Sunday, September 16, 2007

System Failure by Eli Broad Critiqued

There is such a load of crap in here from Broad that one doesn't know where to begin. And such praise for BloomKlein. Check to see if reforms such as class size are mentioned. (Just a joke).

Broad's simple solution:

If our system of public education is to adequately prepare every student in thiscountry for college, for work and life, we need to start with a system that works, including nationwide standards, a longer school day and school year, and leaders who can transform the governance and management of a school district.

Wow! We're there. Things must be great. And it didn't really cost all that much.

Here's one paragraph (see full article below).

Unfortunately, mired in bureaucracy, many urban districts today have dysfunctional organizations that cannot perform even the most basic operations. Consider the Los Angeles Unified School District, which employs more than 77,000 people. When the district tried to implement a new $86 million payroll system, a series of computer failures and insufficient staff training resulted in employees receiving paychecks that were either too large or too small–or not receiving them at
all. The problems helped boost the cost to $132 million.


To use our own business analogy -- does anyone remember the constant fiascoes at IBM when it tried to start a personal computer business? or the amazing number of business errors Microsoft has made? and who was that masked man who prosecuted Microsoft for unfair monopolistic business practices?

How many fiascoes have we seen under BloomKlein -- but here they are bumps in the road. Who will prosecute Klein?

Broad compares the size of NYC school system to Sun Microsystems, Continental Air and Eastman Kodak -- funny, 3 companies that have suffered through enormous business difficulties - I know - I have Sun stock.

AND THIS ONE --MUST BE A JOKE

Consider the St. Louis Public Schools, which mapped out its daily school-bus schedule on an
archaic corkboard, outlining the routes with push pins and yarn.
When a business consultant working with the district questioned the logic of the system, he uncovered a state-of-the-art computer program still shrink-wrapped and tucked in a storage closet.


BROAD MANAGED TO AVOID COMPARING THE STATE OF THE ART CONSULTANTS IN NYC - THE SAME ONES IN ST. LOUIS - WHO DID SUCH A BANG UP JOB ON THE NYC BUS SCHEDULES.


DEMOCRACY: A Journal of Ideas
http://www.democracyjournal.org/
Issue #6, Fall 2007

System Failure by Eli Broad

Shaking up the bureaucracy is the first step to improving America's schools.
A response to Jason Kamras and Andrew Rotherham.

Eli Broad

and Andrew Few professions in this country strike as deep a chord as teaching. Everyone has a warm memory that they can attribute to a teacher who made an impression on their youth. So it was no surprise that Jason KamrasRotherham held up the responsibility and credit for public education’s future to the need to attract the right teachers with the right talents, pay them competitively, and equip them with the necessary tools to do their jobs ["America’s Teaching Crisis," Issue #5]. Few people will argue with the importance of having the right people in the teaching profession. When they’re successful, they’re enormously successful. And when you’ve got a dud in the classroom, you have pretty much guaranteed that you will handicap about 30 kids for a year.

But Kamras and Rotherham miss a critical point in their argument, and that is the system in which teachers work. To use a business analogy, this would be akin to saying that regardless of the top management at a company and the systems and tools in place in that organization, the line workers are the determining factor in whether the company turns a profit. Are they important to the bottom line? Absolutely. But without the right systems–the leadership at the top and critical systems in place throughout the organization–success is, at best, left to chance. That’s why shareholders demand good governance and operational systems from public corporations. When it comes to American public education, every citizen is a shareholder in how successfully schools educate our children–and we must demand more in how our schools are governed and run.

Improving the quality of teaching, as Kamras and Rotherham argue, is important. But how do you ensure that you have the right teacher in the right classroom? How do you give them the tools–like curriculum, benchmark assessments, and pacing guides–that, across the board, will move an entire grade level, school, or school district in the same direction at the same time? How do you measure their success? These are the underlying problems facing American public education. The real issue in today’s public schools is the utter failure, at a systemic level, to create high-performing, well-functioning organizations, without which even the best teachers cannot do their best.

The largest urban school districts are the size of a Fortune 500 company. The New York City Department of Education has a bigger budget, more employees and more facilities than companies like Eastman Kodak, Sun Microsystems, or Continental Airlines. Unfortunately, mired in bureaucracy, many urban districts today have dysfunctional organizations that cannot perform even the most basic operations. Consider the Los Angeles Unified School District, which employs more than 77,000 people. When the district tried to implement a new $86 million payroll system, a series of computer failures and insufficient staff training resulted in employees receiving paychecks that were either too large or too small–or not receiving them at all. The problems helped boost the cost to $132 million. Or consider the St. Louis Public Schools, which mapped out its daily school-bus schedule on an archaic corkboard, outlining the routes with push pins and yarn. When a business consultant working with the district questioned the logic of the system, he uncovered a state-of-the-art computer program still shrink-wrapped and tucked in a storage closet. And each fall, districts across the country start the school year without a principal or enough teachers at every school, because their recruitment cycles start so late in the spring and summer that the best candidates already have accepted jobs elsewhere. Stories like these abound around the country. They are absurd. Yet because the problems are deeply rooted in bureaucratic systems and a historic culture of low expectations, they’re tough to fix.

That said, there are cases that show what can be achieved by even the largest bureaucracies through systematic structural changes. In addition to being the largest school system in the country, New York City’s is also one of the most closely watched because of the dramatic reform that has taken place over the past five years. Buoyed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s successful bid for control of the city’s schools, Chancellor Joel Klein – best known as the federal attorney who successfully prosecuted Microsoft–has displayed the bold leadership and entrepreneurship required to turn around such a large-scale, underperforming enterprise. Klein and Bloomberg ended the controversial practice of social promotion, moving children to the next grade even if they were not academically ready. They have implemented a new "Autonomy Zone," in which principals who set high goals and meet them are given more freedom in exchange for greater accountability. And through successful negotiations, Klein and the teachers’ union agreed to no longer allow teachers with "unsatisfactory" ratings to transfer from one school to another.

Boston Public Schools is another success story. The oldest district in the nation recently overhauled its human resources department after decades of complaints about bureaucracy, non-responsiveness, and ineffective and time-consuming pen-and-paper application processes. The solution, implemented by Harvard MBA Michelle Boyers, is an online application and hiring system to reduce paperwork. The result is that more teachers are now applying to work in Boston. And more teachers are staying longer than a few years. Does that systemic reform benefit teachers? You bet.

Or consider Chicago Public Schools, another big-city district with an appetite for reform. When another newly hired Harvard MBA, Monica Santana Rosen, was stumped by her inability to get someone on the phone to answer questions about her medical benefits, she put her experience into action and established a better system: Employees now have an appointment when they come to the HR Employee Service Center. The department explains forms to groups of new employees, rather than one at a time. And an employee who calls to speak to a human resources representative is never on hold for more than 20 seconds.

These seem like simple, common-sense solutions. But they affect an entire district of teachers and, ultimately, the children they serve. A teacher who spends less time on bureaucratic paperwork has more time to spend in the classroom. These deeply rooted district systems were upended when fresh eyes saw the problem in a new light. And that’s why my foundation–which recruited and placed both Boyers and Rosen in school districts through our residency program–has worked to bring about systemic reform of America’s education system through improving the governance and management of our public schools.

Thanks to John Lawhead for passing Broad's article along.

Saturday, September 15, 2007

Welcome Baaaack! - Norm Scott in The Wave

The School Scope column

Sept. 7
www.rockawave.com
(The Wave has been Rockaway's community newspaper since 1893. Norm took over the column from current editor Howard Schwach in Sept. 2003.)

Even though I wrote a column for the Wave’s special education edition two weeks ago, this feels like the first column of the new school year – the year of Power to the Principal – with the BloomKlein theme of “If it goes wrong, we know whom to blame.” One would think education issues would be dormant with schools closed. Not so. With an endless summer of retirement, I was still very busy writing for the Education Notes Online blog that I run. I need a vacation.

Well, here are some of the things I covered in the past week or so.

What's the Real Difference Marcia Lyles?
Marcia Lyles, Joel Klein's deputy chancellor for teaching and learning, following on the heels of Diana Lam, Carmen Farina (Lyles took over for Farina when she left Region 8) and Andres Alonso (now chief of the Baltimore school system,) gave a revealing interview to Jennifer Medina in the NY Times.

One of the 4 superintendents chosen in the latest reorganization, about 12% of the schools signed up with Lyles before her promotion. How do you think they feel now that she’s gone? Quick, maybe Kathy Cashin can grab them for her Knowledge Network (described by one blogger on the first day this way: “We stuck with Cashin and everything is "Core Knowledge this, Core Knowledge That, best thing since sliced bread, Yada, yada, yada.")

