“I want to put a human face on the consequences of the planned austerity measures; the disaster of charging kids for MetroCards, the impact cuts will have on schools and families,” said Guy De Baere, a lab specialist at LaGuardia HS in Manhattan. “Each year we’re asked to do more with less — much less.” It was his first lobbying trip as a teacher, but not his first as a parent. This time, he joined more than 1,200 UFT colleagues and supporters in Albany on the union’s March 9 Lobby Day to tell state legislators what his award-winning high school needs.

At Manhattan’s Murry Bergtraum HS, in the shadow of the Brooklyn Bridge, more than 200 teachers, students, and union and community leaders assembled to call on the state Legislature to reject the governor’s proposed $1.4 billion in school aid cuts statewide — as much as $600 million in cuts to New York City — as an attack on educational quality and a precursor to mass layoffs.

The federal education law that, for better or worse, has dominated the lives of America’s educators for the past eight years is set for another controversial and troubling renewal.

Agreeing with the UFT that — six months since the union’s last contract expired — negotiations with the Department of Education had deadlocked, the state’s Public Employment Relations Board on Feb. 22 appointed Philip L. Maier as mediator.

As a result of legal action taken by a coalition including the UFT and the NAACP, a judge has ordered the Department of Education to halt its process of matching students to high schools. The order is temporary until the judge rules on a preliminary injunction in the coalition’s lawsuit to stop school closures.

During a heated and contentious seven-hour hearing on March 2, City Council members grilled Department of Education officials on the accuracy and fairness of the policies, procedures and criteria they used in designating 19 schools for closure.

One of the hottest issues in education today is also an age-old question: What makes a good teacher? And the UFT is working to help find an answer. Federal officials, in testimony before Congress recently, called for a refocus away from looking at “paper credentials” to gauging teacher effectiveness by asking states to find a better system for teacher evaluation.

The educators longed to learn effective, practical teaching strategies — even if it meant drawing graphic organizers in the dirt. And UFT Teacher Center staffer Nick Norman provided that professional development — even though it meant leaving a secured compound in an armored vehicle with driver and bodyguard, and traveling over rough roads to the other side of Kabul.

What if you could prevent school violence before it occurs? That’s the idea behind a new hotline, announced at a March 1 press conference held by City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. The Council-sponsored hotline, called “Speak Up — Save Lives,” will operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week and will be staffed by professional crisis counselors.

A faltering national economy. Huge budget gaps in Albany and New York City. Unemployment at a peak, homelessness on the rise, Wall Street losses. Sound familiar? 2010? No, the year was 1975 and the city was teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Real disaster was averted when the state, city and business community joined forces with the city’s unions to forge a joint solution. And therein lies a lesson that today’s New York leaders might do well to recall.

How bitter now is the memory of Obama’s promise, not yet two years old, that instead of blaming and stigmatizing teachers, government would be our partner, providing the supports and the resources necessary to take on the historic tasks of educating all American students. In place of that promise is the full embrace of the corporate agenda for education, following the well-known formula of GE’s ‘Neutron’ Jack Welch: establish a punitive regime of fear by firing 10% of your workforce every year. No wonder that the Business Roundtable cannot contain their glee.

As the German philosopher Hegel once mused, Minerva’s owl flies only at dusk: we do not know the full extent of the damage done by an administration that was once the source of so much hope. But no matter what happens next, an all too real price will be paid by America’s neediest students in years to come. If the price of working with America’s neediest students is a game of Russian roulette with one’s professional career, many teachers will reasonably decide that the price is too high. And the losers will be the schools and the students who need accomplished teachers the most.

Motor Mouth, one of my least mature students in terms of behaving in accordance with the expectations I and school demand of a child his age, has really impressed me the last few days.

One of the traits I correlate with him more than any other is his propensity for raising his hand and then speaking without giving much consideration to what is about to come out of his mouth.

Now, don’t get me wrong. He is still the loudest during morning unpacking and the most distracted during independent reading. But, for whatever reason, he has, this week, been putting forth the most cogent arguments I have heard from him all year, and some of the best from the class as a whole.

