My open letter to @campbell_brown

Dear Campbell,

I hear you have filed another lawsuit seeking to do away with seniority rights for teachers. You've already got a suit going in New York, and your case in Minnesota was thrown out, and now you're coming after us in New Jersey. 

Why?

Are you aware that Gov. Christie signed a bipartisan tenure reform law that puts the responsibility of helping underperforming teachers squarely on the shoulders of administrators? Do you know that attaining tenure in New Jersey now takes four years instead of three? That there is a definite process and timeline that must be followed? That the evaluation process is now far more detailed and rigorous than before? So, exactly what do you hope to attain with your lawsuit? 

If you're trying to get rid of veteran educators, you're doing a good job. The power and money (and the influence they buy) behind the education 'reform' movement have seen to it that more veteran educators are leaving the profession now than ever before because it's becoming almost impossible to effectively do our jobs. And in urban districts—the very same ones you and your lawsuit avatars claim to want to 'fix'—new teachers are fleeing the profession within the first five years. 

As far back as 2003, education experts were sounding the alarm bells about the increasing teacher shortage. It has only gotten worse, and efforts such as yours, and the education 'reform' movement in general, have only added to the brain drain.

It continues to amaze me that those who seek to improve my profession and student achievement, but who lack any real knowledge of my day-to-day classroom existence, simply refuse to acknowledge the scholarly and vetted research showing the real causes of student and school underachievement, and best practices to help them succeed. Instead, you construct your agenda based on the fast food model: cheap, fast, loaded with unhealthy CCRAP (read it backwards) delivered by underpaid employees while the corporations selling this swill rake in billions.

But then, this does seem to be the American way, doesn't it? 

The education 'reform' movement's refusal to accept the facts and research puts you in the same category as climate deniers and birthers. 

And speaking of facts, here are a few from  a 2014 New York Daily News article authored by Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the UC Irvine School of Law, with additional research by Raymond Pryke, Professor of First Amendment Law at the university. They analyzed the case made by the Vergara plaitiffs' attorneys. Chemerinsky writes (all emphasis mine):

American public education desperately needs to be improved, especially for the most disadvantaged children. But eliminating teachers’ job security and due-process rights is not going to attract better educators — or do much to improve school quality.

In recent months, several respected progressive scholars and politicians have endorsed litigation, like a successful case in California, to weaken the protections afforded public school teachers. Former CNN anchor Campbell Brown is spearheading a suit in New York. Their goals are laudable, but their means are misguided.

The problem of inner-city schools is not that the dedicated teachers who work in them have too many rights, but that the students who go to them are disadvantaged in many ways, the schools have inadequate resources and the schools are surrounded by communities that are dangerous, lack essential services and are largely segregated both by race and class.

Taking the modest job security accorded by tenure away from teachers will address none of these problems.

The causal relationship alleged by the plaintiffs in these lawsuits — that teachers’ rights cause minority students to receive substandard educations — is belied by readily available empirical evidence.

If the plaintiffs were correct, similarly situated students in states with weak protection of teachers — such as Texas, Alabama and Mississippi — would have higher levels of achievement and the racial achievement gap would be smaller in those states. But there is no evidence that minority students in Houston, Birmingham or Jackson outperform those in Los Angeles or New York.

In fact, a study published in the Harvard Educational Review found a significant positive relationship between rates of unionization (and accompanying job security) and student scores on the SAT and ACT.

Every year, the states with the highest student performance are those with robust protections for teachers — places like Maryland and Massachusetts.

(... and, may I add, New Jersey) 

One of the key reasons they are successful is that these states do a better job at getting resources to the neediest students and creating a climate where teachers have the support needed to succeed and therefore stay in the profession.

Similarly, though there are some outstanding charter schools where teachers lack union protections, the lack of union protections never guarantees quality. New York State has plenty of schools where principals can hire and fire teachers at will. Many do not excel.

In the California anti-tenure litigation, the judge found that between 1% and 3% of teachers in the state are grossly ineffective. They, of course, should be replaced. But the evidence also showed that it is possible to do so while respecting basic protections teachers have under law.

The reality is that job security and protection against arbitrary treatment are terms and conditions of employment that, like higher wages, attract good people into teaching and keep them in the classroom.

And if that is our objective, it should be noted that teachers in the United States work more hours and are paid less than their counterparts in almost every other developed country — and their salaries have fallen dramatically relative to pay for comparable jobs in our economy since 1940...