Lyles’ story is that she spent her entire career as a teacher and supervisor in the NYC schools. Long-time observers of the ed/political scene see her (and her predecessors) as figureheads for the MBA types looking for bottom-line narrow test results who are really driving teaching and learning. Lyles almost admits as much when she says:

"When the music changes, so does the dance.”
“I learned all the new steps,” she said. “I just moved with the changes, that’s what you have to do.”

Medina writes:
“While some teachers and principals say the Klein administration desperately needs an educator’s voice in a headquarters packed with lawyers and consultants who have little patience for the city’s education establishment, they question whether Ms. Lyles is aggressive enough to be heard.”

But the most revealing part of the interview was Lyles’ own childhood experiences. As a high school student at the dreadful Benjamin Franklin HS in East Harlem, she cut school regularly – until an aunt found out. Medina writes:

“Convinced that the school was too easy, her aunt, who was raising her, forced her to transfer from Benjamin Franklin High School to Jamaica High School, making an hour long trip to and from Queens near the end of her sophomore year. There, Ms. Lyles was shocked to learn that after being in the top of her class at Franklin, which was largely black and Hispanic, and finding school so easy that she could skip out, she was struggling to keep up at what was then a largely white Jamaica High.

“It was her first lesson in the problem that still preoccupies the nation’s largest school system — the racial achievement gap.”

Joel Klein (and Bloomberg) have seized on this issue, trying to play the race card by turning it into a civil rights struggle and calling the inability to close this gap "the shame of this nation." Bunk. Want to know about shame? Try their refusal to do the things that might work – like lower class size or give schools resources they need instead of throwing so much money away on useless staff development and high priced reorganization schemes.

Ironically, Jamaica HS was recently placed in the list of most dangerous schools and will probably suffer the same fate Benjamin Franklin did. What has changed at Jamaica from Lyles' student days? Analyzing how that school is turning into what Benjamin Franklin was would provide some interesting data for the MBA's at Tweed to crunch.

Lyles said, “I just thought, wow, what’s the difference?” she recalled of Jamaica High. “What’s going on, now I have to play catch up? That’s when I saw about inequity, that’s when I saw about low expectations.”

There it is. She was just a victim of the low expectations by the teachers at Franklin while she somehow escaped the low expectations of teachers at Jamaica. In other words, racism.
Next, she'll parrot the Klein line by telling us that if the teachers at Benjamin Franklin had gotten merit pay things would have been different. Or maybe they should have paid the kids to study like Bloomberg wants to do. Life is so simple when you know all the answers.

What was the impact of the role Lyles' aunt played? The chorus of teacher blamers seems to ignore the little bitty factor of family support.

Did the fact that Lyles was now in a better learning environment without being surrounded by other students who were struggling make a bit of a difference? Did the fact that the students at Benjamin Franklin clearly needed so many more resources than the white students at Jamaica - more guidance counselors, lower class sizes, etc. to make up the gap mean anything at all?

If Lyles publicly recognized these issues, that would be an admission that no matter how many times BloomKlein reorganize, or manipulate test scores, things will not change until there is a willingness to spend the money needed to make a real difference rather than rely on gimmicks. The refusal of BloomKlein to take any of these factors into account and just close down schools while blaming the teachers is the true shame of the nation – and their administration.
Marcia Lyles won't go there. She has learned to dance to whatever tune is playing.


How Weingarten Helped Undermine Almontaser
“I agree wholeheartedly with your editorial,” – Randi Weingarten in a letter to the NY Post

"...The campaign against Almontaser was a “high-tech lynching.” – Rabbi Michael Paley, scholar-in-residence at United Jewish Appeal-Federation of New York

"If it was a lynching, my union did not string up the rope, but it was the UFT that kicked away the stool." - Steve Quester, UFT chapter leader

The Indypendent (weekly newspaper) has printed an updated version "Teachers’ Union Undermines Arab School" of Steve Quester's piece published on my blog. Steve, a UFT chapter leader in Brooklyn, goes into more detail on the role Randi Weingarten played. I received lots of response on this issue with people arguing back and forth as to whether a school such as the Khalil Gibran school should even exist, from rational points of view like those of Diane Ravitch (it is a huge mistake--contrary to the philosophy of American public education--to establish schools that have an ethnic or religious focus. The purpose of public education is to prepare young people to participate fully in American society), to the right wing calling the school a training ground for Bin Laden and a madrassa. The usual suspects showed up on the blog – anonymous personal attacks on Quester.

People have assumed that because I published Quester's piece, I support the concept of the school. But I have mixed feelings. A this point my interest lies in the way Bloomberg and Klein and Weingarten, the holy trio, known on my blog as BloomWeinKlein, functioned in this situation. While all three express support for the school, the results of their actions have undermined the school – sort of like the “wide stance” argument made by that Republican Senator from Idaho.

Two weeks ago I wrote that whatever Tweed touches turns to doo-doo. And so it has. And by the reaction of a vocal minority of teachers, many of them Jewish, Weingarten has the same magic touch.


NY Times does another puff piece on Klein
Joel Klein has been doing a media blitz, even saying he wants to remain beyond Bloomberg’s term in office to finish the job of driving the entire NYC school system into oblivion so it could be “rescued” by privateers. (Thousands of teachers had to be talked down from their roofs upon hearing this news.) The make-nice to BloomKlein NY Times did its usual thing, prompting this response on my blog piece from Vera Pavone, a former NYC teacher and school secretary:

“My blood started to boil when I read the article, especially because it shows the Times and their lackey reporters continuing to give credibility to the big lies:

1. "He [Klein] has sought to break what he regarded as a vise grip by the teachers' union on work rules”;
“Can't experienced reporters Herszenhorn and Medina find anyone (union leaders, teachers, other people in the educational community) who can explain how work rules actually benefit students and the educational environment?

2. "To divide large failing schools into small schools" and "to put traditional public schools into competition with charter schools"

“Couldn't H & M read their own publication to find out all the questions that have been raised about small schools and charter schools actually being more successful: getting a higher achieving pool of students and eliminating students with special needs; getting a disproportionate share of resources; forcing the larger, traditional schools to be even more overcrowded and receiving those students who have the least chance of succeeding.

3. "To end what he viewed as a monopoly by the mostly white, middle and upper middle class on good public education services"

“Do H & M really believe that Klein and Bloomberg are the champions of the non-white, non-middle class children just as the Bush administration and NCLB really want to equalize educational opportunity nationwide? Has their investigative reporting shown that quality educational services exist only in white, middle and upper middle class public schools? Do they believe that test scores tell the whole story? Even if it's true that on average teachers in higher achieving schools have more "credentials", this doesn't explain why so many highly skilled, educated, talented, and hardworking teachers don't produce higher test scores in failing schools. Both H & M have been writing about education for some time now and should be able to recognize that "good public education services" have to be suited to the needs of the students, something that is very rare now for any of our students, rich or poor, white or non-white.

“And did I miss it, or did they forget to mention class size?”

Thursday, September 13, 2007

The Charter School Flood

by MICHAEL TISSERAND

[from the September 10, 2007 issue]

http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20070910&s=tisserand

Rob Wyman says he couldn't field any more questions about error-filled report cards, so he made this sign and tacked it onto his office bulletin board: "We are sorry. We did not do the report cards. We don't know how the problems happened. We do not know how to fix the problems."

He knew it was not the best way to explain to angry high school students why they hadn't received accurate credit for their work. But incorrect report cards weren't the worst problem at Joseph T. Clark High School, one of approximately twenty-five schools that were operated during the past school year by the State of Louisiana in the so-called Recovery School District (RSD) in New Orleans.

Wyman, the school's guidance counselor, pulled open his top desk drawer and took out a sheet of paper that was covered with hand-drawn squares and arrows. In his spare time, he said, he has been devising escape routes from the school in case of a fire. The school hasn't had a drill all year, he said. "The students have no idea where to go. The teachers have no idea where to go. Here's the kicker: We have kids in wheelchairs on the second floor, and I'm afraid for their safety."

As he spoke, groups of students milled about in the hallway outside his office, near the school's metal detectors. Some of the students in the building were taking the LEAP test--the state's high-stakes exam that monitors schools' progress and decides if a student will be promoted to the next grade. For those who had already taken the test during a previous session, holding rooms had been assigned. The rooms weren't monitored by the students' regular teachers, and students were periodically popping into Wyman's office, saying they didn't have any work and pleading to use the phone to call their parents or guardians to come pick them up. He declined each request in apologetic tones. "My job isn't to help you leave school," he said to one student.

Wyman spent his lunch break leading me on a tour through the school. When we reached an upstairs classroom, William Perkinson waved us in. Perkinson readily acknowledged he had never taught before he came to Clark; he had a college degree but no teaching training or credentials. He just answered an ad in the paper. When he arrived at the school, he walked into a room filled with students doubly traumatized by Katrina and ongoing street violence. "A month ago, one of my students and his brother were shot," he said. "I asked the kids in class the following day if they had any other friends who'd been shot and killed. They called out names and I wrote them on the board. There were eighteen names. I don't know how these kids are handling it."

