An Eye for an iPhone

It's almost inconceivable that an ostensible public servant could introduce a health plan in which people were asked to choose between phones and health. And yet that's exactly what Congressman Jason Chaffetz of Utah managed to portray a few days ago. You see, to Chaffetz the issue isn't why people can't afford a $10,000 visit to their friendly local ER. The issue is that they're greedy, and that they'd rather have an iPhone than be alive.

Of course that's absolutely absurd, as is the GOP plan to replace Obamacare. The notion, obviously, is to pass on costs to those who can least afford them. Subsidizing insurance by age rather than need means that someone as wealthy as Bill Gates could be eligible for huge benefits while a single mom in Brooklyn will be more or less on her own. I'm sure that makes sense somehow, to someone, but who it is I have no idea. Of course Chaffetz himself has a government health care plan, and if it's good enough for him, why not offer it to all Americans? 

And how on earth can cutting Medicaid support help America? Medicaid is beneficial for states, and ultimately saves money. Clearly the priority of the GOP is not a healthy America, but rather a more wealthy insurance company. And don't forget the uber-rich, who will get a huge tax cut benefit even as our poorer friends and neighbors get cut.

I honestly don't know how Chaffetz or Ryan can get up in the morning and face themselves in a mirror. Were I the motivating factor for a plan like this, I'd take the first opportunity to leap from a tall building. Nonetheless, these guys suffer no such scruples.

If you feel like buying an iPhone, you can get one brand new for as little as $399. I'm not sure what drugs Chaffetz is taking, but I've yet to hear of the health plan you can buy for $400, even if you're the healthiest 22-year-old on God's green earth. In fact, I think you'd be fortunate if you could find a halfway decent plan for $800 a month. As a matter of fact, I have very good health insurance as a NY City employee, and there've been months when I paid $800 in co-pays. With $30 doctor visits and lab fees, $50 visits to Urgent Care, $150 to ER and $200 to hospital admission, those dollars can really mount up.

Despite that, I know how lucky I am. What I really don't understand is how anyone could vote for a lying sack of crap like Jason Chaffetz. I mean, I suppose he must have qualities other than his outright contempt for poor people, but what on earth can they be to remotely compensate for that? The man is a loathsome reptile.

It's disgusting that he insults poor people, as though they're greedy. This guy has a great medical plan, makes almost 200K a year, has a whole lot of his expenses paid by we, the people, and wants to begrudge poor people the small comfort of a phone. I don't understand for the life of me why people vote for these morally bankrupt windbags. I read a whole book called What's the Matter With Kansas and I still haven't got the slightest idea.

But the real sinners are the ones who write the propaganda to keep slugs like this one in office. I hope there's a special ring in hell for those people, because their job entails making life hellish for real working Americans here on earth.

The Ever-Shifting Standard

It's fascinating to read the opinion columns in the New York Post. Yesterday they were all bent out of shape about waiving the current literacy test for incoming teachers. Evidently this test results in fewer teachers of color than white teachers passing. How good is the test? I have no idea. Now I personally think literacy is key for teachers, even though it appears unimportant in a President of the United States.To me, for example, when Donald J. Trumpp, uses the word tapp, it makes me think he's full of crapp.

But let's talk teachers. I certainly hope that we can model the use of English for our students. Let's assume, for the moment, that this test is a fair measure of literacy. Now I can't tell you exactly why we should assume that, since NY State created the NYSESLAT exam to test language acquisition, and in fact it measures no such thing. Also, the state has a history of moving cut scores to get the results it wishes. Wanna fail everyone and make teachers look bad? Raise the cut scores. Wanna pass everyone and make Bloomberg look like a genius? Lower the cut scores.

The problem is not necessarily this test. It's not impossible that this test is a precise measure that's absolutely accurate. Of course I have no reason to assume any such thing, but that doesn't make it impossible. The problem, in fact, is that this standard applies only to public school teachers. It does not apply to charter school teachers, who may be appointed despite not having teacher certification. And yes, that applies right here in good old New York State.

So my question is why doesn't the NY Post go after those substandard charter school teachers? If it's outrageous that public school teachers fail to meet this standard, isn't it equally outrageous that charters can hire people who not only don't meet it, but may fail in other areas as well?

I know people who've been banned from public schools, either temporarily or permanently. Where did these people find work? In charters, of course. Now I'm not saying these people are bad teachers. They were targeted by the lunatics at DOE, sometimes for bad reasons and other times for none I could determine. Sometimes I read about these teachers and sometimes I know firsthand that their charges are trumped-up nonsense. But you know what I never read? I never read that, oh my gosh, this charter school hired this awful teacher that isn't good enough to work in a public school.

Let's talk student teachers. I've had many, and most were great. There was one glaring exception, an ESL teacher who made fundamental usage errors on my board, errors some of my students noticed. She offered lessons I knew she couldn't have written, since she seemed not to understand them, and when I looked I was able to find them lifted in their entirely from the internet. Oddly, her college professor seemed not to notice. My student teacher also had a charming habit of trash-talking me for criticizing things like her differentiation of "might" and "may" in cases where there was none. My colleagues, none of whom liked her all that much, reported this back to me daily.

When this teacher asked me for a recommendation, I declined. I told her, truthfully, that I never wrote recommendations for student teachers. (Actually that was simply because no one had asked me.) She went and complained to my supervisor about that. I told my supervisor it was because she was incompetent, and the supervisor was happy to leave it at that. Actually there was nothing she could have done, since I'm not required to recommend anyone, even people l like.

Where did this student teacher end up after failing to score a gig at my school or any other public school? You guessed it. Last I heard she was at a charter school, saving the world from awful public school teachers like me and you.

So where's the standard? Well, to me it looks like Public School Bad, Charter School Good. When there's profit to be made from our kids, it's positive. When Eva Moskowitz can bring home a bundle of cash, somewhere around 500K a year last I checked, all is good with the editorial staff of the New York Post. I don't know whether Murdoch is losing money on this enterprise, but the important thing is to get the word out.

Whatever it is, it's our fault. I've grown fairly accustomed to such messages over the year. We've been found guilty of the awful crime of educating New York City's children, no matter where they come from, what their handicaps, or what their home lives are. And as long as the charters continue to select the students they want, dump those they don't, and hold a blatantly lower standard for the teachers they run through like chewing gum, we'll always be guitly. 

A Clean Campaign and an Honorable Election

 That's what NYSUT Unity is promising this year. This begs the question, why would anyone expect anything otherwise? If they weren't, there'd be no call to say any such thing.

The wording is curious too. The campaign will be clean, they say, but they don't promise it will be honorable. The election with be honorable, but there's no indication it will be clean. I'm curious why they didn't assign both adjectives to one, or better yet both of these things. If I needed to assert that, I certainly would have clarified. I'd also offer examples rather than just my word. But that's me.

Here's the promise:

A promise for a clean campaign & honorable election - https://t.co/EwaxXUUFSe #unionpride @nysutra2017 @AndyPallotta #RepresentationCounts pic.twitter.com/0Bu6JHYS9r

— NYSUT Unity Caucus (@Unity_Today) February 28, 2017

Yet my sources tell me that NYSUT has yet to agree to debate Stronger Together. Is that honorable? I hear that the implication, for reasons they haven't bothered to enumerate, is that ST Caucus is not honorable. I have my own issues with Stronger Together, but they mostly amount to an honest disagreement. I have very vivid recollections, though, of traveling all over the state to forums with Unity/ Revive, and I recall very well how they were arranged.

The first one was in Long Island, and was pretty much open. We had no idea what the questions would be and each side got a few minutes to answer. I'm pretty sure that anyone in attendance would tell you we kicked their butts all over the place. Alas, of those that followed, all but one was much more tightly controlled. Some entailed everyone reading statements with no interaction. One like that was somewhere in Westchester and run by a Revive supporter.

There was another, in fact, in Saratoga Springs, where they spoke, we responded, and then they got to speak again. Two to one. That's clean and honorable, isn't it? I remember that pretty vividly because I slept in some crappy hotel that night, woke up at maybe 4 AM, and then drove like hell to make it to work the next day. There was one in Newburgh, NY where they said they couldn't show because of work commitments. I felt very little sympathy because I went, drove home in a blinding rainstorm, and made it into work the following day.