We need to find better ways to attract talented people to become teachers. Every study, and common sense, supports the conclusion that teacher effectiveness improves with experience. I hope and believe that I am a far better teacher than when I began as a law professor 35 years ago. Thus, the lawsuits’ attack on consideration of seniority in assignments and layoffs is misguided.

One of the biggest challenges in education today is teacher retention... Getting rid of tenure and due process will not encourage more teachers to stay in the profession. It will drive them out and discourage other qualified people from entering the profession in the first place...

Cloaking the attack on teachers’ rights in the rhetoric of the civil rights movement is misleading. Lessening the legal protections for teachers will not advance civil rights or improve education.

So, the research (and this piece is only one in a large body of evidence) says that your lawsuits hurt—not strengthen—the teaching profession. And if teachers are hurting, how can they effectively teach? So, again I ask, What is your point? Other than trying to break the unions, what exactly are you trying to accomplish? The only thing you are doing is sucking the life out of us and driving highly qualified people from the profession—and that hurts students. 

Public school teacher Susan DuFresne sums up the crush of corporate 'reform':

What corporate reform is asking of teachers today is impossible for one human being to accomplish – even in a 24 hour period. With the start of each day at 5:30 am... I carry the burdens of exhaustion, the unfinished workload, the guilt of what reform does to young children... and the build-up of prior weeks of stress. 

I am not alone.  Other teachers in my district are ready to quit. At one school in my district 11 out of 14 teachers said they have thought about quitting – leaving their profession.  Our local union president notes we are at our tipping point. What will it be like when the uninhabitable death zone is the only place left in our public schools and all the creative passionate teachers have gone? 

In addition, our paychecks have shrunk. We're doing more test prep and data collection than actual teaching. We are held accountable for all the ills of society that plague our students. We are vilified in the press. Our pensions are disappearing. Heck, even our 403(b) plans suck. Enrollment in schools of education is down nationwide in part because young people simply don't want to go into a profession where they are attacked on an almost daily basis. There is absolutely nothing attractive about the teaching profession right now, and you want to make it worse—and that is supposed to somehow magically make it... better. 

Look, no one wants to work with an ineffective colleague. But whose fault is it that an ineffective teacher has been allowed to languish in the classroom for years? Not the teacher. The responsibility rests solely with the administrators. And yet, other than New Jersey's new tenure law, I have not seen one 'reform' that addresses administrators who turn a blind eye to ineffective teaching. 

If you win your case (and this is your case—not the avatar plaintiffs'), do you know what will happen to all the highly effective teachers who have 15, 20, 30 years of experience who lose their job? They will either never teach again or, if they do, they will have to take a drastic pay cut because, when push comes to shove, school districts simply can no longer afford to hire experienced, veteran educators. And that is a damned shame. But the blame for that rests squarely on the shoulders of the education 'reform' movement of which you are a large part, because your movement's efforts have resulted in billions of dollars being cut from public education all across this country. 

Don't believe me? Consider this scenario:

Teacher A has 25 years experience and a masters degree. During that time she has received outstanding observations and been considered an excellent teacher. Last year her summative score was 3.70—highly effective. She is at the top of the salary guide earning about $80,000.

Teacher B has 4 years experience. During that time she too has received outstanding observations for her excellent work. Last year her summative score was 3.72, also highly effective. She is toward the bottom of the salary guide earning about $48,000.

Due to a charter school opening in town, the district has to send 90% of its per pupil funding over to it with every student who enrolls, so the district is forced to lay off staff to fill the hole in the budget. 

If seniority rights are removed, Teacher A will lose her job. And she will never work again because no district can afford to hire her. If she were to be offered a job, it would be at a drastically reduced salary. This would be financially devastating—not to mention demoralizing.

If seniority rights are in place, the district would lay off Teacher B, who would have no trouble securing another job because because of her effectiveness and comparatively lower salary. She's a good investment for another district and has decades to earn more money.

Are you prepared for this? Do you even care that your actions could result in many excellent, veteran teachers losing even more take home pay than they already have? Have you thought about how effective a school with little to no teaching experience can truly be? Have you considered that all the 'innovation' you all love to demand from us first requires experience in what works and what doesn't? And that experience takes years to acquire? 

Teaching—the most important profession there is—is the only profession nowadays where experience doesn't matter.

And how do you justify nepotism and discrimination as educational best practices? I mean, they will no doubt play a huge role in many hiring and firing decisions if seniority is removed. I'm very serious. How will you combat that?