Perkinson is like many of the new teachers I met in New Orleans over the past year: intelligent, compassionate, overwhelmed. Public-education advocates frequently complained to me that inexperienced teachers in New Orleans found themselves in front of classrooms filled with unfamiliar students, with neither formal written assessments of kids with special needs nor the benefit of experienced teachers in the building who might know the kids and their stories. A lack of formal assessments violates the federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, which states that schools must provide special-needs students with an Individualized Education Program, or IEP. By referring to the IEP, a teacher and an aide can quickly assess a student's needs and offer appropriate lessons. Jim Randels, a veteran teacher at Frederick Douglass High School--also an RSD school--said that his school was 20 percent special education before Katrina but that IEPs are a rarity now. Perkinson confirmed that IEPs were not available to him. "I don't know anything," Perkinson said. "I don't know who's who, what's what. I don't know who's special ed, who's not."

As part of the state takeover of New Orleans's public schools, Clark is but one battleground in what some are calling an education revolution. Parts of the flooded city were still closed off to residents when, in November 2005, the Louisiana legislature cleared the way for the state to assume control of 107 out of 128 schools in the Orleans district. The act clearly targeted New Orleans, which was one of the few districts in the state with enough "academically unacceptable" schools to trigger the takeover. A majority of New Orleans's legislators voted against the act. Immediately, the state began converting many of its newly acquired schools to charter schools--publicly funded schools run by for-profit or nonprofit groups that operate by a "charter," or contract.

Although the overall recovery of New Orleans has been frustratingly slow, the restructuring of its schools happened nearly overnight. A public district formerly governed by an elected school board and its hired superintendent splintered into city charters, state charters, parish-run selective admission schools and state-run district schools. Parents struggling to make their way back to the city are often shocked to learn that the familiar school down the street is closed to their children because it is now either a charter or filled to capacity with children from across the city. Violence has erupted when students from different sections of the city have found themselves thrown into the same building. "In the two schools where I teach, there are now students from a dozen different schools," Randels says.

In January the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported the startling news that hundreds of children had been "wait-listed"--denied entrance to any school--because there were no seats available in any RSD buildings. Yet this number likely doesn't reflect the true number of young victims of the past school year. Lance Hill, executive director of the Southern Institute for Education and Research at Tulane University, told me about a conversation he had with a young woman who couldn't get into her former neighborhood school, which was now chartered. She was offered an RSD school, but because its location was traditionally hostile to kids from her part of town, she didn't feel it was a physically safe option. So she dropped out. When Hill met her, she was working at Wendy's. "The RSD is, without question, the worst school district in America," Hill says.

At a January rally at the state Capitol in Baton Rouge, public school students who organized as the Fyre Youth Squad spelled out the reasons. A light rain fell as students took turns at a microphone, telling stories of overcrowded classrooms and schools where the security-guard-to-student ratio was smaller than the teacher-to-student ratio.

"When John McDonogh Senior High School reopened after Hurricane Katrina, there were thirty-five security guards on staff and only twenty-three teachers," stated Joshua Short, an RSD student and Fyre Youth Squad member. "I felt like I was visiting one of my relatives in prison."

And at an anticrime march through downtown New Orleans earlier this year, students at L.E. Rabouin High School joined other protesters who carried pictures of friends and family members who were victims of the city's escalating violence. They were there to memorialize the school's popular bandleader, Dinerral Shavers, whose shooting death helped spark the rally. While a jazz musician led chants of "music in the schools," the Rabouin students spoke fondly of Shavers. They also lambasted their school's learning environment, which they said included still-frozen salami sandwiches for lunch. That's a familiar complaint from the past year, along with the lack of textbooks and an unchecked population of rats and roaches. "They run into the classroom and everyone cuts up," said one student.

The students' teacher Glenda McQueen brought them to the rally as part of a lesson on Martin Luther King's "Letter From Birmingham Jail." She didn't dispute their description of the school. "These kids are still recovering from the hurricane, trying to pull families together," she said. "It is like they are war-torn."

In New Orleans, the debate over the public schools centers on a question that's difficult to resolve: Which problems did the new school structure create, and which ones did it inherit? "There seems to be incredible amnesia in this community about what we had before," says Sarah Usdin, head of New Schools for New Orleans, a nonprofit teacher recruitment group. As has frequently been the case in New Orleans schools--which before Katrina cycled through superintendents at the rate of about one per year--leadership became a central issue. Following months of growing controversy over RSD school conditions and performance issues, the Times-Picayune called for RSD head Robin Jarvis to resign; she obliged in early May. The state tapped Philadelphia public schools superintendent Paul Vallas, whose first school year on the job will begin at the end of this summer.

The blossoming of new charter schools is frequently touted as the best hope for New Orleans. Still relatively young, charters were introduced in 1988 by American Federation of Teachers president Albert Shanker, who saw them as self-contained educational greenhouses for developing new ways of teaching. These innovations, he explained, could then be introduced districtwide. More recently, some advocates have argued that charters represent a superior way to run all public schools. Yet the results of national achievement tests have been inconclusive at best. Those wishing to forge ahead with a full-tilt charter revolution have also lacked a platform from which to launch their crusade. Then the floodwaters rose over New Orleans, sending some 65,000 public school students fleeing.

"This is the greenfield site that you never get in public education," says John Ayers, with the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, which contracted with the State of Louisiana to review groups that wished to open charter schools. Indeed, by the conclusion of the 2006-07 school year, more than 70 percent of the city's schools had become charter schools, far outpacing the rate in any other city.

The Bush Administration has been trumpeting the new schools as a New Orleans success story. In fact, charters were the Administration's second plan for New Orleans students. Immediately after the flood, Bush attempted a $500 million voucher program to allow displaced children to enroll in private and religious schools across the country. Critics saw the move as an attempt to exploit the disaster to finally enact vouchers, a longstanding Bush goal, and the initiative failed. There was no similar outcry when the US Department of Education pledged $44.8 million to Louisiana for post-Katrina charter schools. Yet the Administration left no doubt that the move was intended to quickly prop up charters: It offered no comparable funding to re-establish traditional neighborhood or district schools.

In addition to the federal money, charter schools also have benefited from an outpouring of nonprofit and corporate dollars that is massive by New Orleans public school standards. This past year, the Baptist Community Ministries, the state's largest private foundation, pledged $4.2 million specifically to help charter schools. The Laura Bush Foundation's impressive effort to rebuild school libraries along the Gulf Coast hasn't yet included any RSD schools, although numerous private and charter schools in New Orleans have received grants of up to $75,000 each. This influx of money has arguably led to an even greater inequity among public schools. One example: In a flattering profile of a French Quarter charter school run by the national Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP), Forbes magazine noted that thanks to corporate funding, the school can spend $1,500 more per student than it receives from federal and state funding. Donations to new KIPP schools in the city include $2 million from the Broad Education Foundation. "The most powerful foundations and wealthiest people are helping some schools succeed that conform to their vision of what schools should be," says Lance Hill. "It's an attempt to influence the outcomes of an experiment."

Although Bush makes infrequent trips to New Orleans--he left the struggles of the Gulf Coast out of his 2007 State of the Union address altogether--he never fails to use his appearances in the city to highlight the new schools. In March Bush stopped at Samuel J. Green Middle School, a well-regarded elementary school that had chartered before Katrina. "Charter schools, to me, say innovation, individuality," Bush declared before an audience of education leaders. Bush used his visit to the New Orleans school to lobby for the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, touting its emphasis on testing: "You can't guess, particularly when it comes to the life of a child."

Guesswork is now a hallmark of New Orleans schools, say critics including Jesse Jackson, who has made frequent trips to New Orleans to organize around education, housing and voting rights. "The charter school movement is privatization, which undermines public education," Jackson says. "Charter schools for a few must not displace public education for all. The students of New Orleans should not be put in a position of being guinea pigs in an experiment."

The appeal of charter schools to conservatives is evident: Charters introduce free-market competition into a traditional public institution. In the language of many charter advocates, parents are consumers and charters are product providers. The more schools on the shelf, the more options for parent shoppers. The problems of public education in the United States, then, aren't about underfunded schools or overcrowded classrooms. The fault lies with the classic flaws of big government: bloated bureaucracy and political corruption. Charter schools undermine big government, clearing the way for efficiency and innovation.

That argument is especially resonant in New Orleans, where just this summer a former school board president admitted she took more than $100,000 in bribes for supporting a particular math program. Yet charter critics say that the competitive model is failing the city's most at-risk students and creating a system that is even more segregated than before. By selective admissions, parental contracts and grade requirements, charter schools are able to "cream" their students not just by race and class but also by levels of parental involvement. If a child doesn't have parents or guardians willing or able to navigate the sometimes labyrinthine path into a charter school, that child will join the other, less fortunate students in an RSD school. "Many in New Orleans now refer to the RSD schools as 'the dumping ground,'" writes Leigh Dingerson of the Center for Community Change. "Such a set of catch-all schools is required in a free market system, because there must be a place for the kids who don't gain entry elsewhere."