Case in point: My class is one of three in the building that is piloting a test program, in which, rather than respond to their books every night, they are only doing it twice a week. We’re trying to study whether such a system results in greater reading stamina and/or improvement in depth of thinking.

Yesterday, I asked the class for their opinions about the change in structure, preparing some anecdotal evidence to present to the administration. Motor Mouth raised his hand – as he always does (it’s one of the things I really like about him) – and offered this paraphrased gem:

“We used to have to write every night and there were times when I had nothing to write. So I really wasn’t thinking much. Plus, we had to write post-its as we read, and we had to stop to do that. That made the books less enjoyable and harder to understand. Now, I feel like I’m improving in two ways. I’m improving as a reader because I get to just read and not stop. And I’m improving as a writer because I have a lot to think about and I can really write well.”

Well, Motor Mouth! With thoughts like that, keep motorin’!

Let this serve as a reminder to us. While it may seem like we are sometimes, or always, teaching classes of beings who constantly look at their fingernails as if they magically appeared this morning, or stare out the window as if a dragon was floating by wearing a top hat, or marvel in the wonder that is lead pencils, these kids are listening to us.

What an unexpected and pertinent lesson to keep in mind.

Some people want to listen and want to learn. Other folks are incapable or have no desire to do either. Most people have made up their minds on the issues at least to a relative if not an absolute degree one way or the other.  But coinciding with when the pall of NCLB overspread the landscape of education, it seems that all parties are uniformly persuaded that the sky is falling and voices trying to sell the survival of civilization clamor for the earth to open and swallow the education establishment as we know it.

There is a bumper crop of prophets of doom. The milder, slightly more laid-back ones tend to be more flexible and forgiving of those whose opinions clash with their own. It’s not an “ad hominem” thing for them. They don’t attack their philosophical foes; they just want those opponents to stand aside so that they can step in to save the world.

But then there are the demagogues. They are dominant and gathering more steam even as they spout it. They’ll go to boardroom meetings but not attend meetings of the minds. They have a vendetta against those who contradict them. It is merciless and personal.

Those knights of the think tanks, tongue waggers of talk shows, corporate conquistadors, hucksters from tax-shelter-hunting charitable foundations, and blog jockeys, and millions of easily duped village idiots, are self-important deluded missionaries. These laymen see it as their sacred duty to redeem America’s public schools from the nefarious wiles of teacher unions and the professional educators who love them. In their crusade to salvage they go for the jugular.

Unfortunately, some of these folks, especially when they are Ivy League alumni or skilled entertainers, can carry off their bitter argument with such charm that they can throw us off our guard. That can so regale with chapters and verses and trained routines that bearers of decency and common sense don’t realize what hit them until it may be too late to keep their jobs.

Why are these “reformers” so consumed and driven to destroy the ancestral grandeur of the teaching profession? Why do they lustfully thrust daggers through the institutions that nurtured educators?

They chalk it up to “integrity.” Well, bully for them. And I don’t buy it. Do you?

When the “reformers” come gunning for the treasure of our earned mastery and pride, (not to mention our meal tickets), I say they need to be stopped in their tracks. (Historically, partisans in occupied lands knew the feeling.)

And what is their “integrity” anyway?

They do indeed possess (as well as being possessed by) integrity in the sense that these “reformers” are true to their convictions, have evolved their ideas and given their all to enact them. They have done this consistently and without equivocation.

But if we mean it to mean honor and moral integrity, then they are utterly bereft of it. We witness the ruin and waste they have spread and the vile aloofness they show to innocent educators whose tears and disillusionment they provoke. With arrogance and ignorance they view it as collateral damage that goes with the territory.

They get their jollies from the liquidation of dreams. They are traffickers in anarchy. It is a filthy business and the soul of integrity will never be its broker or partner.

Where rests the power to rehabilitate the “reformers”?

Educators seek more collaborative work environment and voice in school policy

Teachers and staff at the Bronx Academy of Promise Charter School in the South Bronx announced on March 12 their intention to join the UFT.