My guess is you won't because you seem to only care about ridding our schools of all those 'bad teachers'. Well, no teacher wants to work with an ineffective colleague. But, there are procedures for improving or removing them, and here in New Jersey that process has been greatly strengthened. But it's up to the administrators to make that happen. Teachers don't work in a vacuum.

Despite some of the snark in this letter, I truly, seriously welcome a response. After being beaten up by the press, elected officials, billionaires and education 'reformers' for the past six or seven years, I've grown weary of being polite to people who simply have no knowledge of what I do, how I do it and what my students are going through. 

The great irony of the education 'reform' movement is that, in your zealous demand for data, you refuse to acknowledge the data that is staring you right in the face: it's the poverty.

@DmitriMehlhorn who's really being uncivil in the ed 'reform' debate?

Venus, Jupiter and Mars weren't the only planets aligning in the sky this month. For the past couple of weeks, Jersey Jazzman has been engaged in a debate on the merits of charter schools with Dmitri Mehlhorn, venture capitalist, education 'reform' blogger and co-founder of Michelle Rhee's ed 'reform' lobbying group StudentsFirst. 

Last week, former news anchor turned education 'reformer', Campbell Brown posted a piece on her ed 'reform' website, The Seventy Four, in support of Britain PM David Cameron's call to end public education in his country titled, Britain's Education Reboot And Why America Needs A David Cameron. Brown's husband is on the board of StudentsFirst. She is a vocal opponent of public education, tenure and teachers unions, and accuses them of coercing suburban parents into opting out of CCSS-driven standardized tests even though the opt-out movement was started by parents. Then Jeff Bryant wrote this scathing piece in Salon about how dangerously out of touch Brown and the ed 'reform' movement in general are about labor unions.

My colleague Dave Johnson at the Campaign for America’s Future recently came across a new study conducted for the Center for American Progress, which found in places where union membership is higher, low-income children, in particular, benefit from “economic mobility” and “intergenerational mobility.” In plain English, this means union strength correlated with low-income children being more apt to rise higher in the income rankings — and for their children in turn to be better off. 

Reporters at the New York Times looked at the study as well and noted, “There aren’t many other factors that are as strongly correlated with mobility” as the presence of unions. “A 10-percentage-point increase in the rate of unionization in an area coincided with a rise of an additional 1.3 points on the income distribution as the average child becomes an adult,” they wrote. 

Combating unions is not only a strategy unlikely to result in good outcomes for low-income kids, it also seems completely out of step with the political zeitgeist of the times.

So, when Brown tweeted out her post about Cameron and privatizing America's public schools, I tweeted this meme:

And I've continued to do so every day since. I don't have billionaire backers to finance and spread my message the way Brown does, but I do have social media. 

So, after one of my tweets, Dmitri responded with this, which Brown 'liked':

I read Mehlhorn's link. You should, too. There are some contradictions in there that had me scratching my head. But this quote in particular stuck out:

If we want a civil debate, we should first and foremost strive to be civil.

He uses the example of Vladimir Putin's ruse of pacifism and civility to justify his invasion of the Ukraine, then goes on to say that "in education policy, although some genuinely seek productive discourse, calls for civility often serve as cover for nasty personal attacks."

And that's where his hypothesis derails. He immediately attacks Diane Ravitch for being uncivil:

While Ravitch was attacking Rhee for lack of civility, she was receiving financial payments from the teachers unions that were funding a secret campaign to personally demonize Michelle Rhee.

Those financial payments are speaking fees, no doubt the same ones that Michelle Rhee and Campbell Brown receive when they speak in front of education 'reform' groups who attack public education on a daily basis. But I never hear either woman publicly denouncing the vilification of public school teachers that they regularly pump out.

Personally, I knew nothing about that website until I read his post. And I certainly can't speak to whether or not Diane knew about it. That said, if in fact AFT did create a website that mocked Michelle Rhee, then shame on them. That's a low blow. Shame on NJEA members who mock Gov. Christie for his weight. Shame on any education professional who puts personalities before principles. But, Dmitri, you must admit, there's plenty of uncivil behavior to go around. Do I need to recount all the horrible things Gov. Christie has said about teachers? Look at this picture. Is this a man with whom educators could sit down and have a 'conversation'? 

"I am tired of you people."

