"Not All Money is GOOD MONEY"...Kudos to Jones Co. School District

Via my blog reading list, I came across a blog entry on Education Matter discussing the lessons that can be learned from Jones County School District in middle Georgia. Apparently, a few days ago, its school board voted to REJECT its portion of federal funding from RTTT, which Georgia was one of the states who won one of the grant allotments. School Superintendent William Matthews gave a simple rationale for the refusal:

"To look at a teacher and say 'Well because your numbers did this we're going to give you something and because your numbers didn't we're going to deny you', it's just not founded in research," Mathews said. 

...

Mathews says he told board members to reject the funds because they would have had to use about half of the money for teacher merit pay. He says research he found does not show it works, and that the district might have had to raise taxes to continue to fulfill a required pledge to continue the reforms after the grant runs out. 

"It was not just money to relieve our taxpayers of a burden or do some things that we want to do," Mathews said. "It was targeted, and very specific, and very restrictive as to what we could do...not all money is good money."

In the midst of hard economic times, this rural school district sacrificed a whole lot of money (almost $1.5 million) for not following the rules and looking out for their teachers. Instead of caving in, this district stood on its principles and refused to compromise them. This is the type of courage and heart needed for the ed deformers to take us seriously.

Kudos to Jones County School District for taking a stand and doing what's right! We can only hope and pray others districts in Georgia and elsewhere will follow suit...

Wanted: Teachers Activism!

It is amazing how awesome the Internet can be... I stumbled across another jewel!

On many occasions on my blog, despite its anti-teacher, anti-union rhetoric, I advocated for educators to go see the controversial education documentary, Waiting for Superman, in hope that the film will motivate them to become more vocal. Maybe I need to reconsider my stance since there are now a plethora of reports/articles/op-eds praising and especially criticizing the film that are accessible online; just Google for it. In addition, in seeing the movie, who are we really supporting?

The judgment is out there. Now the public is choosing sides. Nevertheless, while many teachers, like myself, have been writing and blogging about the film, our efforts failed to make a huge impact on the public perception. So, I was delighted and well-pleased in stumbling across this video of a group of Bay Area teachers protesting this movie and expressing their personal feelings on how this film has affected our profession:


Although they were small in numbers, to me, it was a first of teachers activism against this movie. This is a precedent for something that is sorely needed to bring about REAL reform in education. We cannot afford to be complacent and entertain derision. We cannot just wait until election time. We cannot always depend on union leadership. We cannot just write only when it likely fall on deaf ears. We need to act now. Go to the school board meetings. Participate in organized, yet peaceful protests. Become members of your professional organizations -- unions. Solicit support from and create alliances with others who support public schools. Stay abreast on the current debate in education reform. Get the word out. Vote.

Also, if you are involved in the teachers unions, hold your union leaders accountable. And if they are not doing their jobs YOU paid for them to do, then remove them from office. Consider what happened in the recent election of officials in the Chicago Teachers Union when a group of rank-and-file members overcame a huge political wall to take over the leadership of the 3rd largest local teacher union in America. These members refused to compromise their principles, as educators and due-paying members, to be a part of the "business-as-usual" get along gang within their union. Quite frankly, it is a shame this had to happen in the first place. But that's what happen when cronyism and other forms of political enticements infiltrate into the union leadership, which cause those in charge to forget who they are SUPPOSED to be representing...it's time to get off my soapbox now.

I know there are stories of teachers being vocal and active in protest that go unnoticed. I have participated in many of these before during my teaching career. Yet, personally, I prefer to "show" than "tell". Right now, it is surely getting to the point for us teachers to "show" the ed deformers and politicians to take us seriously. Last week, SocialistWorker.org posted an article advocating for more activism from the labor workers by highlighting the current French working-class protest against changes in their pension plans imposed by the government. Perhaps, there are lessons to be learned from the "little people" in France.

Whatever the case may be, something DEFINITELY must be done. It has to start with us...but when? When enough is enough? I pray it won't be until AFTER the damage has been done. By then, it will be too late.

PS: If you haven't done so already, I strongly recommend that every educator and supporter of public schools read this best-selling book by renowned education historian/pro-public education advocate, Diane Ravitch. While I am still reading the book, what I've encountered so far is so informative, yet remarkable.

The "Deprofessionalization" of Teaching

While doing online research for an unrelated topic for my blog, I stumbled across an episode of the acclaimed daily news program, Democracy Now!. Entitled "Educators Push Back Against Obama's 'Business Model' for School Reforms", host journalist Juan Gonzalez spoke with Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union, and Lois Weiner, professor of education at New Jersey City University, to discuss various issues related to the current education reform movement in America. While there is the embedded HTML code for the episode video clip on the Democracy Now! website, I opted to use the episode video clips posted on You Tube, since they are divided into two segments. Although I will focus on selected parts of the interview, I strongly encourage everyone to view it in its entirety.

In the first segment of the interview...



...this is what grab my attention the most:

JUAN GONZALEZ: But now, what’s wrong? The supporters of Arne Duncan, superintendents like Michelle Rhee in Washington, DC, Joel Klein in New York City, and others around the country, are saying, what’s wrong with having higher accountability standards for teachers? What’s wrong with encouraging experimentation and entrepreneurship, in terms of how you deliver public education to the millions of children who so far have not been served by the public education system? So what’s wrong with that?

KAREN LEWIS: Well, the problem is that the whole idea of the business model doesn’t work in education. In the business model, you can select how you want to do something. You have an opportunity to innovate in a way that discriminates. It’s very easy to do. Whereas in a public school system, where we do not select our children—we take whoever comes to the door—what we need is actually more resources and more support for the people that are there and the work that’s being done...

