Union Role is Mediator, Not Advocate

Even Penn and Teller can't make an entire school building disappear from public into private hands in an instant. But watch the UFT and Green Dot make magic.

We've been saying this for years. That the UFT plays the role of mediator between the rank and file members and the people managing the school system. What the members need is a strong advocate, a role that is increasingly being played by people like Diane Ravitch and NYC parent activist Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters and a new national group, Parents Across America (PAA).

I wrote a piece on Feb. 13 titled: Why Won't Mulgrew Defend LIFO?  I know the answer but don't want to scare you so early in this article.

Remember: 110 schools have been closed under the stewardship of the UFT leadership. Schools have become test prep factories (Ed Notes sponsored resolutions at DA's on the evils of standardized testing as far back as the late 90's were ignored). And charters are running rampant inside public schools but the UFT can't say a word because it has its own two charters running rampant inside two public schools. Where's the advocacy on the part of the UFT other than selective words at selective times? Show some results. The scary thing was yesterday's missive to send Governor Cuomo a "thank you" message. Lucky I ate a few hours before.

A new crop of young teachers who have come out of the woodwork recently and become active in groups like Grassroots Education Movement (GEM), NY Collective of Radical Educators (NYCORE) and Teachers Unite (TU). These voices have become important to counteract the message of the anti-union Bill Gates/DFER funded group Educators for Excellence (E4E which ICE's Jeff Kaufman renamed "ME4ME. I just call them ME$ME.) GEM's Julie Cavanagh debated a ME$ME on NY1 the same night Ravitch appeared on Jon Stewart's show. [Diane Ravitch and Julie Cavanagh Kick Butt].
A principal, Brian De Vale, did as good a job as could be done defending seniority face to face with Cathie Black at a District 14 CEC meeting last week. [Brooklyn Principal Challenges Cath...]

I was at the viewing party with Ravitch (Eadie Shanker was there too) sponsored by Leonie and PAA and we also watched Julie eloquently defend LIFO, seniority and tenure in a way that I haven't heard anyone from the UFT or AFT do. Julie tied her advocacy for her students (her school has been invaded by a charter controlled by a billionaire) to the protections she has from tenure. Ravitch was so so impressed she commented, "Julie, you were spectacular, also beautiful!"

Another thing we have been saying is that the UFT for years obfuscated - acting like Joel Klein was the bad guy and Bloomberg was the good guy. Funny how an article in The Observer claims that relations have deteriorated because Randi and Joel have left the room, while also talking about how Klein and Bloomberg played "bad cop, good cop." We maintained that the UFT was trying to fool the membership into believing this was about personalities, not a national attack on teachers, their unions and the entire public school system. EdNotes has been saying that since around 2001.

But I guess Mulgrew hasn't been reading Ed Notes. For in the Observer piece he says:

"I thought it was because of Joel Klein," Mr. Mulgrew said. "I honestly did. But that's not the case anymore. It's just [Mr. Bloomberg] there and it's become worse. ... He has a whole new team around him. ... Everything is carpet bomb and toxicity.

He has to be kidding. Randi fooled him too? We're in more to trouble than I thought. Then Mulgrew comes up with this goody:

"Since I know Deputy Mayor Wolfson's strategy is this when he runs a campaign, I'm assuming it's his influence on [the mayor]," said Mr. Mulgrew. Mr. Wolfson is of course the mayor's hard-driving senior adviser, who notably fought against Barack Obama's campaign long after Mr. Wolfson's candidate, Hillary Clinton, seemed to abandon the 2008 Democratic primary.

Mulgrew and the Observer declined to mention that Howard Wolfson was (and still may be for all we know) on the UFT payroll for years. (Just check the LM-2 reports of past years.)

And then we come to the NY Times piece today (New Strategy Weighed for Failing Schools) about the cozy relationship between the UFT and Green Dot charter maven/scoundrel Steve Barr who will partner together in shutting down a public school but making it look like something else. You see, you can believe in magic. Even Penn and Teller can't make an entire school building disappear from public into private hands in an instant. But watch the UFT and Green Dot make magic.

The plan would also involve forcing all teachers to reapply for their jobs and using a committee of teachers, school administrators and parents to pick who got to stay. The teachers’ contract would give them some measure of job protection, but it would be easier to fire them. The teachers also would work under more flexible rules, including longer hours in exchange for higher pay. “It’s about, what do we need to get this staff in order for them to meet the needs of the children and stop with this one-size-fits-all stuff?” said Michael Mulgrew...

Right Mike! One size fits all. If I were teaching in one of these schools,  I would be scared, very scared.

Let me tell you a few things about Steve Barr:

You know that the school in LA - Locke HS mentioned in the Times article?

Results on the standardized tests were lackluster, but the school gets high marks in other indicators of progress.The state test results released Tuesday for Locke High School weren't the sort of thing its new operator, Green Dot Public Schools, is accustomed to seeing: Not a single student scored as proficient in geometry, for example, and only a few percent tested at the next level down, basic.

How interesting what the Times leaves out. GEM/ICE's Lisa North commented:
BUT this is how NYC schools are closed...based on test scores....but I guess a charter school can be judged by "other" means.

Oakland teacher Jack Gerson wrote in Substance:

Two years ago, Steve Barr and his Green Dot charter schools group engineered a hostile takeover of Locke High School, a large public high school in Los Angeles. Despite the opposition of United Teachers of Los Angeles and the LA Unified School District, Barr was able to convince a bare majority of Locke's permanent faculty (37 of 73) to opt for Green Dot." Barr promptly dismissed the entire staff, forcing them to reapply for their jobs. Over 70 percent were not rehired.

And then there is this side of Barr: According to the Green Dot website, he is no longer on staff either.

Barr stepped aside this fall as board chairman of Green Dot but remains on the board and on staff. The expense problem had nothing to do with Barr's change of role, said Shane Martin, who replaced Barr as chairman.

Green Dot charter schools founder repays group $50,866
The nonprofit's tax return shows that Steve Barr repaid the organization after an internal review found that expenses he had charged were undocumented or unjustified.

Lie down with privatization dogs and you get fleeced. Can't wait to hear the spin at the DA today.
----------------
Check out Norms Notes for a variety of articles of interest: http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/. And make sure to check out the side panel on right for news bits.