Yet Ayers, who calls charter schools "liberation strategies," says that there is a progressive argument to be made for charters. Organizations like KIPP are developing vital strategies in inner-city education, he says, and not all charter-school proponents in New Orleans and elsewhere support the President and his educational policies. "The charter movement is dominated in the trenches by progressives, even when we've been represented on the national stage by conservatives," he says. To those who argue that charters amount to privatization of a public institution because some chartering organizations are for-profit groups, he counters that much of public education--from textbooks to cleaning services--is already privatized.

In 2000 Jonathan Schorr argued in these pages that progressives should not write off charter schools, and that "liberals need not abdicate their place on the educational cutting edge, and ought not be seen as defenders of bureaucracy and failure." Indeed, among the most vocal champions of New Orleans charters have been the city's most prominent Democrats. Senator Mary Landrieu has called charter schools the backbone of the city's educational renaissance. The senator's aunt, Orleans Parish School Board president Phyllis Landrieu, was even more ecstatic about the changes. "I say, 'Thank you, Katrina,' all the time," she told Time magazine at the start of the 2006-07 school year.

As president of the United Teachers of New Orleans (UTNO), Brenda Mitchell is used to being called a defender of failure, and worse. "We've been painted as obstructionists, which is not the case," she says, speaking amid folding chairs, file cabinets and solidarity signs, and the sound of drills and hammers, in the union's temporary offices in New Orleans. "I've been told that the union is trying to run the schools. All we are saying is that we should work together on this."

Mitchell estimates the union's pre-Katrina membership at 4,700, and UTNO was the exclusive bargaining agent for another 2,000 school employees. The union now has about 500 members, she says, and is working on organizing inside charter schools.

Those responsible for reshaping New Orleans schools make no apologies for being anti-union. In written testimony before a US Senate subcommittee hearing in July 2006, Linda Johnson, president of the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, listed this item as a positive "unintended consequence" of the state takeover: "This structure was the only way to terminate...central office employees, eliminate the collective bargaining agreement and leverage the opportunity to start anew." Ayers, of the National Association of Charter School Authorizers, is more succinct: "In the urban setting, the unions add so little value, it's shocking."

Mitchell, for her part, contends that unions are valuable not only because they give teachers a voice in the workplace but because they help prevent the kind of troubles that the RSD has faced in the past school year. Jim Randels says he's seen this firsthand as a teacher at Douglass. The union contract insured that a school's heating system was checked before winter. This year, that didn't happen--and Randels says the school had to shut down temporarily when winter came and the heater didn't function.

In December 2005 the Orleans Parish School Board voted to fire all teachers and other school employees. Many veteran teachers left the city or took early retirement. Not surprisingly, chief among the problems that plagued RSD schools this past year was a teacher shortage. "Our teachers were forced to retire. They want to come back, but not under these conditions--not without a recognition agreement with United Teachers of New Orleans," says Linda Stelly, an associate director with the American Federation of Teachers.

New Schools for New Orleans head Sarah Usdin has worked alongside union officials on previous projects in New Orleans schools. "My bottom line is that unionized or not, we need the best teachers to get the best results with kids," Usdin says. Yet some charter critics argue that new teacher-recruiting groups such as New Schools for New Orleans and teachNOLA are steering the most qualified educators only into the charter school system, further deepening the quality gap between RSD schools and charters. For much of this past school year, a teachNOLA website offered visitors a chance to identify themselves as certified or uncertified teachers. Those who identified themselves as certified were sent to a site for charter schools; those who were uncertified were sent to a site for RSD schools. Usdin says that the distinction was an unintended result of contract structuring. The site no longer divides the potential teaching pool in the same manner.

Usdin stresses that she is interested in bringing new teachers into New Orleans, especially from "the diaspora"--former New Orleanians who left the city after Katrina. She's not interested, she says, in shuffling teachers from school to school. Yet competition among schools for teachers seems fierce in the new school marketplace. Outside an uptown restaurant this spring, I heard one preschool teacher complaining about the conditions in her charter school. A neighborhood activist immediately began recruiting her for a charter he was helping to establish. Randels says he's personally seen representatives from charter schools enter RSD schools to recruit teachers, and adds that teachers have left their classes in the middle of the semester to take other positions, further disrupting classrooms. "This is no longer democracy; it's capitalism," Randels charges.

That ethos now permeates New Orleans public schools. Hal Roark is a resident in Broadmoor--a mixed-race, mixed-income neighborhood that organized itself after learning that it had been slated by a city-planning group to be converted into green space. Broadmoor residents realized that the neighborhood's recovery depended on the establishment of a public school. After researching various national charter companies, residents contracted with the for-profit Edison Schools. Yet it has been unable to secure a site in the neighborhood--even though a nearby school building has been open and unsecured since the storm and has suffered heavy losses due to post-Katrina vandalism. At the same time, Roark notices a former parochial school in the neighborhood and wonders if another group could place a charter in that building, siphoning off his new school's students. "Remember, this is a competitive model," he says.

If so, it's not always a transparent one. Sheila Williams works with the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition in New Orleans; she recalls that she and others were working with families in the Guste Housing Project to open a nearby RSD school. After months of speaking with RSD officials and organizing families in the effort, she learned from state education officials that the building was going to a charter group. "They can make as many charters as they want, but they need to stop giving away all the buildings," she says.

Yet in the new New Orleans, the option to charter is often seen as necessary to getting a neighborhood back on its feet--nowhere more so than in the city's heavily damaged Lower Ninth Ward. Before Katrina, the neighborhood's Martin Luther King Elementary School was an Orleans public school success story. When the region flooded, residents violated official orders and worked with the Common Ground activist group to enter and clean the building. Neither the city nor the state, it seemed, had any interest in reopening the school. "The reality check is that the schools below Canal Street were X-ed off the map," says Cynthia Willard-Lewis, who represents the area on the City Council.

And so principal Doris Hicks, Willard-Lewis says, was given a choice between two "wrong" options: charter or go away. Hicks now appears in advertisements for New Schools for New Orleans that champion the autonomy of charter schools.

At a parade through the Lower Ninth this past Martin Luther King Jr. Day, the scene was of a community refusing to give up. Children from the Martin Luther King Charter School, temporarily located in an uptown New Orleans building, marched past flood-stained empty houses carrying signs that stated We Study and We Do Homework, while sweat streamed down the faces of brass band musicians who chanted, "We got fire!" National Guardsmen on patrol and Common Ground volunteers stopped their activities to watch as teachers climbed out of a pickup truck to dance in the street with students. The sign on the Martin Luther King school still had a pre-Katrina date: August 18, 2005. Hicks ran to a cooler to get sodas for students and teachers. "I used to not believe in charter schools," she admitted.

By the end of the school year, the Ninth Ward location for the Martin Luther King Charter School was reopened. Meanwhile, according to area graduation rates compiled by the Times-Picayune from RSD data, of the sixty-six seniors who started at Joseph T. Clark High School this past school year, fifty-eight remained. Of those, twenty-six students--just 39 percent--made it to graduation.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Tough Liberal: Albert Shanker Review by Sol Stern

City Journal Home.
Old-School Idealist
Albert Shanker nobly led a teachers’ union that eventually became part of the problem.
Sol Stern
7 September 2007

Tough Liberal: Albert Shanker and the Battles Over Schools, Unions, Race, and Democracy, by Richard Kahlenberg (Columbia University Press, 524 pp., $29.95)

When Albert Shanker died of cancer ten years ago at 68, he was hailed as one of the commanding figures in American public education during the second half of the twentieth century. It’s hard to think of anything about the management of big-city public school districts today that doesn’t bear the mark—for better or worse—of the gifted New York City teacher who went on to become president of the million-member American Federation of Teachers. Shanker made teachers’ unions a force to be reckoned with—not only in education, but also in state legislatures and in Democratic Party politics. In the sixties and seventies, he was a fierce combatant in the culture wars over race and America’s role in the world, which would eventually fracture the postwar liberal political coalition. And in his spare time, Shanker also wrote millions of words on what works in education, expressing views that were usually far ahead of AFT members’ thinking.

Richard Kahlenberg’s admiring, meticulously researched biography of Shanker is a good read, partly because it tells a classic American story. It’s an uplifting narrative about a nerdy Jewish kid from a poor immigrant family whose oratorical and political skills led him to national power and influence. Shanker’s story is also testimony to the vibrancy of our democracy, showing how ordinary people at the grass roots can effect change in the nation’s most important institutions. On another level, one that Kahlenberg probably did not intend, the book is also a cautionary tale of how even the most idealistic movement for change can mutate into a bureaucratic interest group that ends up defending the status quo.