In the second segment of the interview...



...these are what struck me the most:

JUAN GONZALEZ: You’ve also taken a look at the impact of No Child Left Behind on teachers. Could you talk about that?

LOIS WEINER: Well, I think it’s important to understand that there are—No Child Left Behind is part of this global project to deprofessionalize teaching as an occupation. And the reason that it’s important in this project to deprofessionalize teaching is that the thinking is that the biggest expenditure in education is teacher salaries. And they want to cut costs. They want to diminish the amount of money that’s put into public education. And that means they have to lower teacher costs. And in order to do that, they have to deprofessionalize teaching. They have to make it a revolving door, in which we’re not going to pay teachers very much. They’re not going to stay very long. We’re going to credential them really fast. They’re going to go in. We’re going to burn them up. They’re going to leave in three, four, five years. And that’s the model that they want.

     So who is the biggest impediment to that occurring? Teachers’ unions. And that is what explains this massive propaganda effort to say that teachers’ unions are an impediment to reform. And in fact, they are an impediment to the deprofessionalization of teaching, which I think is a disaster. It’s a disaster for public education.

 ...

LOIS WEINER: Well, that’s part of the—you know, that’s part of the thinking here, that teaching really is not—does not have to be a skilled profession, because we’re not going to teach—we’re not going to educate kids to do anything more than work in Wal-Mart or the equivalent. They only need a seventh or an eighth grade education, at most a ninth grade education, and so we don’t need teachers who are more than, as Grover Whitehurst, a former Undersecretary of Education, said, "good enough." That’s all we need is teachers who are "good enough" to follow scripted curriculum and to teach to these standardized tests. And if you only need teachers who are good enough, you don’t have to pay them very much. And that’s the project...

While Ms. Lewis emphasizes some key criticisms of the education reform rhetoric spewed by the ed deformers, it was the commentary by Professor Weiner that opened my eyes to this game the ed deformers are playing. To the ed deformers, all of this is a systemic ploy to dumb down the future workforce to become more docile and less high-skilled, as well as to deprofessionalize the teaching profession. I think Professor Weiner conveys this better than anyone else I have heard. And I believe she is absolutely correct.

How is teaching becoming more deprofessionalized?

• In my Master's thesis, I examined how NCLB affect the teacher workforce. (Mind you that I completed my degree over a year before the current ed deformers' propaganda got into gear.) According to its HQT criteria, all public school teachers must be certified by the state, as well as attain an undergraduate degree and pass content assessment. However, that is not the case for charter school teachers; in fact, a large percentage of teachers in a charter school are not mandated in many states to be certified. Nevertheless, every public and charter school teacher must meet the HQT criteria. In retrospect, NCLB is more concerned with teachers who are more knowledgeable in their content area than in pedagogical skills.
• Educator Julia Stein shared her experiences as a charter school English teacher and described how the administrators at this particular (and probably other) charter school  as fast-tracking kids, as young as in the 10th grade, in these college-level courses which they are not prepared for.  In addition, she expressed her unfavorable views of teaching English classes with more focus on grammar and less exposure to a variety of literature
• According to the EPIC/EPRU, Miron/Applegate, and Vanderbilt studies, teacher attrition (moving to another school or leaving the profession) is as nearly twice as high in charter schools than in traditional public schools. In an article where I discovered the former study, one of the commentors, D. Jones, shared her expertise on the matter:
  I am a charter school survivor. I taught two and half years at two different charter schools and survived low pay, bounced paychecks, no pay, no running water when the school didn't pay the water bill, no personal leave time -- even to go to the doctor when sick, and many other things that public school teachers never (usually) have to contend with. Rather than leave the profession, I found a good public school district which I have now been at for 3 years. Charter schools are a training ground -- nothing more. Good teachers who love the profession should move along into the public schools and consider their charter school time a good learning experience in how NOT to do things.
• In a more recent study on teacher attrition by Vanderbilt University, dissatisfaction with working conditions was cited as the primary reason for teacher attrition among charter school teachers. plus, the rate of involuntary attrition (termination) was significantly higher among charter school teachers than their traditional counterparts. Another study on teacher attrition conducted in Wisconsin's schools, which is more biased toward ed deformers, cited lack of job security and demanding workload as the primary reasons for higher attrition rates among charter school teachers.
• Due to the current economic woes around the country, state budget cuts in education has not only affected public school teachers, but also charter school teachers as well.  For example, see what happened to the teachers in Oklahoma:
  Not even the current stimulus package from the feds can rescue charter school teachers.
• One of the perks of charter schools is having a non-unionized personnel. However, there is an increasing number of charter schools nationwide where their teachers have unionized, including in areas like NYC and Chicago.
• Throughout the country there are widespread cases of charter school executives and managers committing corruption, fraud, and profiteering of school funding, which some of it comes from taxpayers. It is also worthy to note many of these executives and managers are paid salaries much higher than superintendents and principals in public school systems.

There is no instructional leadership or real, holistic learning taken place in many of these charter schools. Instead, there is this "supervisor-subordinate" dynamic among a college-educated workforce; streamlined process of student learning that many students may not be prepared to handle; and an organizational culture where the "bosses" sit on top and are being paid nicely while the "peasants" work harder and are paid less. Of course, the ed deformers wants to portray teachers and teachers unions as being "greedy", "selfish", and "irresponsible"; they wish not to share their dirty little secret that who they are ACTUALLY describing are themselves. Oh the irony!