Is Mulgrew In or Out?

If you are reading the tea leaves on where the UFT really stands on LIFO, there is a whole lot of give about to come, though of course it will be couched in terms of a big victory. We raised the question a few weeks ago in this post: Why Won't Mulgrew Defend LIFO?

It is pretty clear to us that Mulgrew won't defend LIFO because he intends to give up ground and today's events confirms it.

Now I sometimes try to look through the obfuscations of Unity Caucus shill Peter Goodman's blog Ed in the Apple for signs of where the union stands - or sits. Goodman's job is to soften people up for the kill. So here is the perfect Goodman scare tactic post: Is NYC Heading Toward a Teacher Strike? How Far Are Teachers Willing to Go to Defend Layoff Rules?

Gee, is the only way the UFT can defend LIFO is to strike? How about making the very strongest case for LIFO that we can make instead of punting? Like, instead of snow ball commercials, how about talking about Peter Lamphere's U ratings for being chapter leader of Bronx HS of Science or Iris Blige or PS 114?  See Jim Dwyer's excellent NY Times piece today: How Not to Rid New York City Schools of Bad Apples:

Over eight years, Mr. Bloomberg has said, he raised teacher salaries by 43 percent. Now he says it’s possible that he will have to cut more than 6,000 positions, and he does not want to do it on a basis of strict seniority, which the law requires — a critical statute that was not changed even when his administration was dishing out raises. (Mr. Bloomberg did win concessions to ease seniority requirements in assignments.)

Education officials spent Tuesday in Albany, arguing that the city should be allowed to lay off teachers using a rating system that currently relies heavily on the evaluation of principals. The prospect of having a principal like the one at P.S. 114 making such decisions does not make the heart leap with joy. Other principals, trying to stretch their budgets, might feel pressured to get rid of older, better-paid teachers.

On NY1, GEMers Peter Lamphere and Julie Cavanagh tonight made a better case than Mulgrew who basically made no case. Tomorrow night on NY1 ("Inside City Hall") Julie will debate another teacher (E4E?) on the LIFO issue. 8pm and 10pm.

I raised the issue of race in this piece: Ending LIFO: Another Form of Racism?

NYC Educator went to the UFT lobbying day in Albany and was also disturbed at signs of a compromise in this post:  UFT--Time to Take a Stand!

But he said something else that was very disturbing. He said there would probably be some compromise bill. He said the UFT tended to do things like that, just as they did on the evaluation system. Now here's the thing--the evaluation system, based on value-added, is crap, because there is no validity to value-added.

The official UFT rationale, that value-added is only 20-40% of the evaluation, is nonsense. The argument that some states have 50% based on value-added, and that we therefore made a better deal, is also nonsense. That we accepted less crap than some other state does not mitigate our acceptance of crap. That we accepted additional crap in 02, and a ton of it in 05, means that there simply is not room to handle much more of it.

Here is the stance we should take on this new "reform"--we refuse to discuss it until and unless we get the 4/4 raises all other city employees got.

Then, and only then, should we calmly sit down at the negotiating table and tell Mayor Bloomberg and his band of corporate goons to go to hell. After that, we can explain our positions to faux-Democrat Andy Cuomo.

There was some back and forth on the listserves that illuminates the UFT about to sell out on LIFO. Some GEM/NYCORE newer teachers who put out that letter (Petitions to Support LIFO and Seniority: Five Year and Under Teachers)  urging support for seniority were asked to attend a Mulgrew press conference on Monday. One of them made this comment:

At the press conference on Monday I was particularly struck by the overly obvious, clearly intentional avoidance of the words seniority and LIFO. The entire point of the press conference was "there is no need for layoffs" and "this is a scare tactic by the mayor." While these are important points, it's also important to say what's wrong with the plan that the mayor is trying to scare us INTO supporting. Mulgrew seemed more incensed that the mayor would go over his head to Albany to change policies rather than come talk to HIM about changing the seniority rules first. But again, his only mention of what was actually wrong with Bloomberg's proposal was when Mulgrew complained that the mayor wasn't coming to the bargaining table about it, plus a vague mention of how the bill was "bad for teaching and learning in nyc." The administrators union leader even said- "Talk to us. Nothing is off the table." Nothing?

Not bad from a third year teacher who "gets it."

Experienced political activist Marjorie Stamberg added to the debate:

On NY 1 this morning, (see link below) education reporter Lindsey Christ said that Bloomberg's layoff plan won't go anywhere because Albany democrats, Sheldon Silver in particular will stop it.


Instead, she reported, Cuomo has his own plan which says that "seniority" should only be "part" of the equation in deciding who gets laid off, and teacher eval based on the new 4-point Race to the Top criteria should be part of it too.


She reported that the UFT seems to be buying into the Cuomo plan!


As we know, if they cave on this, it will be a huge blow for the union and labor struggle. But I think it was in the works for sometime, that is why we haven't been able to get Mulgrew to come out and say he defends seniority in layoffs, only that "nobody should be laid off." All well and good, nobody should and we should fight for that. But that is only one-half of the principle.


I have also been trying to track this down all day, and my Unity chapter leader (who's also on the E Board) was not denying it.


http://www.ny1.com/content/134765/cuomo-enters-albany-fray-over-teacher-layoff-policy

Check out the ednotes sidebar for latest events and Norms Notes for a variety of articles of interest: http://normsnotes2.blogspot.com/. And make sure to check out the side panel on right for news bits.

Why Won't Mulgrew Defend LIFO?

I just want to open with a cat report since our Unity/union official friend seems so anxious to get an update: no doody, no vomit. Now you can relax for the day.

I just watched Mulgrew on Diana Williams on ABC and wasn't surprised he wouldn't defend LIFO. He didn't at the DA last Wednesday and he didn't went he went to speak to E4E (I have to comment later on the E4E correct point about retirees voting in UFT elections). Instead he shifts the debate to not having layoffs at all or talks about class size. Not a bad strategy but ducking the LIFO issue when he has a platform to make a rational case does everyone a disservice. Why not bring up the Peter Lamphere case in a vast public forum? Does the fact that Peter is a long-time member of the opposition have anything to do with it? At the very least he should bring up Iris Blige.