March 16th in Mount Kisco there will be a forum, and NYSUT Unity has not yet committed to it, Why? Likely as not because it will follow the same format as the one in Long Island did. I got to observe Andy Pallotta pretty closely over those forums, and I can tell you this--unexpected questions were not his forte. This notwithstanding, fielding questions from your constituents, whatever they may ask, is fundamental.

What Pallotta is good at is reading statements. He's a very good reader. When he has a script he can sound commanding and persuasive. On the other hand, Martin Messner, who happily peddles MetLife/ NYSUT insurance that costs twice as much as Allstate, had trouble with that. This guy, who works with NYSUT finances, did not appear to understand what he was reading. Maybe that's why he can endorse an insurance plan that makes us pay double. Who knows?

Let's talk honorable. Is it clean and honorable to dump the sitting President for acting like a President? Once Richard Iannuzzi took action against Andy Pallotta for supporting a Cuomo gala, his fate was sealed. Iannuzzi curtailed Pallotta's money supply, which was a big no-no. NYSUT finances are a mess, in fact, according to my friend Harris Lirtzman, among others. I'm not sure why that merits re-election. I'm not even sure why the deteriorating pension tiers or the APPR that's brought morale to a low I've never seen in three decades teaching merits it either. In fact, as far as I can tell, the only legislative victory Unity/ Revive achieved was to get double pensions for the officers, so they wouldn't have to go through what they put Lee Cutler through.

How about Karen Magee? I'd heard almost two years ago that she wouldn't be getting a second term, because she somehow labored under the misconception that being elected President meant she was President. A friend of hers told me Magee herself didn't hear about that until January 2017. Anyway, it appears they're now doing away with the fiction that Pallotta doesn't run NYSUT and he's running for President, so we'll grant at least one point for their honesty.

As for clean and honorable argument, the person in charge of the NYSUT Unity campaign feed is purposeful but less than admirable in that he traffics largely in logical fallacy. As far as I can determine, he would not know a proactive argument if one were beating him over the head. His prime argument against Iannuzzi was that he lived like a king because he held meetings in some club they'd joined in Albany. The Unity/ Revive folk said they'd prefer to hold meetings in Starbucks. Hey, Governor Cuomo, meet us at a Starbucks so we can negotiate an APPR that doesn't rely on junk science. How do you suppose that would work out? How many times do you suppose they did that?

The last time I read the NYSUT PR guy he'd posted a personal attack piece against me. Among other things, he called me a part time teacher and a part time unionist. I discovered this piece because AFT President Randi Weingarten tweeted it and commented how good it was. I pointed out, on Twitter, that this managed to libel not only me, but also every working chapter leader in New York City, and Randi took it down. The rest of the post was strawman/ ad hominem nonsense. Several of my friends wrote me that they left comments, but this particular clean and honorable NYSUT Unity guy doesn't post them. That's one way to avoid argument, I guess.

Another, of course, is to refuse to show up to a forum. What about it Andy? Are you willing to debate Michael Lillis? How about you Martin? Ready to debate finance? Are you guys willing to put your money where your mouths are and participate cleanly and honorably? Are you willing to stand alongside your opponents and let the public see how able you are next to them?

Hey, it doesn't matter to me. I'm a New York City high school teacher, and like my 20,000 colleagues, I'm not represented no matter who wins. But since we have the honor of paying your salary and at least one of your pensions regardless, it would be nice to know that your campaign consists of something more than telling us how honorable you are. I have never known anyone, honorable or otherwise, to advertise not to be honorable. Saying how honorable you are, to me, means less than nothing. But hey, any time you want to show me you're honorable, I'm here every day, ready to accept your PR guy's apology.

Alas, if you have any honor, you're also gonna have to stand in public and defend your record, repeatedly, and all over the state. So what's it gonna be, NYSUT Unity? Are you gonna answer unscreened questions? Or are you fraidy-scared?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Hell Freezes Over

Photo notwithstanding, this isn't about the Eagles. I'm just sitting here pretty much in shock that anyone from UFT would recruit me to do anything whatsoever. But it just happened nonetheless.

It's been a very interesting but bumpy ride for me on this blog. I started in 2005, with a view toward defending the UFT against the slings and arrows of the press, which seemed to hate us and everything we ever did. I had written a few times for New York Teacher, and they were the first people who ever paid me to write.  That said, I had personally taken exception to the 2002 Contract for adding time. Given that we had recently taken zero percent increases, I saw further such increases as a way to wipe out any gains and effectively leave us working extra time for free.

Shortly thereafter the 2005 Contract showed up. I had been in negotiations to write for Edwize, the gone but not-much-lamented UFT blog. I found the 2005 Contract to be a virtual abomination, and stating that publicly marked the end of my Edwize career before it even began. So I stayed here, and developed a voice that may have criticized union leadership once or twice, here and there.

I've run for office a few times, and last year, with the support of the MORE Caucus and the high school voters, managed to win a seat on the UFT Executive Board. We go there twice a month and support almost everything Unity brings up. Unity, which outnumbers us by over ten to one, opposes almost everything we bring up. It's a pretty funny position to be in, but you never know when they'll come to their senses.

I've been on an up and down quest to help reform the awful ELL policy called Part 154, and have not had a whole lot of success getting the kind of attention it deserves. I had a journalist all set to write about it, but for whatever reason, we had a lot of back and forth and it never happened. My friend Aixa and I made it all the way to being on TV, but haven't been able to get sustained attention thus far. I was able to help initiate and push a resolution with UFT to reform it, but nothing much has happened since then.

While I was pretty happy about it, I also almost fell off my chair when UFT VP of Education Evelyn de Jesus invited me to the NY State Association for Bilingual Education Conference in White Plains last weekend. I had signed up to do work with a UFT ESL committee, but didn't expect anything to come of it. I spent three days with people who were passionate about the kids I see every day. It was pretty amazing. Evelyn also spoke to me about presenting on future occasions, which surprised me even more. In fact, Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa, who I've been trying in vain to reach out to, actually walked up to me after she spoke and said told me was working on Part 154.

I'm more than happy to work with my union to promote our shared values and help the kids we serve. Fun though it may be fight all the time, this might be a better way to go. It's something I've been urging on this space for some time. We are fighting the worst dangers I've ever seen. Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump would be happy to close every public school in the country, make a few bucks on privatization, and maybe bring back child labor It appears inevitable that the United States will move backward to become a so-called right to work country. And if that isn't enough, my students, from every corner of the globe, are facing fears and dangers worse than I ever thought they'd have to encounter.

So I want to thank Evelyn de Jesus for thinking of me for this. I'm ready to work with UFT to preserve and protect the rights of my students. I'll do whatever I can. If we can give them a better and/ or safer education, I'm up for it. UFT President Michael Mulgrew said, at the conference, that if they came to our schools we're ready to be arrested. I know I am. These kids are like my own children and they've been one of the best parts of my life.

I'm ready to stand for them, to defend them, and to fight for them. I'm thrilled to see UFT leadership feeling the same way, and they have my unqualified support in this.

Banana

My students like to test me. Often I fail. But not always.

The other day, I said, "See you tomorrow." One of my students, from El Salvador, said, "No, I'll see you mañana."

I said, "No, TOMORROW."

This back and forth went on for some time. Once more, my student said, "Mañana."

A Chinese girl in the back of the classroom said, "Banana."

A bunch of students picked up on it.

The next day, I was giving an exercise, and very pretentiously began to say, "You may begin..."

And a whole bunch of students, from all parts of the globe, replied, "Banana."

"We can do it banana."

"Good idea."

"Let's not do it now. Let's do it banana."

In my classroom, you see, we don't just learn English. We invent entirely new languages. We only have one word so far, but I see a big future for our new language. Once we work on it a little, I'm gonna send it to Pearson so they can make it compliant with the Common Core State Standards.

Executive Board Takeaway February 27.2017

There were a few striking things that occurred on Monday night. The first was Howard Schoor’s joke about how popular the questions period is. This was at least the second time he made that crack. This is significant for a few reasons. One, of course, is that we high school reps are seen as a pain in the ass rather than contributing members. Contributing members are expected to sit quietly and never contribute anything. That was pretty clear later in the evening, after Jonathan Halabi asked a question, Schoor asked whether he had answered it, and a woman nearby remarked loudly, “YES, he DID!”