How about Campbell Brown's outlandish accusation that the New York City teacher's union harbors sexual predators? What about the NRA blaming teachers for the Newtown massacre because they weren't carrying guns? Are you aware that while he was working for then NYC Schools Chancellor, Rupert Murdoch, former NJ Education Commissioner and current Newark Schools Superintendent Chris Cerf was spying on Diane Ravitch and Parents Across America founder and education activist, Leonie Haimson? Don't you think it's uncivil to blame tenure for 'failing schools' as Campbell Brown does, despite the fact that some of the nation's leading legal scholars find no basis in that claim, nor have there been any long-term studies to support it? Don't you think it's just a tad disingenuous when newspaper reporters and editorial writers don't even bother to do their homework about education policy, relying instead on baseless talking points from 'reformers' to spread their propaganda? Don't you find it mind boggling that there is a mountain of research like this showing how poverty affects children's brain development and their ability to learn, and yet it is summarily dismissed by education 'reformers' and elected officials on both sides of the aisle who do nothing but hold teachers responsible? Don't you find it hypocritical that Governors like Scott Walker, John Kasich, Chris Christie, Rick Scott and Rick Snyder—to name just a few—have done all they can to destroy labor unions in the name of helping the middle class despite the fact that strong labor unions help lift low income earners out of poverty, and provide the middle class with more financial stability? Don't you find it downright mean and cruel that Michelle Rhee fired an educator with cameras rolling? How would you feel if you were an educator and you saw this? 

The woman in this picture does not want to have a 'civil conversation' about 'fixing' America's schools. Any third grader looking at this as a writing prompt could figure that out. I'm sorry, I know she's your friend, but can you walk a mile in my shoes for a minute and see how this image sends the wrong message?

I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. These are attacks, plain and simple. They are not 'conversations' and they certainly are not 'civil'. They are not even debates. If education 'reformers' such as you think you unequivocally know what will 'fix' education, why not sit down to a 3-hour debate on national television with leading education experts? I would pay good money to be in the audience for that! Unfortunately, I doubt that will ever happen because the facts are on our side. But Bill Gates, Eli Broad, the Walton Foundation, ALEC, StudentsFirst and many other anti-public education 'non profits' have boatloads of money which is used to buy up the media and politicians, and thus control the message. 

And if you think I'm off my rocker, then please tell me why organizations like the Broad Foundation are pouring millions of dollars into local board of education races in states all across this country? 

No, there was never any plan to have any type of civil discourse. Bill Gates simply showed up at America's public school doorsteps and declared, "This is what I'm doing because I believe it will work." He never sat down with educators to hear our expert views on education in America. He has treated public education as another novelty on which he can focus his vast wealth. He manipulates it, shapes it and molds it to his liking, then moves on when he tires of it. We're not real to him; we're just his lab rats scurrying through his mazes, unwillingly helping to carry out his grand scheme to turn public education into a system to which he would never send his own children. No, his children, along with many other 'reformer' children, are educated in elite private schools that would never stand for this nonsense. Education 'reform' isn't for his children; it's for everyone else.  

Now, I know what you're thinking: See? That's just what I'm talking about. You're not being civil; you're attacking. But we've tried—really, really tried to no avail. Anthony Cody, bless his heart, is still the most civil educator out there debunking 'reform'. He tried to engage Bill Gates and members of the Gates Foundation in civil discourse about ed 'reform'. He even wrote a book about it: The Educator and The Oligarch. But not all of us are blessed with his time and patience. And when somebody is standing over you kicking you repeatedly in the gut and blaming you for starting the fight, it's really hard to be civil. When a billionaire tells an oncologist she's got to treat her patients with cotton candy because he believes that's the cure (and said billionaire coincidentally owns a cotton candy factory), would you blame the oncologist if she acted just the teeniest bit incredulous?

There are a lot of people in this country who have lined up to grab their piece of the $700 billion public education pie. But those people have already eaten their way through the entire bakery— banking, real estate, the military, prisons, healthcare—and left the rest of us scrambling for crumbs. The only thing left is public education. And most teachers are just too nice, too polite to fight back. As for the rest? Well, some think that if they bog us down with so much extra, meaningless work, we won't have time to fight. But that's backfiring.

So, excuse me if I'm not polite. Excuse me if I don't know my place. Excuse me if I don't genuflect at the altars of the super rich and powerful who have brought this country to its knees with greed and selfishness as they plow through one economic sector after another leaving a wake of death and destruction as they toss aside the foundations of our democracy like over-indulged children at Toys-R-Us hell-bent on the next immediate gratification.