Arthur Goldstein did a piece on LIFO at HufPo: merits of LIFO  and Peter did his own piece at Gotham: “Merit”? My Experience With Arbitrary U Ratings

Making the connection between political use of U ratings and LIFO should be at the top of Mulgrew's agenda. But it isn't and that avoidence is what puts him on the Randi Weingarten camp (see part 2 of our GEM TFA blogger's reactions to Randi's appearance yesterday for a sample of Randi doublespeak -Live Blogging from Teach for America 20th Anniversary Summit, Part 2 - Randi Weingarten).

I know people think Mulgrew is different - and later I may do a piece on my reaction to him at the DA where I also saw some differences - but more in style than substance.

Mulgrew also missed a chance to explain and defend the ATRs - which he did at the DA to the members - but doesn't really do when he talks to the public - I mean give the full case with facts and figures how these people are often covering real programs.

I left this comment at Gotham, a comment that is waiting moderation, so I'll reprint it here:

Is a democratic system of government always fair? There are all sorts if distortions. But can anyone point to an alternative. The same with LIFO. Not always fair to all but in fact is the only system that works over the long term. It is a system put in place well over a hundred years ago way before there were teacher unions  because of the corruption and patronage that went on.

Why would that change now? Just read Peter Lamphere's story in the Community section - he would be out of a job if LIFO ends. Then there's Iris Blige. But we can talk about hundreds of principals who would not make a fair and rational judgement.

Other principals I know absolutely support LIFO in spite of what it costs them.

By that I mean the fair funding formula which was designed to force principals to get rid of the highest paid teachers. I have a simple way to eliminate that as a factor - go back the old system of not charging a school for the costs of teacher salaries. There can be no LIFO modifications until that ends. But you will never see that happen because that is the very reason for the Fair funding formula in the first place and it reveals the entire intention behind the move to end LIFO.

I was at a school the other day as a speaker and a 4th year teacher told me she supported the idea of LIFO but also doesn't think it fair for her to lose her job while she can point to people in the school who don't pull their weight. A fair point.

But let's drill a bit. First, she has no guarantee that the principal sees it the way she does. I had a principal who favored people who sucked up to her - to her that was pulling the weight.

Secondly, as a 4th year teacher she already had a buffer over teachers with less seniority than she has. If she is laid off LIFO seniority rules should protect her when people are called back - though I don't know how this would work in reality. In 1975 when there were massive layoffs, most people were called back within a year or two - and in the order in which they were laid off and at the salary that were making.  Teaching at that point became a tough job to get.

In fact, you will never find everyone working to the same capacity in any job - I know young lawyers at big firms who chafe over the seniority that goes on - there are forms of LIFO in almost every profession. My wife was at a hospital and even among doctors, the longer you are there the more perks you get. There are also all sorts of politics that keep certain people around while more competent people can't get ahead. What do you think goes on the police dept - and these guys have guns - no one seems upset that a young cop might be cut to keep a vet who may not have the ability to chase someone down in the street anymore. To make teachers the focal point is just part of the general assault on public education - to ruin teaching as  career and replace them with a cheap, transient force. As Ravitch points out, there are 4 million teachers in this nation - do they think they can work on the Peace Corps idea? 

Has the uft has made any of these points amongst all the other defense of lifo arguments so many bloggers are making?

Jim Callaghan Comments on Principal Iris Blige Outrage: Charges UFT Protected Blige

"Mulgrew should save his outrage about the Blige case for the UFT comic pages"- 
"Weingarten told me that most teachers in the rubber rooms were guilty and crazy"
-----Former NY Teacher reporter Jim Callaghan

We always knew the UFT leaders took the side of administrators but now we have it from the horse's mouth. A must read below is Callaghan's exposure of how the UFT leaders abandoned a teacher at Blige's school who had trumped up charges filed against her and was fired.

The UFT allows attack on chapter leaders to go unanswered - I could go into a bunch of stuff - but when the very lifeblood of the union is under assault it calls for drastic action. I even put up a reso at the DA calling for special protections and cover for chapter leaders over 10 years ago that was overwhelmingly turned down by Unity Caucus.

Blige is the poster girl for why we need tenure and LIFO. She went after teachers for no reason, was found guilty but instead of dumping her she was fined $7000. Chump change.

Here are some background stories:

Bronx principal keeps her job after imperiling the jobs of others ...
Ruining careers for $475/month (18 month term) « JD2718

And Ed Notes covered it a bunch of times:

Education Notes Online: Teachers Protest Principal Iris Blige at ..

Mar 13, 2009 ... The principal at this school, Iris Blige, is abusive, arrogant, and disrespectful of teachers. She has framed several teachers that for some ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../teachers-protest-principal-iris-blige.html - Cached - Similar

Education Notes Online: UPDATE: Highlights of the protest at ..

Mar 14, 2009 ... Winderbaum slammed into Iris Blige and her wayward approach to educators, kids, and schools and said the union is “fed up” with the DoE's ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../highlights-of-protest-at-fordham-hs-for.html - Cached

As long as they support principals who engage in vendettas against teachers, they will have to drag teachers kicking and screaming out of fighting for protections.Jim Callaghan was the NY Teacher reporter who did the most intensive work exposing the Bliges of this world - until he was fired in July 2010 for attempting to organize a union of reporters at the UFT. Here is a report on what went on behind the scenes in a comment he left at Gotham Schools story on Blige:

What the UFT Did and Didn't Do in the Blige Case
by Jim Callaghan, former reported for the NY Teacher

Klein knew all about Blige and the recantation of an Assistant Principal because I wrote about it in the Spring of 2009 for the New York Teacher. It didn’t take a special Condon “investigation” to uncover the Blige horror show, supported by Mulgrew and Weingarten.

I quoted members who said Blige specifically went after chapter leaders and sent them to the rubber rooms on trumped up charges-they were never charged with anything and were all sent back to the classroom.

That was the last article I was allowed to write about Blige.

When the union had a rally on March 13, 2009, Weingarten sent out a press advisory (I have a copy) knocking the total number of protesters down to 50 after she was told that 500 would attend. So even then the union was protecting Blige.