No professional, including many of these same ed deformers, wouldn't be who they are if it weren't for another set of professionals -- teachers. Educating children is not contingent on content mastery alone, but also pedagogical skills in understanding how children learn. That's the art of teaching. Learning is too complex for standardization. Yet, those who embrace the "business model" of schooling don't have a clue; for the people they claimed to fight for a good education will be hurt by this movement the most...our children.

UPDATE: Directly from Shanker Blog this morning comes a simple concern addressed to ed deformers: Do you REALLY think the teacher supply in the future is "deep" enough to withstand voluntary or involuntary attrition in schools, especially charter schools? I DON'T THINK SO!

Let There Be Light

It appears the WFS honeymoon will soon be over...

Throughout this month, it has been so refreshing to see others within the village, particularly the parents, finally realizing what the education reform movement is REALLY about...

It first started earlier this month with the ousting of DC Mayor Adrian Fenty, which resulted in the resignation of his school chancellor, Michelle Rhee... Why? They both were guilty of alienating the community from the reform process.

Then, via a blog entry at Failing Schools, there is a video clip of NYC stakeholders upset with the co-location plans of a charter school, expressing their frustration of the exclusive practices of not involving them in the process, not accepting ALL students, and removing students from such charter schools when these kids fail to meet the mark.



Speaking of WFS, Woodside HS, a suburban public school near the Bay Area, was profiled in the movie. One of the profiled children dismissed Woodside for Summit Prep Charter School. While Woodside HS is considered a "good school", the child opted to go elsewhere for fear of being tracked to a "low-level class", since she doesn't test well; Summit Prep do not track its students. Baffled yet sorely disappointed, the parents of Woodside HS created a large banner stating the following: Woodside High School Teachers – Man, You’re Super! Thank you for teaching ALL the students in our community! The banner was place in a prominent area of the school for the public to see.

Courtesy of the California Teacher Association

Even the principal of Woodside HS had to weigh in on the misguided perception perpetuated by the movie.

Last night, Queens Teacher blog posted an entry about how the NY Post literally made up a story about a parent's view concerning the possible release of teacher evaluation ratings in NYC. Well, that parent, Brian Rafferty, spoke out against the newspaper:



Now I am confident there are other stories of parents "finally waking up" and seeing the madness for what it really is. I believed Leigh Dingerson, the author of this Rethinking Schools piece on DC school reform as well as a parent, described best the role of parents (and educators) in today's education reform movement:

...Suddenly, decisions were being made at the top and carried out with atomic force. Parents have been treated like consumers—informed about options and outcomes but denied a seat at the table. The district’s teachers have been insulted in the national media, fired or laid off in record numbers, and replaced by less credentialed and less experienced newcomers. The model views teachers as a delivery system, not as professionals. High turnover is not just the result—it’s the goal. Principals, too, are isolated and expendable...

While the public relations war is surely far from over, if more of us cease in entertaining the blame game and continue to come together, then we can become a force to reckon with. The ed deformers' "spell" on the public perception is showing signs of weakening. As a village, we must continue the fight by first coming together in a common effort to save our schools and our children's futures.

Coming together is the beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success. ~ Henry Ford

In closing, I would like to quote the protagonist of the award-winning movie Gladiator, Maximus, as he rallied his fellow slave comrades during their first gladiatorial fight:

Anyone here been in the army?... You can help me. Whatever comes out of these gates, we've got a better chance of survival if we work together. Do you understand? If we stay together we survive.

IF WE STAY TOGETHER, WE WILL SURVIVE!

Profile: The Misunderstanding of Randi Weingarten

There must be some misunderstanding
There must be some kind of mistake...
~ Genesis

Let me first say this: To a certain degree, I am looking at this from the outside in. In metro Atlanta, the more dominant union is NEA via its state affiliate, Georgia Association of Educators. However, it is fair to say that AFT President Randi Weingarten (biography) has become the face of the teachers unions on a national scale. Nevertheless, I have been monitoring her via TV news and online articles; and quite frankly, I have mixed views of how she is handling the current backlash of teachers and teachers unions in the heated education reform debate.

While the so-called experts on education reform (who fellow teacher-blogger Queens Teacher called them "ed deformers") has vilified her, Ms. Weingarten has striven to work with many of these ed deformers and has convinced skeptics, which are many within the AFT membership, to buy into some of the education reform tactics. For example, she had Microsoft chairman Bill Gates, a notorious ed deformer, to speak at the AFT National Convention this summer, despite a mixed reception during his speech. In addition, her state affiliate in Colorado supported the passing of a controversial bill on reforming teacher tenure. Recently, Ms. Weingarten, along with Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and NEA President Dennis Van Roekel, publicly announced upcoming plans for "a national education reform conference for labor-management collaboration", showcasing current efforts within major school districts of this taking place. Essentially, in her own way, Ms. Weingarten wants her AFT comrades and other educators to embrace reform. In her recent interview on NPR, Ms. Weingarten is pushing for more teacher involvement in the implementation of these education reform tactics and shared accountability for results, as she has reiterated in her recent piece on Huffington Post and in her rebuttal to Waiting for Superman that was highlighted on AJC's Get Schooled blog.. Nevertheless, she is portrayed as the chief dissent of education reform by the ed deformers:



But are AFT members and other educators pleased with Ms. Weingarten's efforts of embracing reform? Not all! In fact, below is a list of sources criticizing Ms. Weingarten and her performance as union leader in the one-sided education reform debate:

• Chris Lehmann, a school principal in Pennsylvania, expressed disappointment in Ms. Weingarten as she was apologizing for her stance against former DC school chancellor, Michelle Rhee, and for "a more inclusive vision of education reform" with administrators and others.
• According to the Education Notes Online blog, Ms. Weingarten was accused of interfering in local union elections in DC, in which she was pushing for the incumbent president, who negotiated the current, yet controversial contractual agreement with Ms. Rhee, to remain in office. Below is a video clip of Nathan Saunders, one of the candidates for local president, blasting Ms. Weingarten:
• Along with Keith Johnson, the unpopular leader of the Detroit Federation of Teachers, Ms. Weingarten has been labeled as a "sell out" for endorsing current education reform tactics and policies in Detroit public schools.
• Recently, the Baltimore Teachers Union, an local affiliate of AFT, voted against a contract, publicly supported by Ms. Weingarten via this press release, which embraces some education reform tactics.
• Ms. Weingarten can't let go apparently as she continues to be involved with her old post as former UFT President by advocating for what the ed deformers want in NYC.

Honestly, I was inspired to write this blog entry after reading this article from SocialistWorker.org this morning. Entitled "Teachers in the crosshairs", the article highlighted many of Ms. Weingarten's blunders listed above (among others) and questioned her intentions as either being an instrument for collaboration in school reform initiatives or a "go along to get along" doormat for ed deformers can walk over. Can she embrace reform while pursuing the interests of her constituents, the union members? Is she try too hard to kiss ed deformers' butts? Has the negative public perception of teachers unions gotten the best of her?


What is the deal, Ms. Weingarten?

Lord knows she has a tough job as well as a tough fight against the ed deformers and their corporate backing. However, Ms. Weingarten, this is what YOU need to understand: The teachers and support personnel who are union members take their hard-earned money to pay their dues, expecting their interests to be heard and fought for. When some within your base questioned your leadership, there is something seriously wrong with that picture. Prior to reading the SocialistWorker.org's article, my views of Ms. Weingarten were pretty favorable. Upon reading the article, I was compelled to research further and my position has since changed. I understand the needs for teachers and teacher unions to make changes in our thinking to embrace current reform in education. What I don't understand is how a prominent union leader give in to these education reform tactics that undermine the teaching profession, and more importantly, the children we serve. To me and others, Ms. Weingarten, your talk doesn't match your walk!


Ms. Weingarten, help me to understand, because I will be watching your every move...

Profile: Democrats for Education Reform -- Jackasses beget more jackasses

Cash, Rules, Everything, Around, Me
C.R.E.A.M. get the money
Dollar, dollar bill y'all
~ Method Man of the Wu-Tang Clan

Election Day in this country is only 8 days ways and among educators, these upcoming elections are critical and will place us at crossroads. Among the two political parties, right now, I can't tell you who are really on our side anymore. While I am a life-long Democrat (who may become more of an Independent and vote for the little candidates in the future), I am not that naive in thinking that both Democrats and Republicans are perfect and  free from corrupted practices.  However, thanks to this informative article about the "billionaire boys club" playing Captain Save-A-School via investments in charter schools I came across last week ago, I am sorely disappointed in learning of the existence of Democrats for Education Reform (DFER).

Essentially, these Democrats favor all the current education reform tactics, including the current charter school movement. In addition, according to its watchdog group, DFER is working behind the scenes very diligently via political pull for education reform policies; investment in propaganda mechanisms, like the film, Waiting for Superman; financial clout on Wall Street; and prominent roles on the Board of Trustees in various charter school organizations. In fact, DFER is a political action committee mainly run by hedge fund managers, folks who make millions, even billions, in opportunistic investments with less risk and greater potential in making a large amount of profit. The "business" of operating charter schools under the current movement is like an ideal "pot of gold" for these investors -- non-unionized workforce, free from regulations, selective admission, innovative learning and teaching, greater demand than supply, very popular with the public, and greater return in investments especially since charter schools can still receive public funding. In the mind of these investors, what is not to love about investing in charter schools!

One would generally expect the GOP to engage in something like this, not Democrats. While everyone agrees that something must be done to fix our public schools, these political and financial cronies are focus on one thing, and one thing only -- making money. But at the expense of whom? Exploiting those who need the help the most -- the disadvantaged, mainly in inner cities. Is this really about the kids? Is this about providing educational opportunities for all children? How dare you play with these young mind with unproven strategies just to make a quick buck! The long-term effects of these...I don't even want to think about it.

It's funny to note that educators and teachers unions have traditionally supported the Democratic Party and voted many of them into office. DFER is a major slap in the face to us constituents, as it too blames the plight of public schools on the teachers and their unions. Yet, in the upcoming elections, many of us will still vote for the Jackass. Perhaps we are the Jackasses for voting for these people knowing they may not have our true interests at heart. The education reform tactics have grown in popularity; the charter school movement has plenty of momentum its way; and the teachers and teachers unions are delineated as the antagonists in the national debate on education reform.

Is there a political evolution occurring within the Democratic Party? It is said "the Democrats represent the people", while "the Republicans represent the wealthy". DFER is breaking all the rules! They are not concerned with looking out for the little guy by providing all children with a sound public education; they are willing to walk away from the liberal platform on education for a dollar.

DFER,

 for going against your principles!

Educators, 

and act accordingly; for

WHAT A PITY! *sigh*

The "Choice" is Yours: Can You Get With This...?