I am not becoming a better teacher because of the Common Core, Race to the Top, standardized testing, defunding of public schools, the expansion of charter schools, and the demonizing of my profession. I am working longer, harder and getting less results and personal satisfaction from the work I do. But I am becoming stronger. And every educator who becomes stronger, empowers others to become stronger, too. 

So, if you don't like my snark, I'm sorry, but as the saying goes, "You don't bring a knife to a gunfight."

So, in answer to your question: 'Has Ravitch said anything else we need to keep in mind?" Yes. Here's a sampling:

Poverty is the greatest handicap to the academic performance of students today, not “bad teachers.” 

The problem with turning public education over to the private sector is that they don't know anything about education. 

American Education has a long history of infatuation with fads and ill-considered ideas. The current obsession with making our schools work like a business may be the worst of them, for it threatens to destroy public education. Who will stand up to the tycoons and politicians and tell them so? 

We are now reducing corporate taxes, reducing taxes on the richest people in this country and cutting the budget of public education. This is crazy. 

Bill Gates is wrong. American education is not 'broken'. Federal education policy is broken. Testing children until they cry is a bad idea. It is educational malpractice. 

Can teachers successfully educate children to think for themselves if teachers are not treated as professionals who think for themselves? 

Our schools will not improve if we value only what tests measure. The tests we have now provide useful information about students' progress in reading and mathematics, but they cannot measure what matters most in education....What is tested may ultimately be less important that what is untested... 

Testing is not a substitute for curriculum and instruction. Good education cannot be achieved by a strategy of testing children, shaming educators, and closing schools.

Oh, and fyi... parents are more powerful than educators. Remember, the Opt-Out movement was not started by the teachers unions. It was started by all those white suburban moms Arne Duncan accused of daring to have an opinion about their child's public education. Hell hath no fury like a mother of an over-tested child. 

Why I oppose @NEAToday early endorsement of @HillaryClinton

Without unions, workers will lose many of the protections against abusive employers. Wages for all will be depressed, even as corporate profits soar. The American Dream will be destroyed for millions. And we will have a government of the corporations, by the already powerful, for the wealthy.
              ~ Kenneth Bernstein, teacher, author, education activist

Change your social media profile pic if you agree

Teacher, education activist and blogger, Fred Klonsky, posted this yesterday: 

What has been rumored for several weeks is now pretty much a sure thing. The NEA board of directors are meeting next week and they will go through the motions of taking a vote. But an endorsement of Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Party primary race is all but assured. (emphasis mine)

What's particularly troubling is that because this is a primary endorsement, many member voices simply will not be heard in this process. Steven Singer writes:

[S]ince this is only an endorsement for the primary election, the matter would not need to go before the Representative Assembly (RA). In effect, the move could sidestep the voices of the RA’s 8,000 delegates representing state and local affiliates, student members, retired members, and other segments of the united education profession. 

The decision would be made by a handful of leaders and the PAC council. Though there are thousands of PAC council votes, they are distributed by the amount of money raised by each state’s members. This means that little states like Delaware – where members donate greatly – have a larger vote relative to their membership than other states. 

The voices of the great majority of members would be silenced. (more on this below)

Even though I want a woman president, and I know I will see that happen in my lifetime, I don't want a president—man or woman—who does not stand for the views and values of public education as supported by the vast majority of hard-working NEA and AFT members in this country. 

The NEA should not endorse this early in the campaign. AFT did it this past summer and got substandial pushback from its members including a Change.org petition calling for a re-call of the endorsement and thousands of angry posts on the association's Facebook page. AFT President Randi Weingarten is good friends with Clinton and sits on the board of Priorities USA, a pro-Hillary super PAC.

Follow the money

If you're reading this post, chances are you've seen this meme floating around social media:

The Tampa Bay Times PolitiFact rated it 'mostly true' stating:

Social media memes say that Clinton’s top 10 donors are mainly "banks, corporations and media," while Bernie Sanders’ top 10 donors are labor unions. This contention fits quite closely with campaign data from the Center for Responsive Politics. However, it’s worth noting that this data refers to cumulative donations as far back as the 1980s, rather than just donations to their current presidential bids. The statement is accurate but needs clarification, so we rate it Mostly True. (emphasis mine)

Donors must disclose their place of employment when making campaign contributions, so it is entirely possible that some of these contributions could be comprised of individual donations from company employees rather than a few large checks from that organization.