The worst case of the Weingarten- Mulgrew Vichy collaboration involves the teacher accused of leaving a letter in Blige’s mailbox threatening to murder her! The letter said there was a “gang” led by the teacher who would kill the principal and her son.

Fifteen cops came to the school, interviewed no one except the teacher, lied to her and said they had her on video leaving the letter in the principal’s mailbox and had her fingerprints on the letter.

Then they changed the story to say it was her handwriting on the letter, which was announced by an Assistant Principal- tape recorded by a member- one week later- that was in February, 2009.

Now: think Tucson and the attempted murder of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords: What happened to the teacher after one “expert” detective said it was the teacher’s handwriting?

NOTHING! It is a New York State felony to threaten the murder of a public official. Nothing happened to the teacher until eight weeks later, in April, 2009, after I called Blige for a comment on my story.
The next day, the teacher was arrested and charged with a misdeameanor. (Even if she is found guilty, she will serve 15 days of community service picking up garbage on the Grand Concourse).

The Bronx D.A.- elected with help from the UFT- did not ask for bail, didn’t ask for the teacher’s passport to be lifted and the principal never asked for extra police protection for Blige, parents, students and the staff.

Despite my urging, Weingarten refused to call the D.A. and ask that he personally look at the case. There was no police probe of the gang. The teacher -this horrible accused murderer beloved by her students and colleagues-- was sent back to the rubber room.

Nearly two years later, after the D.A. Robert Johnson asked for 15 postponements, there has been no trial and the case is still open.

What would have happened if a teacher wrote a letter like that to Bloomberg of Klein?

The teacher ultimately lost her job because neither Mulgrew nor Weingarten nor NYSUT lawyer Claude Hirsch lifted a finger to help her. She never had a 3020A hearing. Klein used a loophole in the law saying he could refuse to approve her application for a work visa if she was merely “accused” of misconduct.

Incredibly, Weingarten and Mulgrew allowed this shanda, like so many others they were complicit in, to stand unchallenged. So the only question still open is: what did they get out of it for themselves and
their UFT cronies?

My editor Deidre McFadyen and staff director LeRoy Barr denied me a vacation day-for the first time since I worked at the union- so I could attend the teacher’s court hearing on my own time--to give her moral support (I have the Barr email).

Weingarten pulled my story the day after the teacher got arrested; Weingarten, Barr, Mulgrew and others all said she was guilty- because she had been arrested. Weingarten told me the teacher was “guilty” because she had “heard” ---from another UFT Staff Director Garry Sprung- that the cops had the teacher’s fingerprints on the letter. I asked Weingarten when the grand jury met, when the teacher was indicted, when she was convicted and when she had exhausted all her appeals.

I had to shame Weingarten the Lawyer/ part-time “teacher” into finally running the story-two weeks after the arrest- after I reminded her about the 6th Amendment (Weingarten told me that most teachers in the rubber rooms were guilty and crazy, which is why I was allowed to run only one rubber room story-in October 2007).

When an Assistant Principal wanted to tell me the story about how she helped frame the teacher, Mulgrew, Barr and McFadyen refeused to let me run the story and Mulgrew wouldn’t even call the D.A. to say he was sending over an important witness to help clear the teacher.

So it is clear- I have lots more on this story and other Weingarten-Mulgrew cover ups of corruption outside and within the union- that the UFT leaders were protecting Klein and the members could
go to hell in a hand basket.


Weingarten $200,000 vacation days myth - or theft of service from the union
The Blige case is one of many that will stand out as the defining Weingarten-Mulgrew legacy of cowardice, double-dealing and abusing the rights of members whose dues they collect for their fat $400,000 salaries, unlimited expenses, a car and driver and “I never took a day off in 24 years” benefits but then refuse to represent them. (The Cal Ripken award for never missing a day’s work goes to Weingarten, except for this inconvenient truth: she took plenty of vacation days, some disguised as AFT “fact-finding” missions and others at her Amagansett country home where she instructed her press office and NY Teacher editors to send her faxes so she could claim she was “working from
home.” Uh- huh- just like every teacher working from home on the beach.

I blame Klein and Blige but Weingarten, Mulgrew, Barr and McFadyen could have exposed this horrible principal two years ago and chose instead to be part of the cover up, as they were at so many other schools which you will be reading about shortly.

When Mulgrew fired me in August 2010 for organizing a union-after 13 years of praise from him, Weingarten and hundreds of UFT officials and the members, he told the press I was unprofessional!
And what other word can we use to describe his perfidy and Weingarten’s abandonment of an accused teacher who came to America from Jamaica to fulfill the immigrant’s dream yet was crushed by the DOE-UFT steamroller?

If there was ever a PERB case for non-representation, this was it- although I lived through so many others when I had to argue with my editor McFadyen and the Weingarten-Mulgrew apparatchiks like Barr, Ellie Engler and McFadyen to get the stories in the union newspaper.

Mulgrew is so paranoid and vicious that he had McFadyen -at $150,000 a year---sit for days on end and go through the New York Teacher archives on line and take stories like Blige off the web site- she has disappeared into the dark hole of corruption that exists at the union. Mulgrew even ordered my name off the obit of Jack Newfield, who once wrote for the union!

How low can a such a self-styled tough guy get? Stay tuned- lots more to come.

Schools in Trouble Starved While UFT Fiddles

Someone must ask the leadership of the UFT, with all its resources, why Leonie Haimson, a one woman wrecking crew when it comes to Tweed chicanery, has to be the one to put a report like the one below together that exposes how Beach Channel HS (the local school in my neighborhood) had rising class sizes while targeted by the DOE for closure. Remember how the UFT law suit kept BCHS open for an extra year but then the UFT made a deal with the DOE that allowed them to insert a new school in the building in an effort to starve the incoming freshman class - with the other high school (Far Rockaway) having been closed already the kids who aren't accepted to any Rockaway schools must head to places like John Adams in Ozone Park, the next target in the domino chain.

So Seung Ok is right on when he says in this piece we posted A Tale of Two Michaels: UFT and Mayor Bloomberg - Who is more undemocratic?:

No wonder teachers are losing the battle for public opinion. We are waging a two front battle against major powers - the millions of our own union leadership and the billionaire mayor. 

