same laments are heard on both sides of the Atlantic ocean. I have noticed that such laments are often concurrent with a big push to outsource jobs to countries that pay a small fraction of what local workers expect to be paid.

Yet, as I read the editorial, I remembered reading a few years ago that Sir Michael Barber, late of McKinsey, now at Pearson, was supposed to have successfully reformed the British education system. Barber is a big believer in targets and testing, accountability and school closing. His ideas have been influential in supporting the NCLB regime, giving it a patina of legitimacy, based in part on his reputation for having reformed British education.

Barber calls his philosophy of  education “deliverology.”

Apparently, “deliverology” saved British education, and now it needs to be saved again.

Schools have this nasty habit of getting unreformed not long after they were reformed. Arne Duncan reformed Chicago, but now it has to be reformed again. Paul Vallas reformed Philadelphia (and Chicago, too) but now it has to be reformed again.

Reforms have this odd life cycle: first comes the press release, then the sustained publicity campaign, and then the reforms quietly dissolve. And the cycle begins again. The Houston Independent School District is on the Broad Foundation’s list of possible winners of its annual prize. Houston was the first district to win the prize some years ago. Then it had to be reformed all over again. New York City has been reformed for the past decade, and chances are that the next mayor will want to reform the reforms.

The only question that remains is not whether the reforms will be reformed, but whether they will be replaced by something different (which would involve admitting that mistakes were made), or whether reformers will do more of the same, with greater intensity.

And so it goes.

Teacher Katie Osgood (Ms. Katie) sent this story:

There is a high school in Chicago called Social Justice High School. It was created after parents held a 19-day hunger strike under the reign of Paul Vallas. The teachers there create rich, relevant curriculum to engage their students. Unfortunately, Chicago Public Schools want the SoJo building–it is a beautiful space which was built in response to the demands of the hunger strike, one of the most expensive newer facilities CPS owns. And I’m sure the city’s charter schools would love a piece of that.

So, just a few weeks ago, the district decided to come in to purposefully destabilize the school this by getting rid of the democratically-chosen principal (just weeks before school started) and cutting important programs like AP classes. But the students reacted. They held sit-ins and demanded to be heard. Here is what happened at their meeting filled with community support: http://www.substancenews.net/articles.php?page=3529 “Then the students began chanting, “Where’s the justice in social justice?” and the whole audience joined in chanting. The principal walked out of the room to the chants of, “We were born out of struggle, the struggle continues.” The latest word is that the teachers who supported their students have been fired and the entire English department has been disbanded.

The truth is that the powers-that-be do not want teachers and communities to decide curriculum because they might incorporate the history of struggle and students might actually be empowered toward action. God forbid! And you want to talk about parent empowerment, please read the history of the school: http://sj.lvlhs.org/our_campus.jsp No triggers to be found, just lessons from the history of civil rights struggle.

Common Core is just one more way to silence communities.

Katie Osgood has a terrific blog. She works with children with high needs. I learn a lot from Ms. Katie whenever I read her writings:

 

What If Charter Schools Did What They Were Intended to Do?

 
As I continue to meet dozens and dozens of charter school students from across Chicago, I am continually reminded how different the charter schools are from their nearby public neighborhood schools. Working in a psychiatric facility means all the students I meet have some sort of mental health problem. And yet, a vast majority of the children I meet from the charters have either mild, or inward-focused disabilities such as depression or anxiety. Their learning problems are minimal and they have overwhelmingly been strong students academically. Many have only just begun to attend charters so, for the most part, I do not credit the schools themselves with this difference. These kids are the ones who already are good students with minimal behavior issues.

And I wonder, instead of skimming away these high-performing students, what if charter schools had followed the original intention of their creation? What if these schools had targeted not the best test-takers, or kids who with just a little push could be great test-takers (since test-taking is the only metric anyone seems to care about these days), but instead focused on the ones who were about to dropout, the ones who had a history of behavior problems, the ones who disrupted the learning of all the other students and took up the time of the teachers, the ones who are over-represented in Special Education, the ones who were truly struggling in the public schools?