Questions, for Unity Caucus, are a nuisance to be avoided. This is very odd for me because I’m a teacher and questions are pretty much my stock in trade. Can you imagine a teacher in a classroom making jokes about questions? In any case, since the overwhelming majority of this board sits quietly, never asks questions, and never rises to say anything whatsoever, I can only assume that the meetings were quite peaceful before we arrived. Also I hear the food was much better. Monday at 3:30 I went to a ramen joint on Broadway so I wouldn’t have to eat the crappy sandwiches, but they tell me when the board was all Unity they had food that people actually wanted to eat.

Of course there are exceptions to the sit down and shut up rule. When someone on the dais puts out the bat signal, the Unity loyalists all rise to argue against things like effectively enforcing the class size provisions of the contract. The system works great, they say. They fixed it in my school, once, and therefore there is no problem systemwide. We suffered and gave up pay for the existing provision, 50 years ago when most of use were not even alive. We should drop this resolution, form a committee, invite no one from the high school Executive Board, and work out this issue.

So basically, we have dozens of people pissed off about the downgrade in catering, people who’d have been perfectly content to sit and do nothing. And that, I have to assume, is mostly what they did before we came around to ruin everything.

I asked about the resolution that would bring Regents grading back into schools. This resolution has been on the DA agenda twice and has not come up for a vote. It’s not a priority for leadership. More important, evidently, is to show a clip from SNL with Melissa McCarthy as Sean Spicer. It was pretty funny, but it was also on network TV as well as all over Facebook. Of course Mulgrew isn’t on Facebook, so maybe he assumes no one else is either. Who knows? Maybe they think it's a good idea to laugh at Trump, whose name Mulgrew wouldn't utter, as he does everything in his power to cripple American union.

The worst thing, though, was the response about whether or not UFT would support the pro-education March this Saturday. Mulgrew deigned to grace us with nine minutes of his precious time, and stressed over and over we have to focus on supporting education. Yet we are not officially supporting a pro-education march this Saturday in Manhattan. This is because AQE, the organization that sponsors it, ran an anti-Cuomo ad. The ad states, correctly, that Cuomo is very much in sync with Betsy DeVos. He has attacked the public education “monopoly,” as he calls it. He has also supported tax credits for private schools, back door vouchers, just like DeVos.

These are simple facts, demonstrated on the ad in Cuomo’s own words.



But we want to get our “seat at the table” and therefore we must not antagonize him. For some reason, UFT leadership believes Cuomo is our friend this week, and also seems to believe that he would not stab us in the back in a New York minute given half a chance.

It must be liberating to ignore history and hope for the best. From my vantage point as a working teacher it’s very tough to do that. I don’t believe a Cuomo changes his spots. I believe AQE is right on target, and I’ve seen Cuomo pimping for charters very recently. I don’t doubt for a moment he’d stand with Moskowitz again on request.

I’m willing and ready to listen, and I’m not afraid of questions. I’m afraid I don’t see those qualities in leadership, and I’m literally afraid that UFT will continue to not only make the same egregious errors that left us adrift in Trumplandia, but also double down on them and ensure, at the very least, that it takes us longer to crawl our way out.

DeVos of Da People?

There is no question that US Secretary Betsy DeVos is an active enemy of public schools. At the right-wing conference she attended last week, she opened with a hilarious commentary ridiculing public school students who are too poor to buy lunch. She proudly told the crowd that she told Bernie Sanders there was no such thing as a free lunch.

That's news to most students in my Title One school, which relies on the federal government to give them lunch every day. Maybe DeVos is feeling jolly because her BFFs in the House are moving to take away lunch from poor kids who come to school hungry. Or maybe she finds the free lunch thing amusing because she herself was born rich and married richer. Clearly my students (and I) showed a lack of vision by failing to do that.

I don't suppose there were many free lunches in the elite private educational institutions DeVos and her children attended. When your family can pay tens of thousands of dollars annually for you to be away from the riff raff, you don't mix with the sort of people who fall into that category. That, of course, is one reason a whole lot of private schools exist.

The problem, in fact, is exactly the opposite of what DeVos says it is. She'd tell you that we need more choice. She'd tell you that we need charter schools and vouchers. She'd tell you that HBCUs are about school choice rather than utter lack of it. She'd tell you that we're condemning our children to inadequate facilities by sending them to the public schools that she and Donald Trump have deemed unfit for their children. Ironically, under absolutely no scenario they put forth will our children, whether or not they get free lunch, be attending school alongside the DeVos and Trump children.

If so-called school choice is not the problem, what is? I'd argue it's Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump. I'd argue it's Michelle Rhee and Michael Bloomberg. I'd argue it's Andrew Cuomo, Joel Klein, Bill Gates, John King, and absolutely every one of the so-called education reformers who decline to send their own children to the schools over which they preside. And yes, I'd have to include Barack Obama in that crowd as well. While I understand taking special precautions for the children of a US President, I have no idea how he rationalizes pushing one system for our children, and opting his into a school that does almost the polar opposite.

If Betsy DeVos had been required to place her own children in public schools, can you imagine Detroit, in her home state, facing crumbling, rat-infested buildings as a matter of course? Do you suppose she'd allow such conditions to even exist if they could affect her own kids? In fact Betsy's privatization efforts have led to the deterioration of public schools all over her state. Sadly she's not alone.

People with a lot of money give it to folks like Andrew Cuomo, who pushes thinly-veiled voucher schemes much like DeVos does. It's Cuomo who advocated and enabled the junk-science based evaluation system that's brought teacher morale to the lowest I've ever seen it. It's Andrew Cuomo who criticized the system he championed as "baloney" because not enough unionized working teachers were fired as a result. Of course Andrew Cuomo didn't send his kids to public school either, so why does he give a damn what happens to them?

Anyone who'd presume to lead a public school system ought to have a stake in it. If Michael Bloomberg and Joel Klein had to send their kids to public schools, would our children be sitting around in crumbling trailers? Would they and their teachers be rated via tests of quality that can be described, charitably, as dubious? Would they set up junk science systems to demoralize and fire the people whose jobs entailed helping their children?

Of course not. There ought not to be a multi-tiered education system, and Finland, generally regarded as the world's best, hasn't got one. Education is supposed to be the great equalizer, and as long as we allow it to be controlled by hypocritical windbags with no stake in it, we're not going to reach that ideal. And as long as we entrust our children to people who find our children's poverty a source of hilarity, we're going to move farther from that goal, at a rapid pace.

We need to find leaders willing to put their money where their mouths are, and to do that they're going to have to put their children where our schools are.

Executive Board February 27th--We Won't March Because We Don't Want to Offend Cuomo

Howie Schoor, Secretary, welcomes us.

Approval of minutes—Exec Bd. Feb 6 approved

Adcom Feb 17th—

Mike Shirtzer—MORE  There is a motion for a stipend for NYSUT convention. How many delegates and why $617?

Schoor—You know how many there are. You run for it. 750. Some delegates don’t go. There is a smaller stipend for those who do not take hotel. We take it because there are 7 AM. In addition meals and transportation.

Adcom minutes passed

President’s Report—Mulgrew is not here.

Staff Director’s Report—LeRoy Barr—Shares passing of union CL. Sabrina Cek. passed last week, is GoFundMe page to help with final expenses. 35 years old. Moment of silence.

Black History film series, going well, last one tomorrow.
Elementary school con. 3/11. Anniversary UFT founding 3/17. Para luncheon at Hilton. CL training 3/ 25-6. DA 3/22.

Question—Asks acknowledgement of special rep. Tom Talerini. Moment of silence.

Schoor—Questions—Makes hilarious joke about how questions seem so popular.

Arthur Goldstein—MORE  At our last meeting, I asked about the resolution to bring Regents grading back into home schools. I asked that it be moved up on the agenda so we could vote on it. The answer I received was that you would speak to the DOE about it after it was voted on. However, I did not ask whether you would do that. Again, I asked if we could move it up on the agenda so it could be voted on.

High schools traditionally have had that week as not only a testing week, but also as a week to catch up on midterm work, like grading projects. In my school, among others, a lot of teachers were required to do complicated midterm assignments, but got absolutely no time to grade them, as principals decided to hold classes or run class midterms during this week. This may or may not become part of a paperwork complaint I’ve filed, but meanwhile I’d like to see this resolved for next year.

At the last DA, like the one before it, this was not high on the agenda. I ask that we bring this to the top of the agenda at the next DA, I already understand your plans if it passes, and at this time I would appreciate a direct response to that request.

Schoor—We’ll take that under advisement

Mike Shirtzer—MORE—Update on IHS 145?