According to the most recent report from The Center for Responsive Politics, so far in this election cycle Clinton's campaign has raised over $47.5 million while Sanders has raised almost $16.5 million. This does not include PAC contributions. But while 70% of Sanders' money has come from small, individual contributions, 82% of Clinton's has come from large, individual donors. And that's a big, red flag. Don't forget, President Bill Clinton signed the New Market Tax Credits bill into law that opened the floodgates for hedge fund investment in urban charter schools. And who has lots of money these days and is spending it on education 'reform'? Hedge fund managers, among others. Wall Street money.

Will history repeat itself?

Remember this? Obama vs. Romney in 2012:

NOTE: The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Look at what that $815K from Microsoft employees has cost us as a nation. I remember sitting on the floor of the 2012 NEA RA and the buzz going around that convention center when, not President Barak Obama, but Vice President Joe Biden addressed the delegation. A lot of people were very angry—but not at Biden. While President Obama did address us via phone, it felt to many of us like he was afraid to face us, and rightly so. While I voted for him twice, the second time I held my nose because he was the lesser of two evils. The Obama-Gates-Duncan education policies have brought US public education to its knees—and I never, ever thought I'd say that about a Democratic president.

President Obama sold public education and our students to the highest bidders: Wall Street, Gates, Pearson, Eli Broad, The Walton Foundation, and everyone else who is profiting in the Gold Rush Education Rush of the 21st Century. We have no proof whatsoever that Clinton—or any of the candidates—will put an end to this madness, so why should we write them a check this early in the game?

See for yourself

Here are the videos of the three Democratic presidential candidates that were shown at the NEA RA in July. Watch for yourself:

Hillary Clinton:



Bernie Sanders:



Martin O'Malley:



There is nothing in Hillary's speech that screams, "We must elect this woman!" Quite frankly, there's nothing in any of the speeches that screams that. And while Sanders' speech isn't as passionate as I've seen him in the past, in Klonsky's post above, he goes on to say this:

In her talks with state union leaders around the country [NEA President Lily Eskelsen Garcia] has admitted that Bernie Sanders and the NEA are more often in 100% agreement on education issues but that Hillary is more electable. (emphasis mine) 

Do we want to support a candidate that's electable? Of course. No one wants to back a loser. And although my personal position is in support of Sanders, I don't want to see NEA endorse any of them yet. There are too many unknowns. If our national association does not first and foremost support our students, our profession and our public schools, we might just as well line up at the door of the local charter school to apply for a job because pretty soon that's all that will be available. 

We have been playing nice for too long. Public education is being bulldozed into the ground. Democracy is being trampled in the name of 'choice'. Our schools are grossly underfunded; our students over tested; our professionals subjected to McCarthy-era witch hunts; and our neediest, poorest students of color are being segregated in numbers not seen since before the Civil Rights Movement.

Time for action!

It's time our association stood up and carved that canyon in stone. With 'reform'-style politicians on both sides of the aisle screaming for accountability within our ranks, when do we start holding them accountable? You want our money? You want our endoresment? You want our votes? Then prove yourself. Otherwise our association is part of the problem, not part of the solution, and we will be weaker for it.

Anthony Cody writes:

NEA members will be active regardless. If NEA endorses Clinton or any other candidate without an adequate process that actively involves and engages their membership, and without clear answers to the vital questions we have regarding the Department of Education and Democratic party support of corporate reform, then teacher activism will take place outside of the NEA. That will leave the organization weakened, and make the endorsement far less powerful than it could be. An endorsement that is the process of real member participation will then unleash that energy into a grassroots campaign in support of the chosen candidate. A top down endorsement will yield some millions of member dollars, and some union leaders on the podium for photos, but much less in terms of on the ground support. (emphasis mine)

In his open letter to Lily, teacher/blogger Peter Greene posted earlier this morning:

Teachers are tired of having their voices silenced and ignored. We have been silenced and ignored by political leaders, corporate leaders, virtually every big name in the last fifteen years of education reformy fiasco. To ask us to accept the same from our own national union is just too much. The democratic process is under attack in our country; we do not want to see it under attack within our own union. 

It is a mistake on the larger scale as well. The early endorsement is just another attempt to circumvent the democratic process, to say, "Well, it looks like the voters at large might make a choice we don't like, so we are going to take steps to keep that from happening. We can't just be letting the Democratic Party make these choices based on the will of the voter. We need to tip the scale." This does not say, "We have faith in the American voters." It says, "The American voters are boobs, and we need to push them where we want them." 