One of Kahlenberg’s more surprising revelations is that Al Shanker got involved in teacher unionism only by chance. In 1953, the 24-year-old Columbia University graduate student in philosophy was bogged down on his doctoral dissertation and struggling financially. So he took a position as a substitute math teacher at P.S. 179 in East Harlem, near the Columbia campus. Shanker fully intended to finish his dissertation (on the American social philosopher Elijah Jordan) and resume an academic career when he had saved enough money. Instead, he found his lifetime vocation in the schools.

The New York City public school system that Shanker worked for presented a paradox. On the one hand, the system enjoyed a reputation as one of the best and most stable in the nation, with a highly qualified staff. Throughout the twentieth century, the schools had successfully assimilated and educated the children of generations of poor immigrants. Yet the teachers who produced that extraordinary achievement were dreadfully treated, poorly paid (Shanker’s salary was $68 per week), and becoming extremely restive over their hostile working conditions. When Shanker started teaching, dozens of separate teachers’ organizations, including several competing unions, were agitating to improve those conditions. But the teachers were handicapped by their own disunity and by the absence of collective bargaining rights.

Shanker joined the anti-communist, social-democratic Teachers Guild—the largest of the other unions was communist-dominated—which represented only 2,500 teachers of the city’s 40,000. His oratorical skills, nurtured on the Stuyvesant High School debate team, rapidly propelled him to a leadership position. Shanker and his Guild comrades proved to be the savviest and boldest of the competing factions, calling a strike to gain collective bargaining rights from the city and eventually winning the election to become the sole bargaining agent for all of the teachers. After merging with another teachers’ organization during the struggle, the Guild changed its name to the United Federation of Teachers.

Shanker’s UFT negotiated its first teachers’ contract in 1962, securing a $995 pay increase and a duty-free lunch period. Modest as those management concessions may have seemed, they ushered in what Kahlenberg correctly calls a “different world” in public education. Collective bargaining spread quickly to other school districts, and within a few decades public school teachers became the most unionized employees in the nation. In addition to higher pay and benefit packages, teachers got contracts giving them more say about decisions—such as class size, hiring and firing, and transfer rights—that had previously been the exclusive prerogative of management.

The UFT made the first big breakthrough to collective bargaining recognition partly because New York was a labor town and Mayor Robert Wagner was a pro-labor, New Deal–style Democrat. But within a few years, Shanker became the union’s president and was facing off with Mayor John Lindsay, a leading figure of the emerging sixties-style liberalism. The issue: who would control the schools in the city’s minority neighborhoods? “Limousine liberal” Lindsay accepted the idea, first promoted by the Ford Foundation and supported in the streets by black-power activists, that poor, minority students would do better academically in schools run by members of their own race. When an experimental school district in Ocean Hill–Brownsville operating under “community control” arbitrarily fired white Jewish teachers, Shanker took his union out in a citywide strike.

Like almost every other liberal and leftist commentator at the time, I attacked Shanker for acting against the black community’s interests. (Kahlenberg quotes from an article I wrote for Ramparts.) And like all those commentators, I was dead wrong. Shanker’s stand against black racism and his defense of due-process rights for his teachers was one of the more sane and courageous acts of that troubled time. Except for a few allies in the civil rights community, such as Bayard Rustin, Shanker had the entire liberal and cultural establishment of the city, including the New York Times, against him. Yet Shanker’s teachers followed his leadership in a long and costly strike that eventually forced the city to intervene and reinstate the fired teachers.

The consequences of the Ocean Hill–Brownsville struggle were enormous for both political liberalism and public education. The city’s working-class white ethnics empathized with the striking teachers and recoiled at the racial and anti-Semitic epithets voiced by the black-education activists, including the notorious Sonny Carson. Ocean Hill–Brownsville contributed to their move away from the liberal orbit, and many eventually became Reagan Democrats. The teachers’ union became even more powerful and was able to insist on new legislation preventing the arbitrary firing of teachers. Unfortunately, the new legislation also made it virtually impossible to fire teachers for nonarbitrary reasons, such as incompetence.

After taking over the American Federation of Teachers (while still holding on to the UFT presidency), Shanker had a national platform to expound on his education ideas. He was the first to propose reforms such as charter schools, national testing, and a core-knowledge curriculum. Against the multiculturalists, he eloquently defended the value of teaching a common American culture in the public schools. Thus Shanker stood apart from other teachers’ union leaders as a serious school reformer.

The problem with Kahlenberg’s analysis is that he conflates Shanker’s admirable educational ideas with uncritical praise for the institution of teacher unionism in general. He claims that the advent of strong teachers’ unions with exclusive bargaining rights improved American public education because it raised teacher salaries, brought better candidates into the profession, reduced class sizes, and “helped promote the democratic message of public education.”

Unfortunately, it’s more complicated than that. When Al Shanker went into teaching in the 1950s, there were fewer than 40,000 teachers for the city schools’ 1.1 million children. Today, there are still about 1.1 million kids in the schools, but partly as a result of the power of the union that Shanker created, they now have 83,000 teachers. Moreover, the top teacher salary has scaled over $100,000. It’s not at all apparent, to say the least, that this huge gain in teacher-student ratios and teacher compensation has improved the performance of schools in the past half-century. And in praising Shanker’s union for promoting the “democratic message of public education,” Kahlenberg fails to note that the American Federation of Teachers represents only one-third of teachers’ union members in the U.S. The other two-thirds belong to the National Education Association, which mostly promotes the idea that America is a terribly flawed country and stands firmly against Shanker’s ideas, including the Americanization of students in the public schools.

Shanker’s exemplary career shows that it is wrong to demonize teachers’ unions as the principal cause of all our public education woes. But that doesn’t mean that the unions should get off the hook when they use their political power for destructive purposes, such as blocking reasonable school-choice experiments or defending inflexible contractual-work rules that harm kids. In fact, the main lesson I took away from this fascinating biography was that if Al Shanker were still with us, at least one of the two national teachers’ unions would likely be demonstrating more flexibility and openness to educational change in the interests of the nation’s children.

Friday, September 07, 2007

State Guts Its Test of Reading: Union Study Sees Inflated Scores

BY ELIZABETH GREEN - Staff Reporter of the Sun

September 7, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/62089

The difficulty of a reading test used to judge students across New York State dropped by as many as six grade levels between 2004 and 2005, according to an internal study by the New York City teachers union obtained by The New York Sun.


The study, written in March 2006, found that passages in the 2005 test hovered around third- and fourth-grade reading levels, down from a ninth-grade level in 2004. It also found that the 2004 test was characterized by longer passages, smaller print, crammed text, and more complex questions, such as asking a student to make an inference versus asking the main idea. Despite this apparent drop in difficulty, however, the number of correct answers needed to pass — known as the "cut score" — was just slightly higher in 2005 than in 2004.


Schools across the state had reported fourth-grade reading gains in some cases of more than 40 points in 2005, and New York City pupils registered a 10-point gain on average.

In New York City, low scores on state tests can prevent students from advancing to the next grade level or lead to a school being shut down.


Coming during Mayor Bloomberg's re-election campaign, the touted surge raised many eyebrows, including those of the then-chairwoman of the City Council's Education Committee, Eva Moskowitz of Manhattan, who held a six-hour hearing on the test scores, and the city's public advocate, Betsy Gotbaum, who handed copies of the 2004 and 2005 tests to researchers at the United Federation of Teachers for examination.


Shown the UFT study yesterday afternoon, a state education department spokesman, Tom Dunn, called its conclusion "completely wrong."


"The passages combined with the questions are at the same grade level for both years," he said.

The UFT study was done in consultation with at least three researchers, according to a March 1, 2006, memo to the union president, Randi Weingarten.


In an interview yesterday, Ms. Weingarten said she chose not to publicize the study out of concerns that doing so would make her appear "anti-test." She also said the study could not be considered comprehensive because her researchers are not psychometricians and lack access to some specific data about the test.


She said the study did concern her.


"It's part of why I keep saying, be careful about data. Standardized test scores can't be used for these high-stakes measures for kids or for teachers," she said.


The director of New York University's Center for Research on Teaching and Learning, Robert Tobias, said the UFT study added empirical confirmation to the concerns he had raised in 2005. But he said the study's grade-level measure, called the Fry Readability test, which uses two indicators to determine "readability" — the average number of syllables per 100 words and the average number of sentences — was too simplistic. A test tabulating more nuanced characteristics — "vocabulary, the complexity of the sentence structure, the number of subordinate clauses, that type of thing" — would be more conclusive, he said.


Mr. Tobias praised the part of the UFT study that describes more subtle differences between the tests, such as differences in the length of passages and question types.

"To me, that's some pretty powerful stuff," he said.