Rich Mantel--Had meeting with staff. Will support them. There was a rally. Was attempt by DOE to stop it, but proceeded, was on News 12. Meeting at school March 6th. Asking they become part of community learning schools.

Schirtzer—PEP tomorrow. Will ask they be removed from 3/22 PEP. Could UFT officers be there to make statement?

Mantel—We will see if they can be there. Success Academy already advertising they will have that space.

Schirtzer—We hear PEP is having conference call.

Mantel—We reached out to mayor, have not heard back, will try right now.

Marcus McArthur—MORE—on Right to Work legislation—there is a committee looking into this—Can we hear a report back on how this will impact us, and are there plans for resistance? Are we coordinating with other unions on this?

Schoor—Yes

Janella Hinds—We’re going to have additional conversations about this. Public School Proud is one way. We will be addressing them and you are welcome to join.

Schoor—Other unions asking us for advice, have reached out to us.

Jonathan Halabi—New Action—After Women’s Marches there was a sense of energy. Delegate asked when we could get back on bus. At this point there are specific actions. Where do we stand. People’s Climate March April 29th? That is particularly important place to demonstrate our concern. Week before, there are science marches. This contradicts some of the admin stances.

This coming Saturday there is a march in NYC for Educational Justice. Are we going to get involved with AQE?

Schoor—Send us info. AQE is group we donate to, but don’t march lockstep with them. They are planning TV ads against governor. This is budget season. We are focused on millionaire’s tax. 3 billion to state budget. We need to weigh that.

Ashray Gupta—MORE—There is a coalition of teachers, students and attorneys who have six asks on immigrant rights. One they are excited by is our proposal for immigrant liaison. Ask for update.

Schoor—Has come up in our discussions. Parent liaison may be point person. City has been good on this. DASA passed in 2012 protects NYS students. Gives them forum if they are bullied or abused.

6:21 Mulgrew arrives.

Hopes we had decent break. Right now our focus is legislative session. Thanks A. Harmon and K. Allford. On message in Albany. Said first and foremost we have to protect education. No one can say what’s coming out of DC, but it won’t be good. In Albany we are holding well on millionaire tax. State has 3.5 billion deficit. Looking for old foundation aid, will give more money to students. Lobby day important. Carried interest loophole means hedge fund pay lower taxes. Sometimes it dies. They say rich people will leave NY.

They said all millionaires would leave as a result of tax, but there are now more of them. Let’s do it some more. Carried interest loophole Trump wanted to close, Ryan against. Mulgrew doesn’t mention Trump’s name. Many states against this, and we will push on this. Did press conference led by Jeff Klein. Will try to move this for additional revenue. Without it ed. is in trouble. With less state money feds have more leverage.

Working with other unions advocating for other legislation in case or right to work. Already a case identical to Friedrichs. We still don’t know what it means. Could some people be grandfathered? They could never get it through before. Will soon be 28 RTW states. GOP governors pushing even harder. Statewide, we have governor, mayor and our own grassroots. Our focus now must be strictly education. We cannot let public education fail. Thanks team.

Seeing this across the country. New Yorker wrote about hashtag #PublicSchoolProud. Want to use it for all unionized workers. We will continue to work nationally with AFT on all worker rights, have to get through legislative session in NY for when feds start shenanigans. That is agenda for rest of school year. Says that he has to go meet with CEC presidents.

6:30 Mulgrew leaves

Reports from districts

George Altomari—Successful program, SS conference on the 11th. Thanks President for attending. 20 presentations, great awards. Great afternoon. Gave 4 CTLE credits for teachers.

David Kazansky—Election mailings for teacher trustee Tom Brown are out. Should come to your schools. Asks petitions get signatures.

Janella Hinds—March 9th Future in Focus, college and career expo for HS students. For 10th and 11th graders.

Paul Egan—Lobby day next week March 14th. Encouraging people to sign up. DRs have links. Want to push education funding. Should be released, no CAR day, need permission. If you don’t show up you have to go to school or call in. Last DA we endorsed Bill Perkins. Happy to announce he has won. Called me to say he would be with us. Now vacancy in State Senate.

Schoor—What are major issues”

Egan—Budget, funding is important. We want interest loophole and millionaire tax expanded.

Grievance update—Ellen Procida—Class size labor management committee met twice in February. Want to address class size issues long and short term. Discussed additional space, staggered schedules, schools at least four years out of compliance. DRs involved. Coming up with plans for each of these schools. Class size arbitrations will start March 1st. Want to come to agreement before arbitration. When school is reorganized, school ends and remedy ends. Remedy continues until we come up with something else, even if it is new teachers with oversized classes. We think that’s positive. We are waiting on specific plans. All the people who need to be part of the conversations are there.

We have APPR complaints for procedural objections. Winning 75%, and got a whole rating overturned. We can take 13% of ineffectives to arbitrator. We’ve been taking people with ratings based on harassment. Student sample sizes were so small we had them based on 3 kids. They were taken care of. If you have fewer than 6 kids, 23 teachers changed, without a hearing.

Para suspension arbitration is happening. Number of people not being suspended who would have been.

Jonathan Halabi—New Action—How many schools is committee looking at?

Procida--19.

Schoor—now D-rated teachers can be part of 13%. Some principals are rating CLs D just to give them TIP.

We are adjourned.

Slippery Talk from Constitutional Convention Advocate

On Saturday I got a message from one of my members about this op-ed in the NY Daily News. It categorizes those of us who oppose it as purveyors of "alternative facts." That's the phrase that Trump stooge Kellyanne Conway used to rationalize outright lies on the part of the President, and it's got a useful ring when you wish to ridicule ideas. The writer ridicules Flanagan for overestimating the costs of a convention, offering no sources, so who knows whether or not that's true?

Personally, I doubt it, because the writer then launches into alternative facts of his own:

Another scare tactic being used to oppose the convention, this time by public employee unions that worry about threats to their entrenched clout, is the claim that a convention could vote to reduce their pensions. The protection for public employee pensions in the state Constitution cannot be eliminated without violating the contract clause of the federal Constitution, which bars states from rescinding contract rights.

Okay, let's grant this writer the possibility that the US Constitution says that. Personally I'm skeptical. If contract rights were so ironclad, how could Detroit have imposed one? And why would we need the Triborough Agreement? Perhaps the writer is correct, and contract rights are ironclad up until they expire. Of course, that doesn't explain how, in times of fiscal emergency, contracts are not necessarily enforced. I've been to many UFT meetings and I've heard about what happens in times of emergency. But let's grant the writer's supposition.

So our pensions are ironclad, given his statement, right up until our contracts expire. Then you're on your own. That doesn't sound so great, does it? Could it be that UFT pensions are only guaranteed until 2018, when our contract expires? Could it be that we're saved because of the Triborough Amendment?

The answer is none of the above, actually. Our pensions are not part of our contract, so whatever the US Constitution may say on the subject, the writer's point is nonsense. Someone is trafficking in alternative facts here, but it isn't the working people of New York State, it isn't the United Federation of Teachers, and it isn't those of us who've worked all our lives under the expectation that the pensions we signed up for would be honored when we retired.

I have my differences with UFT leadership, and I may in fact have mentioned them once or twice on this little blog. But misleading nonsense like this op-ed are just the opening salvo in what will be a long-term attack against the financial security for which we've worked all our working lives. This targets all UFT members and all state employees, whether new, veteran, or retired.

A few weeks ago, I conducted my first and only COPE drive. I recruited 78 members, 79 if you count the one who came to me weeks earlier complaining about the Constitutional Convention. And I may invite UFT in for lunch meetings to recruit further.. I don't expect to support everything that COPE does.

Nonetheless, I don't know of any other organization right now that's going to fight this. Whatever happens with this Constitutional Convention, I'm not gonna say that I didn't do everything within my power to fight it. I've contributed five bucks a paycheck for a number of years, largely because I thought it made me a little more credible as chapter leader. But I didn't ask my members to join me until this year. We need not look far to see what happens when pension promises aren't kept.

We face all kinds of threats, all the time. Sometimes the union is helpful and sometimes it isn't. But as a teacher, I'm all in. If you are, or if you think you ever will be, it's hard for me to understand how you could decline to fight this with every means at your disposal. Come November, if we win, it may be time to reassess this decision. But right now I don't regret it at all.