The entire teaching staff, along with other staff members at the school, have signed union authorization cards.

In a letter given to the school’s principal, the teachers’ organizing committee called for a more formal and collective voice in the school community to “ensure the quality of our students’ education.”

The UFT filed a formal petition today with the school’s board of trustees, and notified the state’s Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) that Bronx Academy of Promise teachers are seeking union recognition. If the school’s board does not recognize the union as the bargaining representative within 30 days, the UFT can ask PERB to certify the bargaining unit on the basis of the authorization cards.

“These teachers want the best for their students. They are dedicated to their school and creating the best learning environment that they possibly can. We are proud to welcome them into our union,” said UFT President Michael Mulgrew.

“This is about job security, but it is also about making sure the school moves in the right direction,” said teacher Reagan Fletcher. “We are with our kids eight hours a day and deserve a voice in the policy decisions that affect them. Ultimately, this will benefit our children.”

“This will let us fulfill the mission of our school: to give the students the best possible school and the education they deserve,” said teacher Melissa Garcia.

The school, located at 1166 River Avenue in the Bronx, has been in operation since the fall of 2008, and currently serves approximately 240 students in kindergarten through 4th grade. The school employs 17 teachers, four teaching assistants, a social worker and several other staff members.

The UFT represents educators at ten other charter schools in New York City and co-operates a school in collaboration with Green Dot, a successful and labor-friendly charter school operator based in Los Angeles.

Additionally, in January, educators at the NYC Charter High School for Architecture, Engineering and Construction Industries (AECI) in Queens voted overwhelmingly to unionize. On January 13, the AECI staff filed a formal petition with PERB seeking union recognition; a pre-hearing conference with both parties and PERB is scheduled for April 7th at PERB’s office in Downtown Brooklyn.

On March 17, students from the Urban Youth Collaborative and Students for Transportation Justice will meet with the chairman of the MTA, Jay Walder, to urge him to work with Mayor Bloomberg and Governor Paterson to save their MetroCards.

The Working Families Party has put together a “teachers and parents petition” that the students will take along to the meeting. They want to walk in with thousands of teachers and parents at their back, to make clear to the MTA — and the media — how important free student MetroCards really are.

Please take a minute to sign this online petition and share it with other teachers, parents or family members of students who might be interested.

www.savestudentmetrocards.org

The petition says:

“We are parents, teachers, and family members awed by the enthusiasm of NYC students who are going all out to save their school MetroCards. These students shouldn’t pay for Albany, the City and the MTA’s budget troubles. We support them in their fight. Please save Student MetroCards.”

The students’ goal is to gather 5,000 signatures before the March 17 meeting. They have been fighting for months to pressure leaders from the MTA, City Hall and Albany to save their MetroCards, and it’s time to show that teachers and parents have a huge stake in this too.

Sign the petition telling the MTA, Mayor Bloomberg and Governor Paterson to save student MetroCards:

www.savestudentmetrocards.org

It is a frequent occurrence in many 10th-grade classrooms: A lesson is underway, when suddenly, from the back of the room, comes the exclamation that no teacher wants to hear: “Miss, your class is so boring!”

Midway through my first year of teaching, I’ve been really getting into improving as a teacher. I’m excited about trying out new techniques and receiving criticism on my teaching. I have learned to detach myself much more from the day-to-day incidents and distractions in the classroom. However, no teacher likes to be told his class is boring, especially not one who is consciously trying to be the best teacher possible. As a first-year teacher, I know I could be more engaging at times, but hey, at least I’m giving it my all!

Since the beginning of the school year, I have dealt handily with comments about my breath, my hair and even my handwriting, never batting an eyelash. But for some reason, the boredom comments always throw me — either into rage or despair.

Fortunately, in my weekly “Fellow Blast,” I found the following advice from another Teaching Fellow:

“I’ve learned not to take it personally when I hear my students say, “This is so boring!” Instead, I try to figure out why the student is reporting feeling bored.