Parent activist Paola da Kock commented on the NYCEdNews Listserve:

Six of these schools opened under Bloomberg.  As might be expected, “the city said it was holding newer schools just as accountable as older ones” instead of acknowledging its reform strategy is a failure.  But where’s the UFT, the organization best placed to stop the madness?  It’s “nothing more than a joke,” quips Mulgrew, “the tea cup ride at Disney.”  Does Mulgrew have a plan besides laughing at this “joke”?  As Norm reported, he does: “If we find any substantial violations of the statute that covers school closings, the DOE can expect to see us in court.”  Look what that did for Beach Channel High School, one of the 19 schools “saved” by the UFT lawsuit last February, which will now be closed.

Paola de Kock

Queens HS parent leader Monica Ayuso said:

There is something more sinister going on a Beach Channel. The building was under major construction work. Therefore, closing the school was always the plan.

Lisa Donlan, followed by Dee Alpert chipped in:

What does the CFE organization say about this? Can the IBO or Comptroller tell us where that money went if it wasn't used to reduce class size? Isn't this the equivalent to the misuse of funds? Don't folks do hard time for less? - Lisa

What is needed is a series of good forensic audits to see how funds were actually expended - as opposed to how they were reported as having been expended.  IBO doesn't do this kind of audit work.  CFE could probably try to get some forensic audits as part of its status in the litigation, but ... .  Ditto for the UFT, which is actually litigating how the NYCDOE actually spent class size reduction funds at this time.

The UFT's new papers in its suit to stop release of teachers' value added reports are interesting in terms of looking at the class size reduction money issue.  It would appear that information principals report to Tweed re a bunch of relevant things - including who is teaching which class - is wildly inaccurate and, of course, unaudited and unverified.  It's hard to see how other teacher assignment/class size data they report would be any more reliable.  It is, of course, interesting that the NYCDOE did not require that principals have teachers check data submitted about them for accuracy.  Principals are, in the wonderful world of Tweed, not only captains of their ships, but also sole creators (or concoctors) of virtually all information regarding their ships' staffs and passengers.  - Dee

The reason that principals are so all-powerful is that the UFT was a co-conspirator with the DOE leaving the union at the school level on a respirator.

The response of the UFT to the closing of schools, if any, is beyond in adequate as they trumpet their phony "victory" last year - which helped Mulgrew gain his 91% victory in the union elections.

As Leonie points out below, the extra help and support has nothing to do with the classroom. Send in another coordinator or teacher trainer - I'd like to see these expert try to teach the large classes for a few weeks and check the results.

Leonie on the NYC Public School Parent blog:

The DOE set the closing schools up for failure

Today, in justifying the eleven school closings, with more to come, Deputy Chancellor Marc Sternberg made the following statement: “Year after year, even as we provided extra help and support, these schools simply have not gotten the job done for children."

Did they ever try systematically reducing class size? No.

Most of these students at these schools continue to suffer from overly large classes that far exceed the state average of twenty students per class, as well as the goals in the city’s mandated class size reduction plan. In fact, class sizes have risen sharply in most of the schools slated for closure.

For example, check out the increases in class size at Beach Channel High school, one of the schools on today’s list of closures, which have occurred despite a promise from the DOE to make specific reductions at this school in return for hundreds of millions of dollars in Contract For Excellence funds.

As Sternberg said, “…we cannot afford to let schools continue to fail students when we know we can do better.”

Most parents and teachers would agree. The Department of Education’s stubborn refusal to follow the law and to allow the students at these schools to have their best chance to succeed is unconscionable, and set up these schools for failure.

Parsing Mulgrew on tenure, teacher effectiveness, teacher evaluation, value-added: What he should be saying, but won't

Just heard Mulgrew on Brian Lehrer in relation to Cathie Black's positions opposing tenure and last in first out (LIFO) for layoffs. Talk of teacher effectiveness and cost effectiveness.

Not the latter is a newer wrinkle of the ed deformers - the argument that given 2 roughly equal teachers it is more cost effective to get rid of the one who makes more money. They can even argue that if a teacher who makes 100G is superb, it is still more cost effectie to keep two 3rd year teachers making 60G.

Now if you are running a business that idea looks good. But is it really cost effective over the long term when you are dealing with an entire profession that would react poorly - even the younger teachers who hope to put in a long career and one day get paid accordingly? Other than real newbies who have no plans to stay - think Teach for America - the shock troops of the ed deform movement - the degrading aspect of this attack undermines the profession and weakens teacher effectiveness over the long run. I would bet most teachers from 3rd year on would be absolutely opposed to weakening of tenure and the end of seniority for layoffs - which are a pretty rare affair. Many teachers I know starting around 1969-70 were excessed at least once - and in '75 we had massive layoffs by seniority and call-backs by the same means - an orderly system instead of the chaos the ed deformers are calling for.

Of course we heard none of this argument by Mulgrew who instead talked about the fact that tenure is due process not life-time jobs and that if there are ineffective teachers the principals should have gotten rid of them before it was time for layoffs. Good points for him - he even talked about how tenure is not a contract provision but state law long superceding the lifetime of the union. (By the way - tenure as people talk about it as a lifetime job is more aligned with college teaching though even that is based on some due process system). He also talked about the fair funding formula - the tactic tha charges principals for the costs of the teachers instead of lumping all salaries into a central fund - and how it encourages principals to get rid of of more expensive teachers. So not terrible even though he could have been much stronger - but as we know- the UFT is partway on the ed deform bandwagon - or wants it to appear that way.

When Brian brought up the release of individual teacher evaluations, Mulgrew was weak I thought in not arguing how they should never be released for all sorts of reasons that have been argued. Instead he attacked the accuracy of the value-added results at this point and seemed to argue that when they were accurate it would be OK to release them.

I think there have been enough arguments about VA and the narrow tests they are based on. We think there is a lot more to a teacher than can be expressed in a number. The union should be making that case instead of bragging how they are willing to cooperate in their own members' demise.