Update--I wrote the following as a letter to the editor:

I read with interest your op-ed advocating a Constitutional Convention in NY. The writer focuses on “alternative fact” and asserts that pensions will not be renegotiated because they are protected by contract and the US Constitution, UFT pensions are not, in fact, part of our contract. I’d have to assume, since pensions are an independent agreement with the state, that they are not part of other union contracts either. Therefore the writer’s assertion that unions oppose the Constitutional Convention to maintain “entrenched clout” is baseless. The writer either did extremely shoddy research or is himself a purveyor of alternative fact.

Arthur Goldstein, ESL teacher/ UFT Chapter Leader
Francis Lewis High School, Fresh Meadows NY

In Which I Am Engaged by Another Great Unity Mind

I love when people just hand me a blog fully realized. On Twitter, I saw something about Chelsea Clinton running for office. Someone responded with something like, please, no more Clintons. I tweeted that and someone said, "I'm STILL with her."

I responded by saying I voted for her, but I was pretty mad about the terrible, terrible consequences of her candidacy. Another person, who claims to be the UFT rep for District 30, responded to my retweet with this:

@amiraminiMD @TeacherArthurG Stop pretending to be Democrats. You Bros elected Trump. Go revel in your victory. Take all the Bros with you.

— (((BamUFT))) (@BamUFTNYC) February 26, 2017

Let's examine this. We'll put aside all the actual reasons Hillary lost, because they do not appear to concern this person at all. First of all, the epithet "Bros" is short for "Bernie Bros." It's a stereotype for anyone who supported Sanders. You see, anyone who says anything that doesn't support the Clintons must of course be Sanders supporters. They are, therefore, mindless thugs who just follow the crowd, to be condemned as a group, you know, like Trump does with Mexicans and Muslims, and much of the press does with teachers. I'm a little surprised to be paying this person to publicly indulge in stereotypes, but there's nothing in the Unity loyalty oath that says you can't.

I also love the "Take all the Bros with you" part. Can you think of anyone in the news who wants to just get rid of an entire group of people? I'll give you a hint. He has an orange face, a big yellow thing on top of it, and he is President of the United States. Historically, this whole getting rid of an entire group of people thing has had pretty bad consequences for many. But I digress.

It's odd that the tweeter blames me for the Trump victory, since I voted for Hillary. But what do I know? We Sanders supporters are all alike, and even if we voted for Hillary we didn't. But when I called the person on that, among other things, I got this response:

@TeacherArthurG @amiraminiMD I'm more than comfortable. Was a mistake to allow Sanders to run in the Dem primary. #Spoilers Party candidate.

— (((BamUFT))) (@BamUFTNYC) February 26, 2017

You see how that works? Why bother with free and fair elections? They just get in the way. That's why the Unity Caucus just changes the rules when they don't like the results. Opposition win a VP spot? Change the rules so the high school teachers don't get to pick their own VP. District Rep isn't Unity? Eliminate elections altogether and just pick any damn person you like.

I just want to remind you that Unity is the same caucus that declined to place Donald Trump's name in a resolution condemning racist acts around the country, among other things. They were loath to offend Donald Trump supporters. Yet this Unity Caucus member has no issue insulting and stereotyping those of us who are passionate about universal health care, a living wage, and affordable college. Evidently our greedy priorities, and not the failure on the part of Hillary to get out the vote, made Trump President.

I love it when Unity folk engage me. I'm here every day. Do your worst.

Six Hundred Seventeen Dollars (times 800)=Half a Million to Send 800 New Yorkers to New York

That's how much UFT will pay to send people to the New York Hilton for the NYSUT Representative Assembly on April 7-8. This is an important event, because there will be an election that will determine whether NYS Unity or Stronger Together controls NYSUT. We all have an interest in that because as UFT members we all pay NYSUT dues.

Of course we all know that Unity votes Unity, and approximately exactly100% of them will be doing just that. So given that, why are we spending half a million dollars to send 800 New Yorkers to New York? In fact, I live in Long Island. I could take a train there from work on Friday, take the LIRR on Saturday, and maybe see the whole thing for thirty or forty bucks out of pocket.

I'm hoping to go as press and write about it, which is what Jonathan Halabi, Norm Scott and I did at the AFT Convention in Minneapolis last summer. If my constituents can't have a vote, at least they can know what happens. I've made a few inquiries. Alternatively, I guess I could go as the guest of another union. That would be fun to write about.

So here's the thing--I'm one of seven people elected by 20,000 high school teachers, and as such I'd deem it my business to know what goes on there, Still, I haven't got a vote in NYSUT, and consequently, neither have any of us. Unless the majority of high school teachers want to give a blank check to Unity to vote Any Damn Way They Are Told, this is not what I'd call an ideal form of democracy.

But let's not dwell on petty politics. Let's take a look at what sort of deal this can be if you're a loyalty oath signer. So you get $617 to go to the convention. You take the subway there and back a couple of times. That's what, $11.00? If you live outside of the city, you add a round trip LIRR fare, and you're out around 40 clams. You've got $566 left over. This could come in handy if you decide to buy $14 beer at the Hilton, but really you could eat on the cheap and pocket $500 easily. That's pretty good pay for sitting around a five star hotel and listening to a few speeches.

Alternatively, you could give $150 each, save hundreds of thousands of dollars, and use it on the organizing that hasn't been done in decades, so as to preserve the United Federation of Teachers as an entity when Friedrichs 2 comes down the pike next year. And if you really want to save money, you could send one representative to vote eighty thousand times. Now it may not be sufficiently dramatic watching Mulgrew sit by himself and do that. Also maybe you need someone who can speak, so you send LeRoy Barr. That's a few subway fares, and then you have to cover the Staten Island Ferry for Mulgrew. Let's say you budget $1000 for both of them, and let them eat any damn place they like. Let them take cabs if they want to.

For this particular convention, I'm not sure I covet a vote. I'd probably lean toward Mike Lillis over Andy Pallotta. I'd choose activist Bianca Tanis over just about anyone. I can't think of any earthly reason why anyone would choose Martin "Buy NYSUT Auto Insurance Even Though Allstate Is Half the Price" Messner for any job more challenging than lifeguard at the car wash. But that's just me. Of course I've got no vote, just the great honor of paying dues. Whichever side wins (because theoretically, at least, it is a contest), the 20,000 NYC high school teachers I represent get no representation whatsoever (and thanks a lot to both caucuses for that).

I could see spending a lot of money to go somewhere if they were going to represent membership and deliberate about something important. I could see spending a lot of money if they were going to make decisions. But they aren't. They're gonna sit in some room, someone from leadership is gonna tell them how to vote, and they'll vote that way or no six hundred and seventeen bucks next time around.

A bunch of people go to the Hilton and pretend they're doing work. They go to meetings they're told to go to, vote how they're told to, and the preordained winners win. That's not a lot of bang for the buck, or more accurately for the 500,000 or so bucks. Given our share of paying for the common rooms, gala luncheons, and whatever the hell else goes on it will likely be more.

Perhaps leadership imagines this sort of thing will inspire all the Trump voters to pony up $1300 a year, as they'll be forever grateful we didn't mention his name when bemoaning his awful practices. On the other hand, maybe we could just buy them off and it would be a wash. But there are a whole lot of ways we could save hundreds of thousands of dollars that weekend, and a whole lot of better uses for that money.

Maybe, while we still have dues deducted from our paycheck, leadership should give some thought toward giving us a vote in organizations our dues support. I shall nonetheless sit while waiting for that to happen.

UFT Unity Response-- From Facebook: I'm a life member of nra and uscg retiree besides a social studies teacher. So you boys sound like a bunch of cry barbies .follow the advice of Ted Kennedy. " instead of saying " why say why not " and maybe you goathumpers will win an election and affect change.

Teacher as Savior

Yesterday I spoke of a forum I attended in the Bronx. An interesting conversation ensued between audience and panel about recruitment for TFA and Moskowitz Academies. Evidently the pitch is that children of color must be saved and only you, the students, can get it done. Oh, and also we can give you a job after you graduate up to your neck in debt.

There are a number of striking points you could make about this particular argument. One is that there are plenty of public schools right there in the Bronx, and if you wish to branch out there are four more boroughs nearby with kids who could use your assistance. Another is that working in an NYC public school still beats the hell out of doing test prep for Eva and watching your hapless kids pee their pants rather than pause one moment from studying. She treats those kids a lot worse than I treat my dog (and in fact I love my dog, treat him well, and take him out whenever he asks).