Often, “this is boring” means, “I am so confused.” It also may mean, “I need some attention right now. “ Instead of feeling offended, I’ve learned to realize that the student declaring boredom is really saying that she needs some help. If the student were uninterested, she wouldn’t have called attention to herself and to the lesson.

If boredom isn’t truly the problem, then we shouldn’t treat it as such. I direct the student to the task at hand, and explain the teaching point in another way. Sometimes I model part of the task for the student, guide her through the next portion of the task, then say, “Great, you’re ready to do the rest yourself.” The student who previously declared boredom will often be more likely to share at the end of the lesson, because she has gained confidence.”

Using this as fodder to better my own practices, I let a comment on how boring my class was roll off my back. I did not confront the student, as I often had in the past. However, the following day, I found the student during lunch and asked her to sit with me for a while. We chatted a bit and I brought up her comment from the previous day. Immediately, she admitted that she did not understand the material, and was further frustrated because she had encountered this material before. She agreed that she should come for extra help and was more engaged in class today, although I still have not totally won her over.

But how to approach students also depends on each one’s unique personality. Another student of mine is constantly complaining about my class, especially the current topic of geology. He is a funny kid, with a witty sense of humor, so I chose to make use of this trait. I started off our conversation, mock crying, “You really hurt my feelings yesterday.” Continuing in this sarcastic manner, we discussed how he loves astronomy, and I was quick to point out that studying other planets’ composition was just like studying rocks here on Earth and that we can better understand other planets by better understanding our own planet. My AP joined in and together we cornered him, concluding that, in fact, he loves rocks!

Miraculously, the next day he participated non-stop, while also making off-hand comments about how he does not like rocks. It was clear that my rapport with him had improved and he was feeling less bored in class. He even came up at the end of the period to apologize to me for making too many jokes in class. I can’t wait to see how he is during the astronomy unit!

I am slowly learning that, yes, I must make the classroom engaging, but I also have to accept that not all students are going to understand, regardless of how exciting the presentation. And when students don’t understand, they react in different ways. They may shut down, or they may express their frustration by lashing out at those around them. Rather than getting offended, I have to use these clues to reach out to those students and help them connect with the material. They could feel the excitement of science, if only they could understand the basics I’m trying to teach them.

[a] The removal of United Farm Workers c0-founder Dolores Huerta from Texas social studies textbooks because she is a democratic socialist, despite the fact that even the Ladies Home Journal has recognized her as one of the 100 most important American women in the 2oth century?

[b] The defense of this exclusion through a comparison of Huerta with Helen Keller, who “exemplifies good citizenship.” [Keller was a life-long socialist.]

[c] Pulling the children’s literature classic “Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See?” from the literature standards because its author, Bill Martin, has the same name as the author of a text Ethical Marxism. [The Board must have been worried about all of the possible MLA papers. Just imagine it: "The Bear As Other: The Fetishism of Commodity Relations in Bare/Bear Racial Identity."]

[d] The influence of the Texas State Board of Education “know nothingism” on textbooks across the country. [Texas authorizes textbooks centrally to create a large market which then shapes how textbooks are written and published across the United States.]

]]> http://www.edwize.org/a-multiple-choice-question/feed 0 http://www.edwize.org/spinning-faster-than-the-magic-teacup-ridecharter-management-on-new-york%e2%80%99s-race-to-the-top-application http://www.edwize.org/spinning-faster-than-the-magic-teacup-ridecharter-management-on-new-york%e2%80%99s-race-to-the-top-application#comments Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:37:26 +0000 David Dashefsky http://www.edwize.org/?p=6479