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it. ~ Adolf Hitler

Recently, I stumbled across and started following several education blogs, including Failing Schools. In one of its recent blog entries, one of Failing Schools' bloggers discussed the real disparities in school choice for NYC's disadvantaged families i.e., poverty-stricken and/or predominately-minority communities. For many of these families, they either have to settle for mediocre school options or send their children back to public schools. In addition, as in the case in NYC, many communities are shunned out of the school choice process; the choice is made for them, not the other way around!  I always thought a choice was a voluntary act! The video clip below sheds some light on the dilemma with charter schools in NYC:



This is nothing new, as I discovered two months ago with the over-hyped success stories of education reform in my hometown of New Orleans. While the area has received welcome attention it so deserves, the success of its charter schools are in question, with many of its critics citing similar complaints as the families in NY.



Also, education historian Diane Ravitch exposed a noteworthy flaw in one of the charter schools profiled in the film, Waiting for Superman. SEED Charter School in DC is praised and celebrated in the movie for its high graduation rates. However, there lies a serious attrition problem there as a beginning cohort of 7th graders dwindled in number upon their senior year at the school. So what happen to the others in the cohort who couldn't make it at SEED? Need I say more?

Back in NYC, one of its well-known charter schools, Success Academy/Success Charter Network, is looking to expand into the Upper West Side. With most of its charter schools located in Harlem, Success Academy founder Eva Moskowitz wants to offer "school choice" options to affluent families as well. Despite the resistance Moskowitz is facing from parents and community leaders, she is planning to move ahead as scheduled, although the charter hasn't been approved yet. Overconfident? Indeed! The former city councilwoman has enhanced her political clout since the founding of her successful charter schools and due to her political and financial connections within the Success Academy's board of trustees, as noted in this scathing article detailing the politics and big business implications of charter school operations.

As emotionally moving the lottery scenes were in Waiting for Superman, I was irked by them. Not only were the families treated as potential charity cases, but also these families are really not given a choice. Their hope for a better education depends on luck, not choice; the only thing they choose is whether or not to enter their children into these lotteries for admission into these charter schools. Plus with the greater latitude charter school organizations have for expansion and deregulation due to its powerful bipartisan support base and growing popularity, families trying to "get in where they fit in" will have to endure more disappointments ahead. They shouldn't have to try to get a better education for their children; the options should be available for their choosing. Unfortunately, charter schools are becoming like a big tease to these families; they look good, sound good, but the road to get in and stay in is far from good. Yet, it doesn't matter to those in charge; one way or another, they will maintain the support and get the money, at the expense of the misguided hope of the disenfranchised.

Profile: Maya Soetoro-Ng: An Unlikely Ally?

Via HuffPost Education, I came across this article this morning, thinking to myself, "here we go with another 'WFS' endorsement from the White House". But to my surprise, the current president's baby half-sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng (biography), a former educator and university professor as well as a writer-in-progress, had a different reason of endorsing the film, according to her informal e-mail sent to family and friends, including education blogger Sam Chaltain (he shared her entire e-mail on his blog); read below:

Dear friend and caring community member,

I only have a few minutes right now, so my evaluation will be necessarily incomplete, but I want to share some thoughts about Guggenheim’s new documentary, “Waiting for Superman”, which I saw last night (I had only seen several discrete segments before).

At the point in the film when children were crying because they weren’t selected in school lotteries, many people around me couldn’t suppress tears and, as a mother of two girls, I too felt intense grief and empathy for the parents of the children.  After the film, I spoke with a wonderful longtime public school teacher and she was teary as well, for a different reason; she was shedding tears of frustration about the fact that the film ignored the enormous commitment and talent of many public DOE teachers and the great work taking place in the classrooms and schools where they throw in their hands and spend large parts of their days. I was one of Randi’s teachers myself in my first years of teaching in NYC. I was even the union rep. for a couple of years. I do understand the hurt, but I urged this teacher not to let the imbalanced nature of the documentary frustrate her, and instead to go talk with others in the community about what she knows, feels, remembers, and can use to help make schools even stronger.

Marveling at the emotion generated by both those who are critical of the film and those who wholly accept the film’s assessments, I’ve become increasingly glad that this imperfect but also compelling film has come along at this time.   Here’s what I hope doesn’t happen:  I hope that we don’t grow more embittered and angry with one another and expend huge amounts of energy in senseless shouting; I hope that public school teachers are not vilified by people who think that they know more than they know about what happens in classrooms.  I hope that the film’s emphasis on test scores doesn’t make us lose sight of the many other potent and meaningful forms of learning and assessment that exist like creative writing, projects of civic engagement, Socratic learning forums, and multifaceted portfolio presentations.


Here’s what I hope happens:  I hope that the film will increase the amount and caliber of dialogue between teachers, administrators, community members, and parents.  I hope that it will encourage teachers everywhere to share their craft and schools loudly and proudly, when pride is merited, and welcome the community’s assistance as well as new opportunities for collaboration.  I hope that the film will help people to see the importance of graceful negotiation when trying to change a system and recognize the true power of persuasion.  I hope that people will think of public schools as belonging to all of us, regardless of whether we have kids in the system, or have kids period.

I hope that we begin to view successful experiments, like good charter schools, as opportunities for evaluation and implementation of best practices.  Of course a larger percentage of charter schools are healthy learning environments, not because the teachers are all better but for the following reasons: charter schools are usually smaller and therefore more manageable; school charters require greater buy-in and contribution from parents; charter schools have the freedom to create cohesive school cultures surrounding issues of local interest and imperative (i.e. Hawaiian language and cultural immersion schools); the choice and freedom in charter schools often allow for a greater sense of ownership by teachers, students, and administrators; and whether conversion schools or new, charter schools are often built using innovations that have been tested and found effective in older, larger, and more overwhelmed regular DOE schools.