Then, as one of the panelists pointed out, it's not exactly within our means to change everything. You know, there's poverty, there are learning disabilities, there is environment, and there are newcomers who speak no English. And make no mistake, Eva talks a big ballgame, but she doesn't take the same kids we do. 100% of the students I teach are beginners. They are most definitely not ready for intensive bathroom-free test prep, and that's not to suggest that anyone else is. If Eva takes ELLs, they are certainly on a higher level. Special education runs the gamut as well. Just because someone has an IEP doesn't mean she's alternate assessment, like a group of kids at my school. Alternate assessment kids are not expected to graduate. We take them to worksites and train them for jobs, and their stats count against us at year's end. And, of course, self-purported savior Moskowitz has a reputation for dumping kids that don't help her test-score-based bottom line.

As for TFA, sure you can have them pack you off to anyplace in the country. Sure you can help poor students whether or not you've got training sufficient to work in a public school. Maybe you've seen movies like Freedom Writers, where the actress what's her name (who, in fairness, has been in some good stuff too) singlehandedly inspires kids and saves them from their otherwise miserable destinies. Then there was the movie with Michelle Pfeiffer, where I think she shot a gun off in class, or jumped out a window or something, and didn't get fired.

One really cool thing about these movie teachers is they invariably have only one class. That's convenient, because you can focus on the handful of kids being saved. Most teachers I know have 170 students, and are pretty busy with things like, oh, grading tests and lesson planning. In my school, located on this astral plane, we now have grading policies so ponderous that teachers can barely find time for anything else. And don't get me started on gym teachers who have different classes every other day and are expected to perform this nonsense for 500 kids. I don't know how they even learn student names.

Of course teachers are a positive influence. Of course teachers, next to parents, are often the very best role models for children. And of course sometimes teachers can do incredible things, and there are extraordinary teachers. I know real stories about real teachers who reach out and change lives. I even know one who did this for years, who was threatened with an ineffective rating from a supervisor who appreciated this not at all, and who died alone one weekend only months before his planned retirement. I don't suppose that would make a movie script, as the protagonists tend to be gorgeous young white women.

The really cool thing about the teacher as savior model is it takes almost everyone off the hook for just about everything. Problems with your kids? The teachers suck. Failing the class? The teachers suck. Not graduating on time? The teachers suck. Teacher calling your house? He should handle it himself, that's his job, and he sucks. Why can't he be more like Michelle Pfeiffer or what's-her-name from Freedom Writers?

Not only parents are off the hook, but so are politicians. Arne Duncan, or John King, or Barack Obama, or Michael Bloomberg, or Joel Klein, or Andrew Cuomo (all of whom send their kids to private schools), can get up and tell some story about how a great teacher can change a life. That takes them off the hook for crumbling infrastructure, lack of a living wage or affordable health care, and allowing both parents to work 200 hours a week each to make ends meet. The implication is that a good teacher can change absolutely everything, and politicians are suddenly responsible for nothing, It's a WIN-WIN!

Thus you devise ways to fire teachers, like value-added, you devise ways to vilify teachers, like attacking their unions, and you devise ways to blame them for every ill of society. You even try to make a few films that drop the whole savior routines and stereotype public school, making charters the hero. You gloss over the whole pants-peeing thing because it doesn't make for increased popcorn sales.

Here's the thing--we do the best we can, each and every day, under incredibly challenging circumstances. We choose to go out and work with America's children each and every day, no matter who they are or how they come to us. We're not asking to be portrayed as super-heroes, but we don't deserve super-villain status either.

I want to support kids and help them to be happy, but I can't do everything. Politicians need to do their part too, instead of simply taking money from rich people, making their comfortable lives even more so, and ignoring those of us who actually work for a living. And we need to hold their feet to the fire.

The best idea would be to make folks who run schools patronize them. If the schools you run aren't good enough for your children, they likely aren't good enough for mine either. If Bloomberg or Klein had to send their own kids to public school, they'd eye very different reforms than the ones they ended up enforcing. You wouldn't have kids sitting in trailers, eating lunch before 9 AM, herded like prisoners, running around outside because there is no gym, or going years without glasses because even an eye check is unaffordable.

With Donald Trump as President, with demagogues like Betsy DeVos and Eva Moskowitz pretending to care about all children but giving in to the backward moves of this administration, our jobs become even more difficult.

Maybe we have to be super-heroes after all. Maybe we can. But our super-hero status will have to bring us outside the classroom and into communities, where we will be truth-tellers. Truth-tellers are in very short supply here in 2017.

Fordham U and Me

Last night I was honored to be included in a panel at Fordham University discussing mostly the welfare of our students. There was great discussion from both the panelists and the audience. In retrospect, it probably would've been smarter to write about this before it happened so more people would know about it. But better late than never.

I had an interesting experience in listening to a Leadership Academy Principal who seemed passionate and sensible. He started to talk about how the system was designed for adults rather than children. I was thinking about disagreeing when he gave examples that kind of turned my head around. He said his teachers had a lot of trouble parking and it affected their jobs because they had to focus on nonsense rather than what they needed to do. It was the first time I heard that line used with explanations that actually supported working teachers.

A man in the audience complained that teachers used to call him when necessary, but now they called him all the time for no reason at all. Several of us on the panel were able to explain that teachers were now required to do parental contact, and that it was entirely possible they were sitting around on Tuesday Teacher Torture forced to make calls whether they were needed or not.

There were several questions about what we could do to change the system. Moderator Mark Naison made a plea for being crazy, and actually asked the students who the craziest teacher they knew was. I was struck by this, because I always pride myself on being the craziest teacher my students know. But I also believed that being crazy was a great motivating factor. It's what's helped me to help my school in a number of ways. You also have to be crazy to run for chapter leader. You have to be crazy to oppose the Unity Caucus. You have to be crazy to love your job no matter what the geniuses in Tweed, Albany, and DC toss at you.

There was also a lot of talk about overcoming fear and perhaps placing your job at risk. I don't know exactly when I stopped being afraid. When I first started this blog it was anonymous. I later started writing elsewhere under my real name. At some point I realized it didn't really make any difference. Maybe it was the day my principal walked up to me and asked, "Hey, what did you mean when you wrote this thing on your blog?" But it's liberating to lose the fear. If more teachers would find their way here we'd certainly be better off. 

I was recruited by my friend Aixa Rodriguez, an ESL teacher who shares my issues with Part 154 and how it hinders the instruction of the newcomers we serve. (You can see us on Telemundo talking about it right here.) I prepared some remarks, but as we went around the table I realized I was the only one who'd done that, so I spoke without them. I hate to write things and not use them, so I'll share my prepared remarks here. Hopefully I said the same thing off the top of my head, but somehow I doubt it.

My job is teaching newcomers English. It became more difficult last year because of a massive revision of Chancellor’s Regulation Part 154.

Evidently what I do is not effective at making students pass tests. It takes time to master a new language, and with every moment wasted doing that, there is content knowledge that students don’t grasp. Consequently, the whole test thing looks bad. It turns out that students who don’t know English tend to pass tests at a lower rate than students who do. Go figure.

One solution would be to send out people like me and teach newcomers English. But we’ve tried that, it takes time, and it doesn’t look good when it takes newcomers longer to graduate. Generally what’s done in cases like this is that everyone says the teachers suck and that’s why kids fail the tests. If Michelle Rhee were teaching my class, she’d take her magic broomstick and insert it in the exact place that would make them all learn perfect English instantly. But since she’s using her incredible gift to sell fertilizer these days, they decided to go another way.

NY State has determined this whole language teaching thing is overrated. So they’ve cut direct language instruction by 33-100% in favor of a new model. You see, what they do is take someone like me and place me in an academic class. While the social studies teacher goes over the Civil War, I magically make every student understand it. No more time wasted with “How are you,” and “My name is.” We’re going straight to the Battle of Gettysburg, which is important because it’s on a test somewhere..

So in the same 40 minutes an American student is supposed to understand the battle, my newcomers are supposed to do that and learn English. How is this achieved? No one knows, actually. We are just supposed to figure it out. We pair up with content teachers and hope for the best. In my school, we’ve paired up with English teachers so instead of the Civil War, our newcomers study To Kill a Mockingbird or Hamlet. 