It won't work. The howls from NEA members will be loud and palpable, and the whole mess will feed the narrative that NEA is NOT the voice of three million teachers, but a group of political operatives who try to harness those voices for their own purposes. 

Democracy is under attack. The voices of ordinary citizens are being ignored and silenced. NEA must not become one more big organization saying, "Some peoples' voices just don't matter." (emphasis mine)

If you agree, and you are a member of an NEA state affiliate, consider changing your social media avatar to the meme above. Then, contact your state affiliate's elected leaders and tell them you do not support this early endorsement; tweet Lily at @Lily_NEA and @NEAToday; share on Facebook and post on the NEA Facebook page; and engage your fellow members to join the chorus of voices rising up to stop this.

Special note

Last week the NJEA PAC Committee took a position of 'no endorsement at this time'. Our members felt there was not a strong enough case for an early endorsement because Clinton has not come out strong against the corporate takeover of public education. Since NJEA is one of the top PAC fundraisers in the NEA, our vote will carry more weight at that meeting next week. 

My Review of the documentary 'Heal Our Schools'

Pick up a newspaper or turn on the television and reporters and other talking heads describe the grand experiment that is corporate education 'reform' with buzz words like 'accountability', 'data', 'innovation', 'testing', 'rigor', 'choice' and 'transformation'. A few words you won't hear too often are 'research', 'proof', 'access', 'stress', 'burnout' and 'anxiety'. That's because those words don't fit into the reformy one-size-fits-all plan of education. Education 'reform'—like climate and vaccine denial—is a faith-based movement in that they believe in their cause rather than rely on empirical studies and peer-reviewed research by actual educators, and they have the money to make you believe it, too. See, facts are messy. They point straight to poverty, and you can't make a profit fighting poverty the way you can by flipping a school to a charter and firing veteran teachers.  

Those who are leading the 'reform' movement are some of the richest and most powerful people in the world. Since they control the message, educator voices go largely unheard. As a result, we have taken to social media, book publishing and documentary film making—places where we cannot be censored—in order to challenge the giant corporate interests that have lied to the American public about the state of our public schools. In the past few years, the number of educator-driven blogs, Facebook pages, websites, Twitter accounts and published books has exploded. Diane Ravitch's site alone can command over 1 million hits a day, and her latest book, Reign of Error, debuted at number ten on the NY Times best seller list. The documentary, Standardized, is drawing crowds of parents at pop-up viewings all across the country, and has fueled the opt-out movement. 

I recently attended a screening of the latest entry in our movement: the documentary film, Heal Our Schools, by former Colorado Springs music teacher, Laurie Gabriel. You can watch the 4-minute trailer here.

Like many veteran teachers of late, Laurie left the profession five years ago after a 27-year career because, as she says, "I could no longer serve up the child abuse I was ask[ed] to dole out." She, her husband and son then spent the better part of the next five years writing, directing and producing this film which was largely self-financed. While she is now many thousands of dollars in debt, she is "obsessed with seeing it to fruition!"

Her website describes it thus:

Heal Our Schools, a documentary researched, written and directed by Laurie Gabriel, is being produced with the mission of uncovering and solving the real problems of public education in America. This venture is different from other education documentaries in that it fully explores the experience and expertise of our most overlooked resource: teachers. Through this platform, educators from all over the country can share their compelling (and strikingly similar) stories and solutions. Hear Our Teachers is an enlightening look into what's really going on behind school doors, as well as a collection of virtually cost-free answers to the education crisis—answers that are based on teachers' caring compassion for the children they serve.

Along with teachers who share their struggles, frustrations and solutions are interviews with leading education activists and authors: Diane Ravitch, Nancy Carlsson-Paige, Anthony Cody, John Kuhn, Jonathan Kozol and Jose Luis Vilson.

The overarching themes of the film are: 

1. All studies, evidence and research point to the fact that education 'reform' is killing public education by turning it into a system not unlike that of China: narrow curriculum, overemphasis on test prep, little room for individuality, drill and kill. 
2. All studies, evidence and research point to poverty being a major factor in a child's ability to succeed in school.
3. Teachers and students are being crushed under the weight of these 'reforms'.
4. No one who is driving these 'reforms' is listening to the experts: teachers.
5. Teachers are not the only people responsible for their students' educational success. Parents and the students themselves must be consistently involved.