Now it is time to reverse the flow of innovation and use charter schools as laboratories for what might work in larger DOE schools.  Let leaders of schools, government, and community focus on building a strong sense of school family, or ohana, in every public school with less tracking, smaller class sizes, smaller learning groups within the classroom, and family-style attention to the whole child.  Let’s think about how to get the community more actively involved in public schools, find new ways for families to participate and share in the culture of the school, and bring the kids out into the community more.  Let’s work to offer free after school, extended year, and parent-enrichment programs, and have school event daycare options for single and overworked parents.  Let’s think of our public schools as the center—the beating heart—of our communities.   Go check out the film, by all means, but then let’s keep talking. With mighty love,

Maya

While I have my own issues with the movie, I too agree with Soetoro-Ng; the movie is worth seeing due to its compelling appeal to spark dialogue. Look at what's happening now in the education reform debate since the release of this film! Unfortunately, this movie has become another exploitative tool to push anti-public school and anti-teacher union propaganda being endorsed by so-called experts, including her big brother and his incompetent Secretary of Education. Thankfully, in spite of her White House connection, Soetoro-Ng hasn't forgotten where she comes from; also, she is a proponent of village accountability. These alone are refreshing...:)

Revised: The Evolution of the Charter School Movement...Originated from Educators, Tainted by Corporations

Disclaimer: Due to some technical problems causing the sudden erasure of half my initial blog entry on this topic, while editing it this morning, here is the new and revised blog entry below. Enjoy...

A few days ago, via Facebook, I came across this article written by renowned education historian, Diane Ravitch. In an eloquent, yet detailed manner, she gave a critical analysis of the movie, Waiting For Superman, challenging misconceptions about public and charter schools, as well as false information being dubbed as factual. Perhaps what grabbed my attention the most is what she stated about origins of charter schools:


The film never acknowledges that charter schools were created mainly at the instigation of Albert Shanker, the president of the American Federation of Teachers from 1974 to 1997. Shanker had the idea in 1988 that a group of public school teachers would ask their colleagues for permission to create a small school that would focus on the neediest students, those who had dropped out and those who were disengaged from school and likely to drop out. He sold the idea as a way to open schools that would collaborate with public schools and help motivate disengaged students. In 1993, Shanker turned against the charter school idea when he realized that for-profit organizations saw it as a business opportunity and were advancing an agenda of school privatization. Michelle Rhee gained her teaching experience in Baltimore as an employee of Education Alternatives, Inc., one of the first of the for-profit operations.


WHAT? WAIT! I DIDN'T KNOW THAT!

Albert Shanker

Of course, I have heard of the late great Al Shanker (biography), the legendary president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the second largest teachers union in America. But I didn't know this. Wow! Elated, I was inspired to inquire more about Shanker's role in the formation of charter schools...and it was a personal lesson learned for me

Dr. Ray Budde

From my research, I discovered several things. First, Shanker didn't first come up with the idea of charter schools; it was originated by the late Dr. Ray Budde (biography), a former teacher, principal, and education professor in Massachusetts. As a teacher, Shanker had serious issues with school administration who were giving young teachers a difficult time; hence, these teachers' passions were being destroyed. After stumbling across Budde's idea of public schools being freed from state and local bureaucracies and basically run by unionized teachers, Shanker, as AFT President, began sharing Budde's idea publicly, first in the spring of 1988 at the National Press Club.


Shortly after, educator reformers in Minnesota sought Shanker in helping with the establishment and implementation of charter schools. In fact, Minnesota became the first state to pass a charter school law in 1991, paving the way for now 40 others states, including Puerto Rico and District of Columbia, to pass similar laws. However, these reformers altered the original intent of charter schools to foster competition with public schools, utilize a more business-like operational approach, and remove not only LEA control, but also collective bargaining ties by the teachers unions. It was then that Shanker began to change his position and advocate against every charter schools idea that didn't include collective bargaining initiatives. Even today, years after Shanker's death in 1997, teachers unions are vehemently against the current charter school movement.


Thus, the idea of charter schools evolved...


...from Budde's idea:

Ray Budde's proposal was actually for a restructuring of the district: for moving from "a four-level line and staff organization" to "a two-level form in which groups of teachers would receive educational charters directly from the school board" and would carry the responsibility for instruction. It dealt with existing schools. It was the concept that Paul Hill later called the 'contract district'; that the Education Commission of the States later termed the ‘all-charter district'. ~ From Ray Budde and the origin of the "charter concept" by T. Kolderie

...and Shanker's input:

Shanker expanded on [Budde's] idea by proposing that teachers start schools new (though within existing school buildings). But like Budde, Shanker simply put his idea out there; did not move to implement it.

~ From Ray Budde and the origin of the "charter concept" by T. Kolderie

In his writing and speeches, Shanker outlined a system where educators would have greater autonomy to develop an innovative school proposal and receive a "charter" from an official government body to implement the plan. Regulations that stood in the way of the proposal would be waived, and the school would control its budget. It would be a publicly funded and non-discriminatory school of choice, where parents would choose to send their children and where teachers would choose to work. Periodic evaluations would ascertain if pre-determined goals were met and if the charter should be extended (Shanker, July 1988). This proposed "autonomy for accountability" arrangement was nothing less than the working definition of a charter school, some form of which now exists in 40 states. ~ From The Grinding Battle with Circumstance: Charter Schools and the Potential of School-Based Collective Bargaining by J. Gyruko
 
... to the current charter school movement:

      But charters only took off because others radicalized the charter concept Budde had devised. Reading Shanker’s column, Joe Nathan and Ted Kolderie, at work on educational reform in Minnesota, saw potential in the charter idea. Delighted that the powerful Al Shanker had given it his blessing, they invited him to the Twin Cities to help peddle it to Governor Rudy Perpich and the state’s legislature.
     But as they worked on the legislation that was eventually passed in 1991, Nathan and Kolderie fundamentally altered the charter concept.  According to the Budde model, charters were to be authorized by school districts and run by teachers. Central office administrators were to be pushed aside, but charter schools would still operate within collective bargaining arrangements negotiated between districts and unions.
     Nathan and Kolderie instead proposed that schools be authorized by statewide agencies that were separate and apart from local district control. That opened charter doors not only to teachers but also to outside entrepreneurs. Competition between charters and districts was to be encouraged.  All of a sudden, charter schools were free of the constraints imposed by collective bargaining contracts districts negotiated with unions.
     At this point, Shanker signed off, calling charters a “gimmick,” and teacher unions ever since have done their best to slow the movement down, insisting that charters be authorized only if local districts agree, as well as burdening charters with numerous regulations, including a requirement that they be subject to collective bargaining.  For Shanker and his heirs, the collective bargaining agreement always came first.
~ From No, Al Shanker Did Not Invent The Charter School by P. Peterson

While never abandoning collective bargaining, it is noteworthy to note that Shanker advocated for increased professionalism in the classroom by pushing for similar agendas that so-called experts are demanding for today, including

• National board certification for teachers
• High academic standards for all students
• Accountability for results
• Peer review among teachers
• Minimum competency tests for new teachers
• Team approach in school organization and management
• Cooperative learning
• Individualized and participatory instruction
• Use of technology
• Focus on other professional issues

Even today, years after Shanker's death in 1997, teachers unions are fighting for not only better working conditions and labor relations for its members, but also for better professional opportunities to improve in their craft.

One of the famous quotes by Shanker is this: When school children start paying union dues, that's when I'll start representing the interests of school children. This may sound condescending, but he was doing his job by representing the interests of those who paid his salary...the teachers and other school personnel. However, I am a firm believer that if school and district administrators would fully support and encourage their teachers the best way they can, then the teachers will give their best to their students. It would be a win-win situation. Unfortunately that is not the case. Therefore, while teacher unions are not perfect, we teachers need them to protect us and provide us with a professional voice.

UPDATE: I just came across an interesting blog entry by Queens Teacher detailing how well-known charter schools in NYC are funded. All the donors hail from, you guess it...WALL STREET! This is further proof that the education reform propaganda being pushed by, as the blogger described as "ed deformers", is about money and making more money and not about the kids.

Here we go again...It was just a matter of time...

History repeats itself because nobody listens. ~ Laurence Peter

About two months ago, the LA Times published a database system using students test scores to rate the effectiveness of teachers. This was a demoralizing and humiliating act against teachers to intentionally mislead the public and push propaganda for the current charter school movement. It spark outrage and dissensions from the local teacher union, as well as other educators and critics nationwide. Unfortunately, Rigoberto Ruelas, a 14-yr veteran elementary school teacher in Los Angeles who was rated as an ineffective teacher, committed suicide allegedly due to the pressure and stress at work since the publication of his rating in the newspaper. While it is possible that there was more to the story concerning his mental state, this incident  may have definitely pushed him to the edge.

Now the madness has spread onto the East Coast, starting in the Big Apple. On tomorrow, the NYC DOE will release to reporters the value-added method ratings of 12,000 public school teachers who teach grades 3-8 reading and math. So once again, the public will be misinformed again and be allowed to scrutinize teachers based on an unreliable, subjective statistical analysis of students test scores. Currently the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), the  teachers union in NYC, is planning  to file a law suit to prevent the DOE from doing this.  We will have to wait and see how all of this will unfold. Nevertheless, this is the beginning phase of using another propagandized tool against teachers. The nation will be watching as other major cities throughout the country will strive to emulate this as well. Mark my words; this is coming to a city near you in the future.

Despite the somber news, in his recent blog entry, acclaimed high school teacher Stephen Lazar, who teaches in the Bronx, showed some solidarity and added a more positive, yet encouraging spin to the drama as he spoke out against this move by the DOE. Unfortunately, Mr. Lazar, the public will not be paying much attention to your blog entry. But thanks anyhow for your kind and sincere words of support.

More to follow...

UPDATE: The Washington Post reported late this evening the UFT has succeed in delaying the public release of the value-added test score rating analyses of their teachers, at least until November! HOORAY! Also, check out the most recent Shanker Blog entry on this issue...very good yet informative read.

"Give Me A Chance"...Improving Teacher Quality Cannot Be Rushed

Motivation is what get you started. Habit is what keeps you going. ~ Jim Rohn

I woke up this morning, and after counting my blessings, two questions popped up in my mind. These questions blew my mind and excited me to ponder further. Later this afternoon, I came across an excellent article; while it stressed the need for village accountability, this article also help me to appreciate my epiphany questions even more. So, what were those questions? They were these:

Can a teacher become "effective" overnight? If so, how?

Apparently, the so-called experts and fans of the movie, Waiting for Superman, believe teachers have one shot only to get it right. If they don't, then they will be out of a job. Also, they believe effective teaching equates in being strong in content knowledge only; in one cartoon scene in the movie, it shows a teacher, in a schematic sense, open the minds of each of her students and pour alphabet soup, representing knowledge, in their minds. Wow! I wish I knew teaching would be that easy!