A freelance data analyst who has worked for the Department of Education, Frederick Smith, said a readability study he has conducted using the Fry method — but testing every word on the tests rather than a sample — is more precise than the UFT study. His results, which he showed to The New York Sun, found a drop of five reading levels, to third-grade in 2005 from eighth-grade in 2004.



Mr. Smith said the results confirm his longstanding calls for an independent review board to oversee state testing. Since as long ago as a 1982 Newsday article, Mr. Smith has called for a testing ombudsman, citing the importance of an independent reviewer to temper politicians' inclination to boast of gains under their watch.


Michael Cohen, a former education adviser to President Clinton who now works with 30 states to improve their annual assessments through his nonprofit group, Achieve, said he believes that some states have "dumbed down" tests in response to pressures to get better academic results — with deleterious results.


"The tests, generally speaking, are not all that rigorous to begin with. So almost any dumbing-down is moving the expectations in the wrong direction," he said.


Mr. Cohen said that he would be very surprised, however, if New York was one of those states. "I do know Rick Mills," he said, referring to the state education commissioner. "This hardly sounds like what he would do."


A vice president of a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, the Thomas Fordham Foundation, Michael Petrilli, said the federal No Child Left Behind law has caused several states to make their tests easier — some publicly and some without announcement, a conclusion that will be issued in a Fordham report due later this month, Mr. Petrilli said.


Responding to a Daily News story questioning the reliability of state math tests published on the first day of the new school year Tuesday, Mr. Bloomberg pointed out that New York City can use state tests to compare its schools to schools in other districts across the state. Between 1999 and 2007, the portion of New York City students who passed the state reading test has risen by more than 15 percentage points, to 51% from 35%, while cities such as Buffalo have had single-digit increases.

Thursday, September 06, 2007

The Chief: Transfers Lead To Teacher Turmoil

Hundreds Still Not Placed
Transfers Lead To Teacher Turmoil


By MEREDITH KOLODNER


Hundreds of veteran Teachers from the re-organized District 79 will work as permanent substitutes for the foreseeable future, even as thousands of new Teachers have secured full-time jobs around the city.

JOEL I. KLEIN: Some Teachers mismatched.
The reorganization announced in late May sent more than 700 Teachers and staff scrambling for jobs. About 340 were placed last month into the available positions in the downsized District 79 and about 280 were assigned to be "ATRs," which stands for Absent Teacher Reserves. The rest retired or found jobs in other districts.

An Insult

"It's an affront to Teachers that served these students who are very bright and very needy," said Carolyn Mollica, who won Outstanding Teacher of the Year at a District 79 Bronx school last year and will be an ATR at Bayside High School starting in September.

District 79 schools serve older students who have not been able to complete their studies at traditional high schools. They include GED programs as well as schools for incarcerated and suspended youth. DOE officials said the reorganization was necessary because the schools were performing poorly.

'CREATED A MESS': United Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten expressed anger with the wholesale excessing of staff that some veteran Teachers suspected was geared toward getting rid of older instructors with higher salaries. 'Someone decided she knew better than the Teachers how to teach at-risk kids, and this is the mess that got created,' the union leader said.
"Our GED programs had only a 17% completion rate, despite pupil-teacher ratios as low as four students per adult with only half the kids attending on any given day," DOE Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein's spokeswoman, Debra Wexler, said in an e-mail. "Clearly some Teachers and staff were not well-matched to the programs."

United Federation of Teachers officials said they repeatedly expressed willingness to work with the DOE to make necessary changes.

Misplaced Blame

"Those programs could have been completely filled up," said Michael Mulgrew, UFT vice president for career and tech education and alternative high schools. "You can't blame the Teachers for your mismanagement. This is the most difficult population, and these Teachers wanted to work with them."

Ms. Mollica and several of her colleagues believe that the reorganization has targeted older Teachers, hoping to push them towards retirement. She and several other Teachers reported that the majority of those who showed up in Long Island City last week to receive their ATR appointments were over 40 years old and had more than a decade of experience. They believe the DOE is trying to save money by pushing out veteran Teachers who have higher salaries. "They can get two for the price of one," said Ms. Mollica, 63. "But I'm not ready to retire. If I'm enthusiastic and I love my job, why should I leave?"

The UFT negotiated a hiring process with the city that included specific criteria by which hiring decisions would be made. Those criteria included attendance records, job performance and licensing, and varied by position.

Can File Grievances

A committee composed of DOE and UFT officials made decisions about whether Teachers who applied met the criteria, although Mr. Mulgrew advised any Teacher who believed the process was unfair to file a grievance. The UFT also convinced the DOE to hire 100 percent of the Teachers deemed qualified into the available slots. In most school closings, the city is only required to hire 50 percent of Teachers who meet the criteria. Teachers who received an unsatisfactory rating within the past three years were not allowed to apply.

Some Teachers did not want to take a chance with the District 79 process and found jobs in other parts of the city. "I went crazy looking for a job," said Jeff Kauffman, who taught at District 79 Second Opportunity School and this week will start at a high school in Brooklyn. "I didn't trust how it would all work." The hiring process was supposed to commence after July 4, but the interviews didn't begin until August. Some Teachers, who say they were committed to staying in District 79, were interviewed as late as last week. When they were turned down, it left them little time to seek other jobs.

'Joke' of an Interview

LezAnne Edmund, who has taught GED classes for 11 years, wanted to continue to work with the same population of students, but didn't get an interview until two weeks ago. "I got a phone interview that lasted maybe 12 minutes," she said last week as she waited for her ATR assignment. "I had to answer how I would instruct a certain groups of students in a certain scenario. It was almost a joke."

DOE officials said the late start to the interview process was due to delays by the union. UFT President Randi Weingarten took sharp exception to that claim. "They come up with a plan at the end of May and think they're going to reorganize all this stuff and treat people as chattel, and they didn't expect their union was going to say you can't do it like this?" she asked.

UFT officials said the agreement was done by the end of June but that the DOE mishandled the implementation. They said DOE officials failed to show up at interviews and that Teachers had to enter their placement preferences twice over a space of several weeks into DOE's computer system. The glitches were so widespread, however, that the union insisted that the DOE see all the ATRs in person in Queens last week so they could once again lodge their preferences and ensure that they got placed in one of them. "This is not the Mayor," said Ms. Weingarten. "This is a district being run by someone who decided she knew much better than the Teachers how to teach at-risk kids, and this is the mess that got created."

Had Some Latitude

Teachers assigned to be ATRs were allowed to choose a group of schools they preferred to work in and were placed based on seniority and need of the school. They will continue to be paid their full salary.

Even some of the Teachers who secured jobs within District 79 said the timing of the reorganization and hiring decisions was going to make the start of school chaotic.

"I have no books, and I have no idea what I'm going to be teaching," said Rosalind Panepento, who will be teaching at one of the revamped GED programs in Manhattan.

Ms. Panepento, who was the UFT chapter chair of the Auxiliary Services for High Schools and has taught for 35 years, said she feared that the city would try to use the growing number of ATRs to get rid of Teachers. During the last round of bargaining, the city proposed laying off Teachers who had been excessed for more than 18 months. "Luckily, the union held strong against it," she said, "but I think that's what they're going for."

Fears Impact on Kids

Mr. Kauffman said that he is happy with his new placement, preferring it to his old school where he said most of the staff had ongoing problems with the administrators. But he said he was concerned that all of the changes, coming as late as they did, would have an adverse impact on District 79 students.

"These kids don't need another disincentive to not come to school," he said. "They see a disorganized classroom and school, and they're gone."

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Joke of the Day: Weingarten Back to School Message

[Emphasis added. Translation into what's really being said to follow, but feel free to get your won translator. Typos corrected, free of charge.]

August 31, 2007

Dear Colleague:

New year. Big changes. We've been here before, I know. But this year, with much of the decision-making moved from the central bureaucracy to the school level, there are reasons to be hopeful. This new structure, however, works only if you are true partners with principals in making decisions about what's best for kids. And ensuring that you assume that rightful role - as partners with principals and parents - will be our goal as the school year begins.

Remember Gilligan's Island? The 1960s sitcom about a group of day-trippers marooned on an uncharted tropical island where everybody (including the "skipper") is forced to live and work together in order to survive? That is the analogy that kept cropping up earlier this week as 750 UFT chapter leaders gathered to learn how to make this thrice-restructured school system actually work in the real world of teaching a million students day-to-day.

I hope you had a chance this summer to rest, recharge and spend time with your families - though I suspect that many of you, like those of us here at the UFT, were working, preparing for the new term, and catching up with everything we have no time for during the school year. Although we don't agree with everything the Department of Education is doing, we are doing our best to make it work for our kids, while at the same time taking every precaution to ensure that you are treated professionally, you get the support you need to do your job and your contractual rights are upheld.