For the kind of defense we would like to hear from out union - but never will read this at Modern School:

Value Added & Performance Pay Scams Weaken Teacher Pay and Autonomy

Stephen Krashen, from Schools Matter, has an excellent posting on the idiocy of Value Added teacher assessments and performance pay: Seniority and Teacher Layoffs: A Red Herring

Like so much of Ed Deform: It's all about money. Senior teachers are higher on the pay scale and cost districts more money than younger inexperienced teachers. Krashen argues that this is the only rational argument for dumping experience over youth since veteran teachers generally do a better job. They have more years of on the job practice. They have more experience from workshops, professional development, and collaboration with peers.

However, there is one more reason to dump older teachers: Control

Experienced teachers are less likely to go along with every hare-brained ed deform plan concocted by their administrators. This is one reason why charter schools like KIPP are able to get their teachers to work weekends and summers and be on call well into the night. 

Retired UFT Bronx HS District Rep Lynne Winderbaum on the NYCEDNews Listserve said:

Of all the words used to describe Cathie Black, "parrot" may be a new one. But it seems that after her listening tour of Tweed, she has now come out repeating the tired old propaganda that has been adopted by the Department of Education for the last nine years.

This morning at 6:15 AM on NPR Cathie Black announced that she "has a problem with the practice of granting 25-year-olds tenure, insuring them a job for the rest of their lives for just showing up to work everyday".   Also, she "has a problem with laying off the 'last in' first".  She stated that she could never run a company successfully if these practices existed and that these practices would never be accepted in business.

Frightening to see that her ignorance regarding these issues had been replaced by the misrepresentations she is being taught. First of all, there is no practice of granting 25-year olds tenure. Anyone of that age who does achieve tenure has already served three years in a classroom and has been trained during that probationary period to work on techniques and strategies to improve their pedagogy. At any time during the three year period, if the teacher does not show improvement or an aptitude for the job, he or she can be summarily fired--no questions asked. It is called a "discontinuance of probation" and it is used frequently. After three years, if the teacher has been satisfactory rated, only then is tenure granted. And if an administrator has any doubts about granting tenure, there is the option to extend probation for an additional year...no questions asked. 

Cathie Black is also showing her ignorance of the fact that tenure is not a "job for the rest of their lives for just showing up to work everyday." Tenured teachers can be fired under the terms of state education law Section 3020a. That's all tenure gets them: a due process proceeding. It does not mean a job for life. It is just a guarantee of a fair hearing, with evidence presented and with representation. Private sector workers would love to have such security, but apparently a successful business cannot incorporate fairness according to Black. A tenured teacher cannot be summarily fired for any reason as a probationary teacher can. That's all tenure means. And if Cathie Black is unquestioningly passing along the false myths that we expect of a person who simply repeats what she hears without any independent research, we should fear what lies ahead in her decision making process.

May I add that without tenure, teachers risk discrimination, being punished for their political leanings, and they will rightly fear exposing wrongdoing or questioning violations such as failure to follow special ed or ELL laws, for example. It is just protection Cathie, not a lifetime guarantee. Get out of your cocoon.

"Last in, first out" was never a policy that was debated until the wholesale closing of schools left many veteran teachers without jobs. Before that, the only teachers in excess were those with one or two years experience. Suddenly there were hundreds of employees who had given their lives to the children of New York City, twenty or thirty years in many cases, who had no place to work, through no fault of their own. They were also the most highly paid. So, despite the fact that many are fine teachers, Tweed looked for a way to paint them all with a negative brush and build a pr position around firing them. Black says the practice would never be accepted in business where the model is to have the power to hire and fire at will. But first she must make a convincing argument that the basis of retaining teachers will never be favoritism or silence about problems at schools. Seniority is a fair way to fight favoritism and nepotism. Do away with seniority and tenure and watch what is unleashed in our workforce. After her week of listening to folks downtown, the breadth of her understanding of the issues may be a mile wide but it is a quarter inch thick.

That does not bode well for anyone in the school system.

A Tale of Two Michaels: UFT and Mayor Bloomberg - Who is more undemocratic?

We are waging a two front battle against major powers - the millions of our own union leadership and the billionaire mayor.   

NYC Teacher Seung Ok on NYCEDNEWS listserve:

The NY Post, no friend to the teacher's union, has the following to say about the public relationship between the Mayor and the UFT president, Michael Mulgrew:

"Even though they're often in adversarial positions, Mulgrew has a good relationship with the mayor and the two men rarely clash in public."

"Loeser said the only time Bloomberg spoke to Mulgrew about Black was right before the appointment, when the mayor pointed out that Mulgrew had met her once before.

Mulgrew declined comment.

"Michael Mulgrew and Mayor Bloomberg have private conversations. We do not comment on what might or might not have been said in private conversations that might or might not have happened," a UFT spokesman said."

So the biggest enemy known to public education in New York, and to veteran teachers advocating for what's best for their students has a friend in Michael Mulgrew. No wonder teachers are losing the battle for public opinion. We are waging a two front battle against major powers - the millions of our own union leadership and the billionaire mayor.

On closer inspection the two Michaels seem to have more in common than not. Both run their organizations with the guise of democratic proceedings. It was not democratic for Bloomberg to bribe and coerce his way into a third term.

For those who are unfamiliar with UFT proceedings, let me say that watching it live as a delegate - I imagined this is how so-called democracy is run in countries such as Afghanistan, Russia, and Nigeria.

The UFT has about 3000 delegates, 2200 of whom, can not fit into the small meeting space at 52 Broadway. This is done so that any vote taking place is always dominated by union personnel and Unity party loyalists. They meet for two hours each month and the majority of the time, Mulgrew uses up in the President's speech - which is as long winded as a Sunday sermon. Apparently Mulgrew saves his vehemence against the mayor in these closed meetings.

After that, comes the ceremonial guest speakers, awards, and placards of appreciation to some organization or people (usually a tug-at-the-heart cause that not even the political opposition can help but clap for). In the one year I was attending meetings, these ceremonies included: UFT sending 1000 dollars to the Honduran Teachers Union, the factory strikers at Stella Dora, the NAACP anniversary, a teacher who finally won a grievance for a medical transfer, etc.