Photo by Jessica Ann Mills

With last week’s announcement that New York was a Race to the Top Finalist, shocked charter management bosses were attempting to explain away weeks of argumentation that a failure to capitulate to their agenda would keep New York from achieving that goal. Spinning faster than the magic teacup ride at Disney World, Peter Murphy of the New York Charter School Association absurdly postulated that New York’s initial success will have a negative impact on education funding. This insight came from the same crystal ball which had Murphy prophesying that New York’s RttT proposal was too weak to become a finalist not two weeks ago. Joining Murphy on the magic teacup ride was Thomas Carroll, the proprietor of the Brighter Choice charter schools recently exposed for denying admissions to students with special needs; Carroll had been madly promoting his list of RttT finalists — sans New York — a few days before the announcement. Charter management’s hours organs — the puerile tabloid and Wall Street press — were called in. Fresh from its visit to Disney World, the Daily News decided that it would take a “magic spell” to win funding. And the usual coterie of anti-union bloggers were brought in for reinforcements. All in all, it’s a sight that would leave any teacher with her feet on the ground quite dizzy.

In the original charter management pitch, UFT and NYSUT stood in the way of New York becoming an RttT finalist simply because we insisted that the charter schools had to be real public schools, educating all students, for the charter cap could be raised. Now that this fairy tale has come up against the real world, charter management mouthpieces like NYCSA’s Murphy are attempting to claim that teacher unions will cause the downfall of New York’s RttT proposal at the next stage of the process. Part of this accusation rests on the suggestion that the entire application would rise or fall on the issue of raising the charter cap: in fact, on the U.S. Department of Education rubric for evaluating RttP applications, charter caps are only one of five points in the category “ensuring successful conditions for high-performing charter schools and other innovative schools,” and the category as a whole is assigned only 40 out of a total 500 points. Given the relatively small number of points available, one could only reach the conclusion that the charter cap issue was decisive if you assumed that RttT was a politicized process in which the rubric was nothing more than window dressing. One would have to believe that Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was lying when he said that “there are many, many factors we are looking at. Charters were never going to be the determining factor. We said that from day one.”

Just as importantly, the second point in the innovative schools category demands that charter schools “serve student populations that are similar to local district student populations, especially relative to high-need students.” The way to score higher in the category, then, would have been to adopt the legislation sponsored by State Senate leader John Sampson and State Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver and supported by the UFT, which combined an increase in the cap for charter schools with measures that would have had charter schools educate their fair share of high-need students. It was the opponents of this legislation — the New York Charter School Association, the New York City Charter School Center, Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein, among others — that bear responsibility for what few points New York may have lost on this count.

New York has more of the higher achieving charter schools in the U.S. because of the balance of oversight, accountability and effective regulation struck in our state; no doubt, those factors contributed to NY’s score in this column. The calls by charter management to remove all regulation could only diminish the quality of New York charter schools.

Unfortunately, it’s not likely the view from inside the charter management crystal ball will get much better very soon, if we judge by their reaction to the news that New York was a RttT finalist. Neither evidence nor common sense play much of a role in their complaints about the results, or their disappointment that the RttT application was not the invitation to union bust they so desperately wanted.

There is, of course, another route. Charter management could work with the UFT, NYSUT and elected officials to push for responsible legislation. A charter school law that combines an increase in the cap with regulations that require charter schools to educate all students, especially high need students, seems to be exactly what the Obama administration is looking for. The Post may see equity, oversight and accountability as “poison pills,” but the RttT guidelines clearly include those three elements with the raising of the cap.

Inspired by some ideas I found on the blogosphere as well as the thoughts culled from interactions with my colleagues, I recently launched an exciting new vocabulary enrichment program in my classroom.

It started after I did some nifty reorganization that opened up the area in the front of the room, reduced the amount of clutter near my desk, and afforded me space to institute the new charts we’d be creating. I told the class, when they came in, to look for the changes in the room, and they all seized on the area I hoped they would: the newly empty board, on which I had drawn the Olympic rings and written “Something special is going here.” For period three, they may have noticed, all I wrote on our flow of the day was “Something special.”

Seizing on the students’ interest in the Winter Olympics (which, regrettably, I didn’t incorporate into any elements of my teaching until today – keeping in mind, though, the restraints of the curriculum as well as the fact that we were off from school for the first week), I told the students we would be launching our own Olympics, and that our neighborhood had been chosen as the host city. Only our Olympics wouldn’t be about sports, it would be about words. This thrilled them to no end, and with that, they sat comfortably nestled in the palm of my hand.