And I imagine the charters as using flexibility in curriculum, staffing, and the use of funds to create truly innovative places of learning. They would be schools with various extra-curriculars to keep kids engaged, extra staff support to reach this tougher group of kids, innovative use of technology, services to reach out to kids already involved with gangs or with substance abuse issues, special programs for kids in the juvenile justice system or even the foster care system, flexible start and end times to encourage students to actually attend school regularly, vocational training opportunities including partnerships with local businesses and industries, and more. Charters could become an alternative to oppressive alternative schools.

In the meantime, the neighborhood school would feel supported and be better able to do a job educating the students who could succeed under a more traditional version of school. There are plenty of children living in low-income neighborhoods who have supportive home lives and who are ready to be challenged academically. But thanks to the effects of poverty, there are MORE students who suffer from debilitating behavior and learning challenges. It matters that some children are not receiving proper nutrition. It matters that more children are being exposed to substances in utero. It matters that children are growing up watching extreme violence on their streets and experiencing post-traumatic stress as a result. It matters that families cannot find employment and children suffer from the daily stress of unstable living conditions. It matters that children are being thrust into bouts of homelessness and the chaotic lives that ensue. If charter schools stepped up to help THESE kids, they ones I meet every day at my work—the ones who are difficult even for a staff of highly-trained professionals– they would be doing a huge service to communities and public schools. Charter schools would be SUPPORTING neighborhood schools by focusing attention and resources on the kids who truly needed it.

Somehow, the vast majority of charter schools (with some exceptions, no doubt) focus all their attention on kids who already can “cut it”. They claim they have solved the puzzle of low-income schools. I’m sorry, but just because your student population is made up of children from low-income backgrounds and students of color, does NOT mean they are the struggling students. Poverty does matter, but it impacts families and individuals differently.

I look at my students at the hospital. The neighborhood schools are truly working with a tougher bunch of kids. Some of them will eventually be transferred (after many meetings, a whole lot of paperwork, and a lot of pushing and advocating) to therapeutic day schools or alternative schools. But there are not nearly enough schools like this to accommodate all the children with significant problems in school. And unlike the successful charters, the neighborhood schools don’t get two teachers and an aide in a class of under 20 kids (See Harlem Children’s Zone Promise Academies.) In fact, as their stronger performers are siphoned away to the charters along with their funding, they will have even less to offer the students left behind.

Charters could’ve really helped my toughest kids. These kids deserve a fighting chance at a good education. Instead, somewhere in the twisted logic of current education reform, they are being given less than ever before. And it makes me ill.

I still don’t believe charters would be a panacea even if they took up their original mission. And I worry about segregating out students with greater needs and not addressing the funding inequalities and racial isolation of these schools and communities, but at least they would not be making things WORSE for the neighborhood schools. I truly believe many charter school teachers and even some leaders think they are doing something good. But I tell you, from where I stand, charter schools are taking part in denying the most fragile children quality education. If only charters could reclaim the mission of helping the kids that need it the most. If only charters weren’t “in competition” for the strongest students and best test scores. If only charters weren’t dividing communities and parents who now need to fight for ever dwindling resources. Perhaps then, in solidarity, all educators and parents—charter and neighborhood alike–could continue the fight together for true equity for ALL children.