It’s pretty well known that language acquisition ability declines precipitously beginning at puberty. Young children are pretty much designed to learn language, and they soak it up like sponges. But high school students have it a little tougher. Taking time away from them to learn does them a great disservice.

Research shows the way to make students learn language is via high-interest and accessible subject matter. Giving newcomers three-inch thick biology books the day they set foot in the country is exactly the wrong thing to do. It’s really better to give them things just a little above their level, and no academic content-area textbook I’ve ever seen matches that criterion.

There are also other ridiculous regulations. I’m in the largest school in Queens, and we have only two classes of beginners. I know because I teach them. The regulations say that students must not be more than one grade level apart. I have no idea why. Thus 9th graders cannot be in the same room with eleventh graders. The smart thing, in a high school, is to group students by language level rather than age. But the geniuses who wrote Part 154 have other ideas. Where they come from is a mystery to me. I could understand not wanting to place an 18-year-old with an 8-year-old but this is overkill.

Were we to follow the grade regulations, I’d likely have one section of 65 and another of 8. In small schools the situation is worse. As Aixa can attest, no one knows what to do, and the ESL teachers run around like headless chickens trying to teach everything, and accomplishing little if anything.

This law reduces most ESL teachers into co-teachers. These are people who’ve devoted their lives to helping newcomers. I have young, smart and capable colleagues who are considering resignation because they want to teach English, not stand around in a classroom where their job entails supporting another teacher making all decisions about curriculum.

Worst, though, is the assumption that we don’t actually have a subject matter, and that the only way to teach English is via coupling it with academic content. Of course direct English instruction supports academic achievement. But there’s actually more to life than taking tests. We help kids figure out how to buy a pizza, meet a girlfriend, or take their grandmother to the doctor.

I’ve tried very hard to get this message out. Aixa and I were on Telemundo talking about it. I pushed the UFT to write and pass a resolution against it. But it hasn’t really caught on. I had reporters promise to write about it and never get around to doing so. And while UFT has passed the resolution, we’ve thus far taken no action whatsoever to back it up. I haven’t given up but it’s an uphill battle getting people to care about our kids.

Aixa and I told Betty Rosa to her face that this regulation was awful and why. She replied that there were good intentions behind it. We’ve all heard the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Somehow we’re going to have to show the NY State Education department that making up rules out of whole cloth is bad policy. We’re going to have to show them that we need research and practice based methodology rather than just good intentions and wishful thinking.

Where's the Beef?

There was an interesting piece on NBC News, which seems to have originated from Telemundo, with which they are affiliated. I'm a Long Island resident, and what caught my attention was that 25 employees had been fired for taking part in the Day Without Immigrants. The piece has since been corrected:

Telemundo 47 initially reported that at Ben's Kosher Delicatessen Restaurant & Caterers in Long Island, New York, 25 workers were fired Friday when they returned to work.

The restaurant disputed the report, saying in a statement, "In anticipation of 'A Day Without Immigrants,' Ben's Kosher Delicatessen Restaurant & Caterers, posted a formal statement to its Greenvale employees on Wednesday, February 15, expressing support for their human rights and requesting that they fill their shift as scheduled on Thursday, February 16."

The statement continued, "While some employees opted to participate in the walkout, several others chose to work and, as a result, the leaders of the protest put pressure on the others to walk out, even threatening physical harm to colleagues choosing to work their shifts."

As a result, the company owner "found this to be a cause for immediate dismissal of the employees who made the threats. All other employees involved with the walkout were, and still are, invited to return to their positions with the company."

On social media, representatives of Ben's now say there was only one employee who made threats and was terminated. They've fought back in the press getting favorable coverage in both Long Island Business News and Newsday. On my Facebook feed there's a pretty interesting discussion, and it's tough to come to a definite conclusion. It was a lot easier when it said 25 were fired.

It's more complicated now. I'm not sure, though, how you express support for human rights and tell people not to participate in exercising them. Also, Ben's has now revised its story about immediately dismissing "the employees who made the threats" and now says it was just one employee. A lot of this sounds very familiar to me. It sounds a lot like what people say when attempts are made to unionize.

We don't really know the full story here, and it's safe to suppose we never will. But I've heard lot of very similar stories about unions intimidating workers. In fact, I've even been accused of it. When I see supervisors breaking the contract by demanding teachers do things they have no right to demand, I've been told that teachers were afraid to do their jobs. It's odd, because the most I cause trouble for working teachers is never. I'm at my job an hour or more before I need to be almost every day. It's often the only time I can work uninterrupted. But just because I'm crazy doesn't mean anyone else has to be.

I guess it's a fair assumption that these workers are not unionized. Under NY State law they are therefore "at-will" employees who can be fired for pretty much anything under the sun. Or they can be fired for no reason at all. Health benefits? Not necessary under NY State law.

I've got an issue or two with union leadership, and I may mention it on this page from time to time. But no one I represent will be fired for taking one day off. No one I represent needs to fight about it, or intimidate anyone toward any political point of view. Unionization is an uphill battle in an environment like this, where you can lose your job for taking one day off, and that's true whether Ben's fired one person or 25.

Ben's has argued that their PR person is an immigrant. That's fine, but it's an appeal to authority rather than addressing the issue. They've argued that their leader is politically progressive. That's another appeal to authority. Where's the truth?

It's probably somewhere in the middle. One of my students approached me and told me she would not be in on that day. I respected that and excused her. Of course, you could argue that this didn't affect my bottom line. Of course, my bottom line is way closer to the bottom than that of a man who owns seven restaurants from here to Florida, and I can't imagine closing one day would move his anywhere near mine.

I'm prejudiced toward working people, and also toward immigrants, who I serve every day of my working life. I'm also becoming increasingly prejudiced toward food I prepare myself at home. I'll have to give a lot of thought before I go back to Ben's.

What do you think?

Something's Fishy in the USA

How does Fox News hook people and keep them hooked? And why can't anyone on the left manage to do anything remotely close? These are tough questions. I've read entire books that try to answer them and come away still shaking my head. What worthwhile endeavor on earth can working people expect from Donald Trump?  Sure, he'll stand there and say he cares about you, but he doesn't precisely put his money where his mouth is. In fact, it looks more like he puts his money where his money is.

How do coal miners watch him spend millions of federal dollar weekending at his 200K per head Florida resort and think, "This guy is gonna make my life better"? Well, here's a guy who keeps a life-sized cardboard cutout of Donald Trump and wishes him well each and every day. I wonder if he drives with him in the HOV lane.

Anytime you have fanatical ideologues you will hear things that amaze and disturb you. Their religion is the best. If you don't join, you're going to hell. Their ideology is the only one that's right, and it doesn't matter if their leaders are wrong. So what if they live in a golden penthouse while you live in a shack? That's just a temporary thing, and any day you'll be living in a penthouse too. That's why it's wise to keep taxes low for the rich. Sure, it's inconvenient now, but you never know.

What was really stupid was getting rid of the Fairness Doctrine, which eventually enabled Fox News. Now people can sit in front of it and tell themselves how smart and cool they are. Oddly, when I was in East Berlin in the 80s, they sold Pravda on every corner and no one bought it. If the folks running Fox ran Pravda the wall would never have come down.

I can't watch Fox for any length of time without hurling things at the television, a practice my wife very much frowns upon. Also, I have more than enough things to go crazy about in my real life, and I don't really much need any more. One of them is Donald Trump. I literally wake up in the middle of the night, think that he's President, and can't get back to sleep.

I'm not sure what exactly you need to believe to be a Trump supporter. It's hard for me to understand xenophobia, as I work with kids from every corner of the earth and it's one of the greatest joys of my life. But we're afraid of what we don't understand. When I see, "Make America Great Again," it looks very much like, "Make America White Again." I don't like to assume that people are racist or bigoted, but it's tough for me to imagine they aren't.

What the hell is it that this man does well? He can't open his mouth without jamming his foot into it. He watches crap about Sweden on Fox and all of a sudden the whole country is on fire. Politifact has him at 50% false. I don't know about you, but I don't find that remotely inspiring in a leader. And his famous thin skin, which causes him to criticize the press when it dares to tell the truth, is particularly disturbing.

The very worst thing about Donald Trump, though, is that his need for adulation could easily provoke him to war. That's the best way for him to rationalize doing what he wants to do, and making it unpatriotic to criticize him. I don't actually think he'll select China, as he and Ivanka make money producing their cheap crap over there. But you never know--he could decide he needs the press to shut up, and may think martial law is worth producing Donald Trump ties in Bangladesh, or even (perish forbid) Mexico.