I proceeded to display a chart on which I had written “Honorable Mention.” I told them that even those Olympians who don’t win a medal do get some kind of recognition – they’re told they did a good job. And this chart, I explained, would house similar words. These are the words that do a good job when needed, but not the best words we can think of. The class named some words that deserved honorable mention: happy, sad, nice, good, bad. We all agreed that even though those words work sometimes, we can almost always find better ways to express our ideas.

Next, I pulled up the “Bronze” chart. It was empty, but the kids volunteered some examples of words that mean the same thing the honorable mention words do, but are more mature. So now it was words like: gloomy, joyful, and blue. We were off to a good start, and excitement was mounting.

Then, it was silver’s turn. I had placed some words on the chart already, and admittedly, I’ve forgotten them now (hey, give me a break. I just had an exhausting hour and 20 minutes commute home). These were words, I told them, that they may have heard before but didn’t know the meaning of. Or, they were really good synonyms for bronze or honorable mention words.

Finally, it was time to unveil gold. Again, there were words already on the chart. The only ones I can remember now are intrigue and incessant, but essentially (oh! that’s another one), these were brand new words they had never heard before.

The kids were nearly at a fever pitch over all the words and the Olympics motif when I asked them who watched the Opening Ceremonies. Many had, and one of the students remarked that the cauldron was faulty (one of our Olympic words!) and wouldn’t come up from the floor. I told them we’d have no such problem and we proceeded to the front of the room, where, on the blackboard I had earlier written the intriguing (GOLD MEDAL WORD!) message: “Something special will be going here.”

I hung our Olympic Words logo and then raised the banners for each word. First, it was honorable mention, which was met with polite applause after I reminded them that all words were important. Next, bronze was raised, and the applause increased. Silver drew a big reaction, and then, with my mouth tooting the Olympic theme song, I raised gold. The claps and hoots were loud and vibrant.

Of course, just like in the real Olympics, things can go wrong during the Opening Ceremonies, and so it was as my magnets slid down the board, and the bronze chart ripped. But I fetched (BRONZE MEDAL WORD!) some scotch tape and announced I would avert the conflict (SILVER MEDAL WORD!). That done, we decided avert needed a space on our podium, and awarded it the gold medal.

I had noticed as I left the room yesterday that one of the girls had made a flower out of paper and left it on her desk. To me, it looked like an Olympic cauldron, and you know what? That’s what it became. I asked her if I could use it and she said yes. I took red and orange markers, colored in the pointy part to look like fire, and stapled it to the board. With this, I declared the Olympics open and announced, “Let the games begin!”

From here, I said it was time to compete. Olympians train and train for their sports — just like we do with words – in order to compete. In their notebooks, I had the class write about anything they wanted, the only catch being that they had to be resourceful (SILVER MEDAL WORD!) and use the idiom, simile, and now, Olympic charts we have fashioned. You would think I asked them to go eat a gallon of ice cream while playing Xbox on the first day of summer. They flew around the room, sitting in front of the charts, conversing, assisting each other. Would you believe some even grabbed dictionaries and asked each other how to spell words? Their seeming newfound appreciation of words was very apparent, no more so than when I said it was time to finish up. This drew the “Awwwwww” that always makes me say, “Fine, five more minutes.” That drew the “YAY!” that always makes me feel chipper (GOLD MEDAL WORD!)

We’re onto something here. Tonight, the class is publishing what they started working on in school today, and we are running with this. They are studiously stalking similes and Olympic words in their books (by the end of the day we had anointed “hamlet” as gold and “conquer” as silver). It’s exciting to see such excitement about words. I’m very optimistic. Our cauldron is burning bright. May it never cease!

One additional point on this that is worth mentioning: The words I started them off with (I had a bunch prepared, for which they voted) are all pulled from one of three sources. Either they are words found in shared reading, words found in read alouds, or words I decided to use in my own speech and then emphasized. I will aid the growth of our Olympic word lists, but the students also need to invest in mining their text for more.