Keeping watch over all that won't be easy under the decentralized system that Chancellor Klein has devised. That's why we have developed a new online grievance procedure (modeled after last year's successful safety reporting system) and other monitoring methods to track trends, identify problems early and resolve them.

The changes this year are as vast as in the 2003 reorganization, but my bet is on you; our members always rise to any occasion for our students. Most important, the shift of decision-making to the school level presents us with both opportunities and challenges.

Principals who don't yet understand will have to learn pretty quickly that they need you as partners if they want their schools to work. There's been a lot of research on this, and it's clear that collegial, collaborative schools have higher student achievement, lower teacher turnover and more instructional innovation, not to mention better staff and student morale.

The lesson that we have to drive home: Successful schools are not principal-dominated or top-down factories; they have the active participation and enthusiastic engagement of their faculty. Your professional expertise, your problem-solving creativity and your commitment
to improvement are the key - if they are tapped. Successful principals create a climate of partnership with teachers and parents to help kids learn.

So this year the union's focus will be to work with our members, and with administrators and parents, to create collaborative environments and professional respect in every school. We will honor those that have that climate, and take whatever steps are necessary to achieve it in those that do not. We have already won a number of important arbitrations toward that end for paraprofessionals and for occupational and physical therapists. And we are still dealing with another challenge - the district that serves our most at-risk kids.

On the eve of Memorial Day weekend, the new superintendent of District 79 (alternative high schools) came up with a so-called reform plan that dramatically downsized the district, including the potential excessing of 750 educators. In early June more than 400 people attended a union meeting, and, as angry as we were, we agreed to press for negotiations as the first response. On the last day of school, the union secured an agreement that reaffirmed everyone's job security and required the district to offer existing employees every job in the reorganized schools, which is double what the contract now requires.

Still, that is not the way I would prefer to build collaborative relationships. Fortunately, our canvas of the schools the week before Labor Day showed that District 79 was much more the exception than the norm. Even if that were not so, the law and our contract give us many tools. Every school must have a union-principal consultative committee, a safety committee and a school leadership team to help make decisions. I hope you will consider serving on that team, or on a committee, and contributing even beyond your classroom to your students' success.

It's hard to predict how this year will go, given all the changes, but we do know that our hard work last year will pay off in several positive ways. Among the changes we can look forward to are:

· A 7 percent raise. This includes 2 percent on Oct 13 and 5 percent on May 19, when maximum pay will exceed $100,000 for the first time. These raises will bring the total base salary increase since 2002 to at least 43 percent.

· New 5-year longevity. This annual payment, which becomes effective in May, is for all those with between five and 10 years of New York City school service. It is worth $1,000 a year for teachers and $500 a year for paraprofessionals, and it's another example of the efforts we've been making in recent years to hold on to our newer teachers.

· A continuing fight for small classes. As I write, the state has not yet approved the DOE's plan for using the new funds coming to our schools as a result of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit. Smaller classes were supposed to be a priority, but we (and some parent groups) have opposed the city 's plan because it doesn't do enough to achieve that. If the city continues to take only "baby steps" rather than an aggressive approach to lowering class size, we will not hesitate to go back to Albany to get more prescriptive language.

· Job security. The new Open Market transfer system enabled about 3,200 members (compared to about 400 a year under the old seniority transfer plan) to change schools this year, and, in accordance with our contract, no new or not-so-new teachers got "bumped" from their positions. Most important, the contract ensures that all excessed educators have jobs at their full pay and benefits. The new system has reduced the displacements and uncertainty that
used to upset thousands of teachers each fall, and it has resulted in better fits between schools and teachers over all. Nonetheless, this year we will work with those who are still not in a regular teaching position to get them more options. We are also tracking all displacements to see if there is evidence for an age-discrimination suit.

· More money for Teacher's Choice. Teacher's Choice was threatened this year by budget cuts, but our lobbying succeeded in getting it restored. In fact, stipends for supplemental supplies will rise to $260 for general ed teachers and $230 for special ed teachers, with guidance counselors, social workers and psychologists receiving $200. On top of that, we have managed to secure enough money so that all secretaries will now receive $50 to buy needed supplies. Remember, everybody, keep your receipts.

I also want to tell you about a wonderful nonprofit program called "Donors Choose," which was started by a Bronx teacher a few years ago and has grown into a nationwide online hit. It enables teachers- including 6,400 of our members so far - to fund their exciting ideas for instructional projects and it lets ordinary "Citizen Philanthropists" help our schools in ways they choose. Go to Donors Choose.org and make your creative idea a reality.

· Whistleblower protection. UFT members have a long tradition of speaking out when they see something that hurts children. Whether it is tampering with test scores or denying services to special ed students, some teachers have put their careers at risk to blow the whistle on their superiors. Now, because of a new law that the UFT advocated and the City Council passed over
the mayor's veto, those brave members will be protected from supervisor retaliation against them. And a legislative push we participated in gives parents strengthened rights to get their disabled children appropriate services.

· Excessive Testing and its Implications. The UFT has protested excessive student testing and using test scores as the sole determinant of major decisions (like promotion) for kids for a long time -- long before the national debate about using those scores as the basis for tenure decisions and teacher evaluations. The tests are simply not reliable enough and are not fair measures for such high-stakes purposes.

This year Gov. Spitzer originally proposed basing tenure decisions on student test scores, but that was deleted as a result of the union's advocacy. Now, as part of the new state tenure law, tenure decisions must include: 1) peer review, 2) principal evaluation, and 3) "the extent to
which the teacher uses student performance data" to inform instruction. This was an extremely important achievement which we will vigorously enforce.

Along the same line, regardless of what the CSA and others may do, we will continue to oppose individual "merit" or "performance" pay based solely on student test scores. Don't get me wrong: We are not opposed to differentiated pay. We support differentials for skills and knowledge and career ladders that offer additional pay for additional responsibilities, just as we always have had differentials for higher degrees and credits earned. And we have been open to experiments with school-wide bonuses, based on an entire school's achievement. But we oppose both teacher evaluations and individual extra pay based on student outcomes.

We face the same challenge on the federal level. As Congress considers reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, there is growing momentum to define "highly qualified teachers" according to the test scores of their students. I'm sure we will be talking a lot more about this as the year progresses.

I expect that the relentless focus on testing and test scores will only get worse. The School Progress Reports (the first is due this fall) will increase that focus since test scores account for 85 percent of a school's grade. And the new Interim Assessments will mean ten additional tests per year for grades 3 t o 8 and eight more for high schoolers!

Other challenges face us as well. As we saw from the recent Most Dangerous Schools list, discipline and safety must continue to be top priorities. I hope by now you are all aware of our online system for reporting violent incidents and violations of the Safety Plan or Discipline Code. If not, look at our home page (at uft.org) and you'll see the orange button for doing
that.

The negotiations on a 55/25 pension provision are still quite active. I remain confident that, if the will is there, we can work out an agreement, but on this one the mayor must also agree. Speaking of the mayor, despite our differences, I must give him credit these days for never letting an opportunity to praise the city's "spectacular" teachers pass him by.

Those are my not-so-brief prognostications for the opening of school 2007.
Let me know how your school "partnership" is working. I want to make sure we recognize and honor those schools that are working well for kids and where teachers' voice is respected, while continuing to educate the school leaders who have not yet seen the light. As always, please e-mail me at uftpres@uft.org. As those who have e-mailed me know, I try to answer every one.

And best of luck this year.

Sincerely,
Randi

Friday, August 31, 2007

Teachers’ Union Undermines Arab School

http://www.indypendent.org/2007/08/30/first-person-teachers%E2%80%99-union-undermines-arab-school/

First Person: Teachers’ Union Undermines Arab School
By Steve Quester
From the September 4, 2007 issue | Posted in Local | Email this article

Imagine a Latina principal being hounded out of her job because she defended a Latina empowerment group’s Che Guevara T-shirts. Imagine an African-American principal being hounded out of her job because she defended an African-American girls’ empowerment group’s Malcolm X T-shirts. Neither scenario is far-fetched.

But in either of the above scenarios, we’d know it wasn’t about the T-shirts.

However, this basic fact has been obscured in the recent takedown of Debbie Almontaser, the veteran Brooklyn educator, Yemeni-American and hijab-wearing Muslim who was the founding principal of the Khalil Gibran International Academy (KGIA), an Arabic-English dual-language public secondary school in Brooklyn that is scheduled to open with the new school year.

Before Almontaster was ambushed by the New York Post, KGIA endured months of vitriolic attacks from right-wing websites like Stop the Madrassa, Militant Islam Monitor and Little Green Footballs.

Predictably, the Post, the New York Sun, Fox News and New York State Assembly Member Dov Hikind jumped eagerly into the fray. It’s the same cast of characters, Daniel Pipes among them, who trumped up false charges of anti-Semitism to try to shut down Arab scholars at Columbia University in 2004 and 2005.
According to a report in the Aug. 17 Jewish Week, Almontaser was misled by Post reporters in an interview for an article published on Aug. 6.