Just in:

Here in Austin, Texas on Saturday, August 25th 7:00-9:00 pm we’ll be having a rally to support the Chicago teachers. Parents supporting teachers. Solidarity!
TexasParentsOptOutStateTests@yahoo.com

This teacher, now retired, reflects on the madness of giving standardized tests to students in special education. She sees hope in the determination and unity of the teachers of Chicago. She also reminds us why retired teachers must stay involved and speak up for their colleagues in the classroom, especially those whose lives are being heedlessly destroyed by pointless reforms:

I was a special ed. teacher who was there before–and when– this craziness started. (Although there were always problems {& NOTHING even compares to the present-day intimidation, harassment}, I was lucky enough to be teaching when one could really teach. To get to the point–as a special ed. teacher, I had a front row seat to the suffering caused by the high-stakes tests. We had no business whatever making some of these students–who were often as many as three years behind (in reading &/or math)–take grade-level tests. We had students hide under their desks, cry, tell us they were stupid, throw pencils into the ceiling, have tantrums (In middle school!), scribble on the Scantron forms, connect all the bubbles, after filling in anything, etc. When I went to a state conference of LDA (Learning Disabilities Assn), I entered into a discussion about organizing a walk
out–that is, EVERY special ed. teacher in the STATE would walk out,
refusing to give the tests. Unfortunately, we couldn’t get a buy-in from others.
I took a class in Special Ed. Law after my first year of teaching, as I
worked in a school district where parents either: 1. wanted to do right by their children, but didn’t know how to get services or help;
2. were not readily available or were not involved in their children’s
education. So, when administrators tried to tell me, “Oh, Mrs. X, you’re just a new teacher. Johnny doesn’t really need all that help.
His parents aren’t here asking for anything, are they?” I’d whip out the rules and regs.and say,”Oh, well, we really can’t do that, according to Section 5, Part A…” I guess I could have gotten fired but, as aforementioned, it was a different world (although the superintendent–who was a real jerk–called me at home and badgered me!), and with knowledge, there was some power.However, there IS hope. Look at Chicago–FIVE THOUSAND red-shirted teachers turned the tide and brought about (and, hopefully, will continue to bring) a good first result. And they continue to show up. And parents/community organizers show up–there is going to be a rally RE: an ELECTED school board this week (City Council almost kaboshed the request for a referendum on this issue, but the people prevailed!). I can assure you that the attendance will be great.There is strength in numbers; attention will be paid.

The question of ownership arises because the “parent trigger” idea enables 51% of parents to “seize control” of their public school and turn it over to a private corporation to manage.

But do the parents “own” the school? Is it theirs to give away?

My view is that it belongs to the public. The public created it. The public paid for it. It belongs to the public. It belongs to those who attended it in the past and to those who will attend it in the future. Next year’s parents and students have the same interest as this year’s. And so do those who will be parents and students in the school five years from now.

If the school is unsatisfactory, if the principal is incompetent, take your concerns to the superintendent and the school board. If most parents speak up, they will not be ignored (unless you happen to live in a city with mayoral control, like New York City or Chicago, where the mayor doesn’t care about parent opinion).

This reader has similar concerns.

What exactly does “taking back a school” mean? Are you suggesting that we allow a group of people (whether it’s 51% of parents or some other group) to take over a public school and “give” it to a private corporation or organization? If so, then I disagree completely.

On the other hand, if you mean, changing the publicly elected school board then I would agree completely. If you mean working with the teachers and parents to improve the educational program, then I agree. If you mean changing the legislature, governor, or other elected officials who are killing public education then I agree — completely.

As Diane has said many times, public schools belong to the public, not 51% of the current parents. You can prove that for yourself by going to a high school basketball or football game. The “alumni” are often there in great numbers. Public schools belong to the community. They are centers for community pride and memories. They are (and should be) a stable influence in a community. 

If 51% of parents decide that a school is no longer meeting the needs of their children and give it away to a private company, what happens next year if 51% of the parents decide that they want to convert it back to a traditional public school? The parent trigger laws do not allow that. Once the public school is gone…it’s gone.

I’m a retired teacher…and I would LOVE to “take back” public schools from the “reformers.” That’s why I write to my legislators. That’s why I belong to a community group which works for public education (neifpe@blogspot.com). That’s why I blog. That’s why I try to inform as many people as I can about what’s happening to public education.