Americans have already died in the service of Donald Trump, and I see no evidence that he wouldn't send thousands of our young people to the same fate in order to comfort his sensitive ego. Hopefully even the GOP will see what a bad bargain it's made and remove this dangerous evil clown from office sooner rather than later.

The Best Catch There Is

I'm a big fan of Catch 22 by Joseph Heller. I don't know how many times I've read it, but it really sticks with me. Catch 22 says that you have to be crazy to fly army missions when people are shooting at you. You can't fly when you're crazy, of course, but no one knows you're crazy until you report it. But once you go and report that you're crazy, you're showing reasonable concern for your life, and you therefore can't be crazy. So you have to fly.

I see absurdity in a lot of places no one else does, and it's sometimes problematic for me. I might start laughing out loud in a meeting where no one else sees anything funny. It can be embarrassing. Heller, I think, saw what I see, and he saw it in everything. He presented his view in the setting of WWII, but human behavior is consistent in many settings, including NYC schools.

A memorable character was Colonel Cathcart. I see this character in a lot of people. He was obsessed with his image, and reduced pretty much everything to "black eyes" and "feathers in my cap." What made him look good or bad to his superiors? There were simply no other considerations for Colonel Cathcart. To me, he's a metaphor for the NYC DOE, forever focusing on how it can look good. (Ironically, just like Colonel Cathcart, it usually doesn't.)

In September, the DOE sent out a grading manifesto, stating that grades had to be largely mastery-based, and that participation grades had to be more closely regulated. In fact, my practice of giving a participation grade based on my memory each semester was specifically prohibited (though in retrospect, I gave one every marking period, which was not). Also, my practice of giving full credit for completion of homework was out. I felt they balanced one another out. A student could easily earn credit for completion of homework, but said student needed to actually do something in class to do well in participation.

But hey, the DOE, in its infinite wisdom, thinks it will look better if I drop these nefarious practices, so I did. My department now gives a higher percentage for graded homework than for homework that requires completion. Actually I'd already been doing that by assigning more weight to homework I sat and graded, but rules are rules so I'm doing it the other way.

An issue in my school, though, has been with participation. We've been instructed to come up with rubrics that clarify what participation is. I guess that's fair. I can't just say I'm giving you a zero in participation because you stink. I'm a language teacher, and whether or not you stink is not necessarily the best indication of how well you use the language. So I made a pretty simple list of what is positive and what is negative, and that's what I use.

Not everyone I know did that. Some people have really complex rubrics. Now here's the thing with a rubric--it's a measurement tool, but if you ever want to get anything done you can't specifically refer to each and every factor. For example, when I graded essays for the Regents, I tended to be in sync with most of my colleagues. But I recall one former colleague who used to agonize over every step. When I was completing my second stack of papers, she'd be looking at paper number two or three, meticulously matching each category to each paper, and doing ponderous calculations to reach her conclusions. She'd also criticize my grading every step of the way. Now maybe she was a better grader than me, but since she never actually finished grading a class we'll never know.

I spoke to a young teacher who'd just spent 90 minutes inputting his participation grades for the day. I told him he'd set an impossible standard for himself. He just shrugged, and said he'd consider revising his rubric. Several departments in my school are demanding weekly participation grades. I suppose parents could call and complain about participation grades or their frequency if they wished, though it's never happened to me once. I also suppose this whole process is the brainchild of some bureaucrat obsessed with black eyes and feathers in his cap.

Another thing Colonel Cathcart liked to do was raise the number of dangerous flying missions. Every time his men reached 20 and were ready to stop, he'd raise it to 30. When they hit 30, he'd raise it to 40. I feel like that's what's being done to teachers. Now that you've done this thing, do this other thing. Follow the Danielson rubric. Go to a teacher team meeting, without which Western Civilization will grind to a halt. Take PD, but not this kind, that kind, and by the way, screw you because we're not offering it. Go to some school to grade Regents exams that aren't yours, and stand outside in 20 degree weather until we're good and ready to let you in. And no, you can't drink water while you grade, and you need permission to go to the bathroom. Sorry, the pass is out.

It's just that somewhere there's a line. Not everyone is as crazy as I am, and sometimes leaders go over it. In fact, it happens often, which is why we lose so many teachers. In my school, I've filed an excessive paperwork complaint about the participation requirements. I think teachers are the best judges of when grades need to be issued and why. I do not believe this barrage of regulations and requirements is improving education for anyone.

I don't want to be Colonel Cathcart, and I don't want my kids to have leaders like him. I understand such leaders are around, and I also understand that people with this mentality might be drawn to administration. But those of us who love kids and wish to support them, especially when they become working people, need to leave them a better world. To do that, we're gonna have to work to keep nonsense to a minimum.

That is one tough job.

Stronger Together Minus Jia Lee=Neither Stronger nor Together

Stronger Together is a caucus of NYSUT that began when former President Richard Iannuzzi was unceremoniously overthrown by Mulgrew three years ago. A lot of locals didn't much like being told by UFT leadership who could and could not run NYSUT. The officers being overthrown ran against the Mulgrew-selected ticket, and PJSTA President Beth Dimino recruited MORE to represent UFT in the run against NY State Unity.

I thought it was kind of cool that Hillary used their name in her campaign. It was pretty cool to see Stronger Together written in big letters on her campaign jet. Back when she was a sure thing, I thought maybe they'd follow in their footsteps. Now that I know exactly what she was a sure thing for, I'm afraid I was right.

As of now, Stronger Together is running a new ticket, once again with only four candidates. My caucus, MORE, was affiliated with Stronger Together for the last few years. The MORE rep for ST reports being treated very poorly by them, being told that they were union presidents and he wasn't, and was somehow not on par with them. I have a little experience with union presidents acting superior to mere members, so I don't find that too hard to believe.

When I realized that Stronger Together was running four people against five, I saw an instant solution to my problem, which is that they have no UFT representation whatsoever. They could run Jia Lee, who bravely faced an uphill battle against Michael Mulgrew last year. They could run James Eterno, who got the majority of high school votes for High School Vice President, but who isn't VP because UFT Unity rigged elections precisely so he couldn't win. They could have run a hundred different UFT members. But they didn't ask any of us.

That's because their election process entailed sending an email, putting a post on Facebook, and then having 12 people decide who would run. I discussed it with Eterno a month later, but we evidently made the assumption that someone would contact us. We were wrong. So then the question becomes this--Why didn't Stronger Together solicit a UFT candidate for their ticket?

The answer could be they assumed there was no interest, which is what they told me. However, I know Michael Lillis, the Presidential candidate, to be very smart. I don't believe for a New York minute that it didn't cross his mind to call Jia, or James, or me, or anyone at all in UFT. What I believe is that his caucus thought being affiliated with us would hurt their chances of the fusion ticket they so much wanted to create with Unity. I have no idea why Unity would not have noticed our previous affiliation, or indeed why the hell they'd be motivated to do any sort of fusion ticket. Of course they did not.

Once that happened, Stronger Together decided to run their four-person ticket. They could have easily added a fifth, but chose not to. So in the virtually unimaginable scenario that they win, it will be four of them and one of Mulgrew's. Of course it wouldn't be Andy Pallotta, who seems to be the only UFT member running. Now that would be kind of cool, as UFT leadership would be frozen out of NYSUT in at least some small way. Their enormous voting bloc would mean nothing whatsoever, and they'd actually have to listen to someone for a change. In the era of Brexit, and Donald Trump, you'd think such a miracle could take place.  Now I often love miracles, but the ones taking place lately have not been the sort that I get excited about. So I'm not precisely holding my breath for this one.

So the question remains why ST didn't reach out for UFT representation.  Could their negative relationship with a single MORE member have led them to stereotype us? I don't think so. Lillis is smarter than that. Could it be that it did not occur to Michael Lillis to pick up a telephone and look for UFT representation? I doubt it. Could it have been that they were so giddy over the possibility of getting a few cool gigs via that fusion thing with Unity? Maybe.

But whatever it was, the egregious error of ignoring the largest teacher local in the country, with 28% of the total members of NYSUT was a very bad idea. It shows a fatal lack of forethought and consideration and fails to sufficiently differentiate them from the machine they're facing. Maybe they'll come to their senses after they lose, and maybe they won't, but their lack of vision right now is nothing short of appalling.