Then, finally, when about 20 minutes are left - the floor opens up to the motions that have been already set forth by the Executive Board (sort of like the Senate of the UFT). Good luck trying to get a motion brought forth from the rank and file - because in order for it to be put into next month's New Motions list, it has to be voted on by a majority of those 800 (mostly Unity brethren) sitting at that assembly.

And good luck ever getting to the microphone, because there microphones set up in the aisles. Specifically breaking UFT union and Rules of Order procedure, Michael Mulgrew hand picks who gets to receive roving microphones handed out by, you guessed it, Unity union workers. And they have the ability to shut off any one of those microphones whenever Mulgrew deems it necessary. In most other unions, microphones are set up in each aisle, and the president must address the first member that asks for the floor.

Even if, after all these roadblocks, a member manages to get in a motion to be heard and voted on at that meeting (requiring 2/3 vote), there are further undemocratic hurdles to overcome. Let me give a specific example of an instance where these abuses had important implications.

In the last mayoral election, a member stated a motion for the UFT to support Bill Thompson for mayor. The whole floor was enthused, as evidence by the unanimous clapping in the room - a rare instance of the majority and minority in agreement. After a period of debate, a member asked for the motion to come to a vote.

Again breaking UFT and Rules of Order procedure - Mulgrew stepped into the debate (which is not allowed by the president) and basically took the floor from that member's motion right for a vote. He proceeded to continue the debate by calling on his cabinet to argue against voting for Thompson. After the Unity loyalists basically got the message that Mulgrew wasn't pleased - the eventual vote was unanimous against supporting Bill Thompson.

Now remember the results. Thompson lost by only 5 %. Had only 3 % of the votes shifted, or had not even shown up to vote for the Mayor, public education would be safer today. Had the UFT, sent out its people, like they did for Tony Avella, and mobilized it's full voting membership - we would not be dealing with Mayor Bloomberg.

The main error that both Michaels perpetrate is the notion that they know more than the democratic voice of the populace. And in a little defense of the two Michaels, the problem goes beyond the egos of these two men - but the very system that allows men like this to come into power. It's a problem that democracy has faced since its infancy.

Remember that when the constitution was ratified, only 10 to 16 % of the population (white men with property) were allowed to vote. It's an endless struggle between the interests of the rich and the interests of the majority. Let us remember that this vision of an equitable and free public education is only 60 years old. Like a new democracy, it has to be fought for and nothing is assured. True public education was born of struggle, and nothing short of struggle will keep its ideals alive.

Seung Ok
- Teacher

Ed Notes Exclusive: Break In at UFT Headquarters

Anyone with information leading to the recovery of Michael Mulgrew's spine, please notify the UFT ASAP

Insider sources at the UFT have informed Ed Notes that an unknown party broke into UFT headquarters. So far the only item that has been known to be taken is UFT President Michael Mulgrew's spine.

While there has been some suspicion that something was amiss from the day Mulgrew took office, the clincher came with this item in the NY Times:

...Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, the city teachers’ union, said, “All of these people have heavy-duty backgrounds and success in education, so obviously David Steiner is clearly looking at this from the educational side, as he should be.” 
- NY Times, Nov. 19, 2010 - Panel on Pick for Schools Has Close Ties to Bloomberg

The reporters from the Times, having analyzed the panel and interviewed numerous people who raised issues with the members of the Steiner panel to review Cathie Black's waiver, were so incredulous at Mulgrew's comment, one of the lone voices in the article supporting the panel, they immediately called 911 suspecting something was amiss.

An all-points bulletin has been issued in an attempt to recover Mulgrew's spine. This may turn out to be a wild goose chase as some doubt there ever was a breakin in the first place.

Inside UFT sources claim that former UFT president took Mulgrew's spine and other parts of Mulgrew's anatomy when she left to go to the AFT, along with and her stapler.


Excerpts from the NY Times article:

New York State’s top education official on Friday named an advisory panel of eight experts, at least half of them with strong connections to the Bloomberg administration, to help him decide whether to approve Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s controversial choice to run the city’s school system.

Three panelists selected by David M. Steiner, the state education commissioner, worked as senior officials at the city’s Department of Education.

One of those three now works at a foundation that was, for many years, the vehicle for Mr. Bloomberg’s personal charitable donations.

A fourth panelist is the head of a museum that has received almost half a million dollars from Mr. Bloomberg in donations since he took office. 

Three panelists are in charge of sizable urban school districts: Andrés A. Alonso, the chief executive of the Baltimore school system and a former deputy chancellor under Mr. Klein; Jean-Claude Brizard, the superintendent in Rochester and a New York City native who has been a teacher and principal and was a top aide to Mr. Klein; 

The other panelists are: Ronald F. Ferguson, a Harvard economist who focuses on the achievement gap between minority students and white students; Kenneth G. Slentz, a top aide to Mr. Steiner at the State Education Department; Louise Mirrer, president and chief executive of the New-York Historical Society, which has received regular donations from Mr. Bloomberg, and a former top official at the City University of New York; and Michele Cahill, a vice president at the Carnegie Corporation of New York and a former senior educational policy adviser to Mr. Klein. 

 Assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries, a Brooklyn Democrat who has long been critical of Mr. Bloomberg’s education policies, questioned the panel’s makeup, saying, “It appears that the deck has been stacked in favor of granting the waiver in a manner that will further undermine public confidence in the appointment of Ms. Black.” 

So kiddies, let's review the panel: Brizzard, Alonso and Cahill all worked for Klein, plus Louise Mirrer who heads a museum receiving donations from Bloomberg.  Hmmm. Let's do the math. 4 is half of 8 and that makes - gee, only one more and Unchatty Cathie gets her waiver.

And let's review Mulgrew's comment:
“All of these people have heavy-duty backgrounds and success in education, so obviously David Steiner is clearly looking at this from the educational side, as he should be.” 


The clincher that Mulgrew was missing something was his classification of Michelle Cahill as "having a heavy-duty background and success in education". The Times piece has this to say:

As one of Mr. Klein’s most trusted aides from 2002 to 2006, she played a crucial role in reorganizing the school system and developing new schools, and was the driving force behind new programs for students most at risk of dropping out. But in 2004, she was denied a state waiver to serve as deputy chancellor, because while she had a dozen years of teaching experience and a master’s degree in urban affairs, she lacked traditional education supervisory credentials. 