Those of us who know better believe otherwise. Teaching can be so rewarding and fulfilling. However, teaching is a tough job; ask Tony Danza. Or better yet, ask Geoffrey Canada, who was profiled extensively in the movie. In the movie, Mr. Canada, a former teacher, stated his first two years of teaching were the hardest, but during his third year, he began to show growth and progressed into a Master Teacher some years later. Yet, he is one of the main one pushing for this "one shot" teacher evaluation process in an effort of removing ineffective teachers. Oh the irony! Surely, as an educator, he forgot where he came from.

Indeed, there are some teachers who don't care to improve in their craft; they have no sympathy from me as they should be removed from the classroom. However, most teachers want to improve in their pedagogical skills and enhance their content knowledge. This requires an personal investment of time, effort, and finances from the teacher, along with support, patience, and resources from the school leaders. While time is of the essence, good things come to those who wait. While I am not condoning experimenting with children's lives and risking school progress, teachers, especially novices, need time for professional growth; one school year isn't enough.

I can't tell you the countless stories I've read and heard from teachers who worked hard in preparing their students for these mandated, high-stakes tests to only see a small percentage of them pass these tests. How demoralizing and heart-breaking it is to be in that type of situation? If the so-called experts have their way, those teachers would be fired at the end of the school year. These teachers wouldn't be given a chance to grow and improve in their craft. All of the years of pre-service training and attaining their teaching credentials would have been done in vain. What a waste of potential...

Nonetheless, the excellent article I touted earlier made several important points about the emphasis of improving teacher quality:

• Teaching quality is the most important IN-SCHOOL factor in improving student achievement
• Other in-school factors e.g., quality of school leadership, quality of the curriculum, and teacher collaboration efforts, are also influential in improving student achievement
• "Decades of social science research have demonstrated that differences in the quality of schools can explain about one-third of the variation in student achievement. But the other two-thirds is attributable to NON-SCHOOL factors."
• "...test scores can be influenced by so many other factors besides good teaching."
• "Even the highest-quality teachers cannot fully insulate their students from the effects of" POVERTY as well as family issues and other societal ills.

One of my earlier blog entries criticized these so-called experts on education reform for rushing in finding solutions to a very complex problem that involves multiple factors. In one of my more recent blog entries, I further accused these so-called experts of treating student learning as a mere product to market to parents. Nonetheless, the propaganda of scapegoating teachers and their unions being pushed by these so-called experts, like the most recent publication of their "manifesto", has greatly hindered education reform, not progress it. Yet, the public and other high-prolific personalities continue to eat this up.

Educators, we TRULY know what will it take to improve the learning process in our schools; yet we continue to be ridiculed and minimized to anything but the professionals that we are. We must continue to combat the propaganda and educate the public on our take of the debate by being vocal and sharing our perspectives and expertise with the public. One way of doing so is to participate in the upcoming Education Communication Day on October 29, 2010, spearheaded by SOS Million Teachers March. Also, don't forget to vote on November 2!

In closing, if a struggling teacher shows potential in becoming more effective, give him/her a chance to grow and learn the craft. In the midst of teacher shortages in critical areas like secondary math, secondary science, and special education, as well as the recent budget cuts in education and layoffs of thousands of teachers, it would be prudent and more cost-effective in finding ways to retain the teachers they have. These growth habits in teaching should be allowed to blossom, not destroyed with the weeds. Using the so-called experts' approach of removing teachers may include losing potentially effective teachers. There is always room for improvement in teaching quality, but these improvements were not meant to be rushed and should not be rushed. Teachers, like every other professional, need time to crawl before they walk, during pre-service and especially in-service.

The purpose of learning is growth, and our minds, unlike our bodies, can continue growing as we continue to live. ~ Mortimer Adler

But, hey, what do I know?

Profile: Teach Tony Danza

I touch the future. I teach. ~ Christa McAuliffe

For biography, click here; also, for more info on the show, click here.

With over thirty years in the show business as an actor, a singer, a talk show host, and a boxer, Tony Danza has decided to take on his "biggest challenge" yet -- a teacher. A real teacher, not an actor being a teacher. THE REAL DEAL!



Last school year, under the guidance of an instructional coach, Mr. Danza taught 10th-grade English at Northeast High School, one of Philadelphia's largest inner city schools. His experiences has been chronicled for the new reality TV show, Teach Tony Danza, which premiered October 1 on A&E. When I first heard about this earlier this year, I was initially unfazed. Now, due to the heated national debate on education reform, I have become more curious about how was it like for him and whether or not I can relate to his experiences. Despite the criticisms of this show being a big gimmick, since I have yet to see the show, I am willing to give it a chance for three reasons:

1. It's about the day and life of a teacher in a real classroom at a PUBLIC school.
2. While he is a celebrity, he is not as well-known to this generation, i.e., his students
3. I am curious to see the extent of the struggles he endured during his time in the classroom

As he reflected on his experiences, Mr. Danza said teaching is overwhelming and harder than one thinks. He is right. My first few years of teaching were difficult for me as well. But the story of concept of the show came about is more compelling:

Mr. Danza, despite what others may say, I am glad you sacrifice roles and other opportunities to do this. I hope you would consider advocating for teachers and students in the education reform debate. It would be awesome to see the so-called experts follow your example and devote one year to teaching in a public school. I heart you on Who's The Boss! I loved that show growing up. I always considered you as a fine actor and positive celebrity role model. Now, I respect you more not just for teaching, but also your sincere desire to give back. So, thank you, Mr. Danza; kudos to you!

Despite missing all episodes so far, I plan to watch the new episode tonight and play catch up later. Nevertheless, I encourage every educator to support this show and give it a chance.