The Post submitted questions in advance before the NYC Department of Education (NYC DOE) would agree to let them interview Almontaser. All of the questions were about KGIA. At the end of the interview, the reporter asked offhandedly what “intifada” means.

Almontaser, who is after all an educator, looked up the word in the dictionary, and translated it accurately: “shaking off.” The reporter then told Almontaser that the Yemeni-American organization on whose board she sits shares office space with Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media (AWAAM) and that AWAAM had produced a T-shirt with the words “Intifada NYC.” Almontaser, to her credit, refused to throw the girls from AWAAM under a bus, instead referring to their nonviolent struggle to shake off oppression in their own lives.

The Post quoted her as saying “I understand it is developing a negative connotation due to the uprising in the Palestinian-Israeli areas. I don’t believe the intention is to have any of that kind of [violence] in New York City. I think it’s pretty much an opportunity for girls to express that they are part of New York City society … and shaking off oppression.”

On the same day the article appeared, Almontaser wrote in an e-mail to community supporters, “I was misrepresented and trapped by the reporter. Those were not my exact words, and the words I did use were taken out of context.” Later that day, she released a statement through the NYCDOE that read, “The word ‘intifada’ is completely inappropriate as a T-shirt slogan. I regret suggesting otherwise. By minimizing the word’s historical associations, I implied that I condone violence and threats of violence. That view is anathema to me.”
RANDI WEINGARTEN INTERVENES
On Aug. 7, the Post, without reference to Almontaser’s Aug. 6 statement of regret, ran an editorial asking, “What is she doing with the job in the first place?”
On Aug. 8, the Post published a letter from Randi Weingarten, president of my union, the United Federation of Teachers, in which she wrote, “I agree wholeheartedly with your editorial,” and, “While the city teachers’ union initially took an open-minded approach to this school, both parents and teachers have every right to be concerned about children attending a school run by someone who doesn’t instinctively denounce campaigns or ideas tied to violence.”

In her letter, Weingarten chose to ignore both Almontaser’s Aug. 6 statement and her proven record as a peacemaker. On Aug. 9 the Post quoted Weingarten saying, among other things, “maybe, ultimately, she should not be a principal.” On Aug. 10 Almontaser resigned, perhaps under pressure from Schools Chancellor Joel Klein and/or Mayor Bloomberg.

In her resignation letter, she wrote, “I have spent the past two decades of my life
building bridges among people of all faiths — particularly among Muslims and Jews.
Unfortunately, a small group of highly misguided individuals has launched a relentless attack on me because of my religion.”

Rabbi Michael Paley, scholar-in-residence at United Jewish Appeal-Federation of New York (Paley’s daughter is in charge of enrollment at KGIA), told Jewish Week that the campaign against Almontaser was a “high-tech lynching.”

If it was a lynching, my union did not string up the rope, but it was the UFT that kicked away the stool. I’m at a loss to explain why my union, which continues to support KGIA, piled on when the attacks on the school’s principal were at their shrillest. The union leadership insists that we were acting on our deep commitment to peace and nonviolence, but that’s a strange excuse for joining in a transparently racist and Islamophobic attack. I suspect that Weingarten, sensing which way the wind was blowing on Aug. 7 and 8, decided to play to the basest instincts of some of her rank and file.

The membership of the UFT is middle class and majority white, and many are Jewish. Not all middle-class white Jews lend credence to the Almontaser witch hunt — I’m middle-class, white, and Jewish myself — but Weingarten was counting on many of her members being solidly behind the Post on this issue. She may be right. But I don’t think that she counted on the firestorm of criticism she was to endure after Almontaser’s resignation. Those of us in the UFT and outside of it, who are outraged at the attacks on Almontaser, are not going to just let this matter drop. We will continue to expose the racist consequences of Weingarten’s statements, so that the next time the right-wing media hit squads go after an educator, she’ll think twice before lending them her voice.

Steve Quester is a Brooklyn-based UFT Chapter leader and veteran early childhood educator. For more, see Jews for Racial and Economic Justice (jfrej.org) and Arab Women Active in the Arts and Media (awaam.org).

RAISING THEIR VOICES : More than 200 supporters of the Khalil Gibran International Academy, including Sara Said Alkhulaidi, whose brother will be attending the school in the fall, gathered Aug. 21 outside the NYC Department of Education to protest the forced resignation of Debbie Almontaser, the former principal of the school. PHOTO: ULA KURAS

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Marcia Lyles in the NY Times

August 29, 2007
Face Book

A New Role, but for Her, Familiar Turf

Marcia V. Lyles, New York City’s new deputy chancellor for teaching and learning, knows intimately just how students can get lost in the shuffle. In her sophomore year in high school in Harlem, Ms. Lyles was caught skipping class almost daily.

“I knew how to cut, who to cut, where to cut,” Ms. Lyles, 58, said in a recent interview, her embarrassment with her conduct so long ago still showing in her reluctance to talk about her own school days. “I would do it all the time, but I was still passing. My aunt found out with one little mistake I made and that was it.”

Convinced that the school was too easy, her aunt, who was raising her, forced her to transfer from Benjamin Franklin High School to Jamaica High School, making an hourlong trip to and from Queens near the end of her sophomore year. There, Ms. Lyles was shocked to learn that after being in the top of her class at Franklin, which was largely black and Hispanic, and finding school so easy that she could skip out, she was struggling to keep up at what was then a largely white Jamaica High.

It was her first lesson in the problem that still preoccupies the nation’s largest school system — the racial achievement gap. And her memories are telling, because perhaps more than anyone else in the upper echelons of the city’s Department of Education, Ms. Lyles has known the city schools as both a student and a lifelong educator in the system.

She graduated from Jamaica High School in 1965 and went on to Hunter College. She became an English teacher at Washington Irving High School in Manhattan, but like other young teachers in the mid 1970s, she was laid off during the city’s fiscal crisis. She later returned to system and taught at Curtis High School on Staten Island.

She has lived or worked in every borough as she has moved up the ladder for nearly four decades from teacher to assistant principal, from program administrator to superintendent. The way she puts it, each job came at the prodding of someone else.

“It was always someone saying, ‘You know, you ought to ...,’ ” Ms. Lyles said. “So when I tell people all of the jobs I had and then say, ‘You know, I am really not the ambitious type,’ people kind of laugh. But it’s true.”

In June, after Andrés Alonso stepped down to lead the Baltimore public school system, Chancellor Joel I. Klein plucked Ms. Lyles from her post as a superintendent in Brooklyn to become the chief official in charge of curriculum and teaching policies this summer. He said that her experience would make her an “extraordinary asset” to his senior leadership team.

Ms. Lyles has been met with skepticism from other administrators in part because while she was the superintendent of Region 8 in Brooklyn since 2004, her region’s gains in test scores in reading and math, while solid, ran behind those in many other regions.

While some teachers and principals say the Klein administration desperately needs an educator’s voice in a headquarters packed with lawyers and consultants who have little patience for the city’s education establishment, they question whether Ms. Lyles is aggressive enough to be heard.

Certainly, while being interviewed in a barren office across the street from the Education Department headquarters, she was cautious about making any definitive criticisms about changes that have come and gone across her four decades.

“Every time we have had a change, there is a portion that is viable and helpful,” she said. Recalling an African proverb she has repeated to dozens of other educators, Ms. Lyles summed up her philosophy: “When the music changes, so does the dance.”

“I learned all the new steps,” she said. “I just moved with the changes, that’s what you have to do.”

In the late 1990s, she was appointed the superintendent of District 16 in Bedford-Stuyvesant, which had a reputation for turmoil and failing schools. There had been three superintendents in five years. Several district staff members had a pool to bet on how long Ms. Lyles would last — one senior adviser put her money on six months.

“So I lasted five years,” Ms. Lyles said with a broad smile. “It was just a truly wonderful experience of starting to turn around a district and really turning around the perception of a district. And just as soon as we started to really figure it out, we reorganized,” she said referring to the advent of mayoral control under Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg in 2002.

Ms. Lyles said her most pressing concern about the school system is the continued gap between the performance of white students in the system and minority students. She thought back to her own high school days, after she transferred from Benjamin Franklin High.

“I just thought, wow, what’s the difference?” she recalled of Jamaica High. “What’s going on, now I have to play catch up? That’s when I saw about inequity, that’s when I saw about low expectations.”

“I knew that there was a difference, because at Benjamin Franklin all of the students were black and Hispanic, and at Jamaica High School in all the academic classes I was usually the only one,” she continued. “And so I saw that there was a real difference.” Benjamin Franklin High School was closed in 1982. “I used to tell my students that I wanted them to do what I did,” Ms. Lyles said. “I defied the demographics.”