Cahill was the much maligned agent of Klein's first deputy chancellor, Diane Lam, and was much vilified by many teachers over her rigid micro-management policies of force feeding the workshop model.

UFT Delegate Assembly Craps out on Black Waiver, Unity Frays at the Edges

Just back from taking my wide out to a fancy brunch - at Costco. We must have hit the clam dip booth 10 times. If I can break through the heartburn I have a report from yesterday's UFT Delegate Assembly.

It was nice to see a bunch of Jim Callaghan supporters out in front of 52 Broadway yesterday with signs and a leaflet. I hope people took note.

You really have to sit through a UFT Delegate Assembly and listen carefully to get an insight to the thinking that goes on at the top levels of the union. Over the past few years I have never had the patience to put up with it and focused more on socializing and organizing. But this time I went upstairs to watch on the TV monitors in the hallway - they no longer allow visitors to even set foot in the hall and if they could get away with stopping me they would keep me off the 2nd floor too - but I just tell them to call the cops to have me removed and they shut up.

You know I'm not a hater but I get closest when dealing with Unity hacks because my dues pays these fuckers. I can do a post or two on some recent encounters but there are more important issues. Like how will the leadership figure out a way to try to make it look like they don't like the Black appointment while in fact doing nothing to make it look to the ed deformers, who they really care about, that they're OK with it - wink, wink.

So there was a reso we handed out calling on the UFT to oppose the Black waiver. This reso was based on Black's involvement with Coca Cola and anti-labor practices which have been condemned and I urge you to read it: Resolution for UFT DA: Reject Waiver and Black.

But it never got to the floor. The UFT had its own reso, which when I read it I smacked myself in the head so hard I had temporary amnesia with side effects- like, while Mulgarten was talking on the TV screen he morphed into Randi, who in another deja view moment showed up as the mystery guest at the Gotham School fundraiser a few hours later. They were hoping for Cathie Black but ended up with Randi.

Mulgrew tolds us how he met Black. "She has nice shoes." Hmmm, Mulgrew have a foot fetish? Well, not to worry, he will end up licking her boots at some point. Wait 'till we see 10,000 less teachers and 52 Broadway becomes the incredible shrinking building.


The Whereases start out saying all sorts of good stuff. Like the Chancellor "should have a full and thorough understanding of teaching and learning" blah, blah, blah. Then they shift into the usual obfuscation/waffling tone about NY State Law on chancellor qualifications and the waiver law and the role of the State Ed Commissioner. Then it goes on to talk about the secretive process that Bloomberg engaged in as he tried to thwart the intent of the mayoral control law - which by the way we all told them when they supported the renewal last year he would do anyway. Ho, hum. Then comes the part about State Ed Comm chairman David Steiner, who Mulgrew seems to have a man crush on, "has announced the formation of an independent panel, including educators (my bold), to evaluate the request for a waiver...."

So you see, kiddies, they have actual educators so not to worry. So here comes the kicker:

be it RESOLVED, that the UFT support the process established by [Steiner] as a credible and fair procedure for deciding on the request for a waiver from qualifications for chancellor...promulgated in state education law.

But, but, but - after all you said you are also saying you would go along with Black if they so decide. You could hear the sound of teeth grinding all over the place.

So, there was no real debate as the Unity leadership decided to amend their own reso with Leo Ugh! Casey leading the charge. This 3 part piece of crap calls for, among other things, changing the law in the future to include a nationwide search for a chancellor - sort of like looking for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

So then it gets interesting. Dave Pecoraro, a long-time Unity parrot at DA's is also chapter leader at the soon to close Beach Channel HS in Rockaway. Dave may be a Unity parrot but he is not a hack. He is a passionate chapter leader and fighter against the school closing and he and ICE's James Eterno built somewhat of an alliance last year as leaders of the 2 large Queens high schools targeted for closing. And the 2 schools the UFT sold out by making a deal with the DOE to allow new schools to open and help kill the incoming freshman classes. Dave was in action at Monday night's meeting with the Queens HS Supt which I taped. A lot of people in the opposition and even in Unity don't like Dave but he's grown on me.

So, he gets up and does something Unity people never do. He adds to their reso: The UFT will oppose the waiver for Black if she does not personally visit every single school on the DOE's list of schools targeted for possible closing. He argues that since she is new to the scene she should these schools first hand. Not radical but interesting. Of course they vote this down.

So far there has not been a person who spoke up and opposed the reso and low and behold a Unity guy gets up and says he is against. Why? Well, he says with some degree of passion, they have closed over 100 schools and what's the point of the whole thing if you turn down Dave's amendment? This is Unity and a sign the waffles and obfuscations on school closings and charter school invasions are wearing the Unity rank and file at the edges.

Mulgrew: There's only one name I don't want to hear. I didn't say it. She doesn't need a waiver.
At least it's not Rhee -  and Unity people go around repeating it
 

But not to worry. You've been hearing the Unity Klones whispering the R word, while shaking. We could get Rheeeee if Black fails. Oooooooh! We scared. Mulgrew goes all cute. "There are some people who don't even need a waiver. I won't mention her name." The whole place goes weak at the knees at the thought of Rhee, who was just run out of DC on a rail, one of the key reasons being that the Black community was outraged at Rhee's slights, some even bringing up the race issue - some historical antagonisms between Koreans and Blacks - remember the Brooklyn Korean grocery incident when Dinkins was mayor. Maybe that's why he endorsed Black - fear of Rhee. But the idea of Rhee coming in here as the big bad wolf is unlikely. But also the fact that the UFT leadership fears her so is a sign of their weakness.

Can't you just see people all over using the coming of Rhee as a threat to get what they want? Take a cut in salary of Rhee is coming.


Mulgrew on Value-added
"If we lose the case and the scores are publicized, we have to be out there to support them."

At this point I was sorry I didn't bring a nail gun to shoot myself through the ear.

------------
Afterburn
Then it was off to the Gotham School party with Eva, hubbie Eric and loads of charter school slugs. And Randi too. Report coming - once I extract that nail.