Educator and author, John Kuhn, says: 

Nobody asks teachers, "What do you think of these systems we put in place?" The silence of the teachers is deafening. Nobody's asking our opinion because nobody wants it.

The film points out that 'reform' is crushing the joy of learning for many students. When that happens, some kids simply stop coming to school, and they are generally the ones who struggle more than others, so how is that helping them? As one teacher says, "If you constantly harp on what kids are bad at, they won't want to come to school." The bottom line is that if a child wants to learn, they will. We cannot force the information into their heads.

Which leads to the fundamental question: What is the purpose of education? Most educators would probably say it's to make children productive members of society and to unlock their true passions and interests. But as Anthony Cody says, "The paradox is that something that's supposed to create opportunity is taking away opportunity." We see it time and again as 'reform' crowds out every subject except math and language arts, thus robbing children of well-rounded educations. And charter schools routinely cherry pick the best and brightest students, leaving those who are more challenging and expensive to educate in the chronically underfunded public schools.

And speaking of charter school segregation, Kuhn drives the point home:

Public schools mean 'if you live in my district, I let you in.' Elevating schools that turn kids away is not good for our country.

The film is full of plain 'ole common sense from the experts no one is listening to:

Teachers should make decisions about education; not politicians or business people. 

Testing costs approximately $1.7 billion per year. That's enough money to hire 50 thousand teachers. 

Why aren't we trying to find out why experienced teachers are quitting? 

Diane Ravitch: Public policy puts millions into Teach for America, yet 50% of teachers are gone within the first 5 years. 

If all 3 million teachers speak up at once, bravery wouldn't be required. 

Corporate America wants compliant, utilitarian workers. 

Why are teachers not considered experts in their field? 

John Kuhn: Soldiers who fight and lose battles get medals; teachers are branded. 

Teachers now teach out of fear; not out of a love of teaching.

My favorite part of the film is when three non-educators are interviewed about their views on the teaching profession, and are then put into a classroom where they will have 30 minutes to teach 10 words to a small group of students. They will be awarded $10 for every word the students remember. 

In the interview, they of course trash tenure as part of a 'liberal agenda' and say that the real solution would be for businesses to let their workers off to go teach because they really know about the subjects. Once in the classroom, their eyes were opened wide. One student was sleeping, another calling out, another up out of their chair wandering around. Class was interrupted by announcements, and students coming and going. Had they been first year teachers, their classroom management skills would have gotten them booted out door.

In the post interviews, they all expressed a change of heart. When asked if all the student behaviors were his responsibility, one man said that, to some extent, it is, but a lot depends on what they're taught at home. They couldn't believe a real classroom is actually like that. And another said that "some of us were not meant to be teachers."  

The film doesn't solely focus on what's wrong with education 'reform'. It also talks about what the real experts—teachers—see as essential to improving educational opportunities for all students:

1. Small class sizes
2. Equitable school funding
3. Free prenatal care for every expectant mother
4. Eliminating bullying
5. Acknowledging and addressing poverty

Notice what's missing: everything that 'reformers' say will fix public education. What gives them the right to claim to be experts? What gives them the right to inflict this toxic poison on an entire generation of children, and an entire profession of educators? Money, power and greed.

As one teacher said, "Our students are experimental guinea pigs." And if this grand experiment fails (and it will fail), the scientists billionaires in their white lab coats expensive suits will simply toss us all aside and begin again without ever reflecting on what went wrong.

But as Diane Ravitch once said: they have money, but we have numbers. Rachel Carson had her Silent Spring; the Arabs had theirs; educators will have ours, too. It's only a matter of time.

I urge you to see this film and, if possible, arrange a screening for other educators and parents. If you are interested, you can contact Laurie here.

ADDING: Why is it that the Attorney General is an actual attorney; the Surgeon General is an actual doctor; but the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, is not a teacher? Only in America, folks.

My blog reaches a milestone

Dear Readers,

Thank you. At some point between yesterday and today, my blog passed the 100,000-views mark. I launched it on March 1, 2014 hoping it would add to the conversation about education 'reform' both in NJ and around the country. My primary goals have always been to educate the general public, and parents in particular, about the privatization of public education, and to give a voice to educators because the mainstream media has, for whatever reason, chosen not to. 

While 100,000 is nowhere near the same universe as Diane Ravitch, Anthony Cody or I'm sure my good buddies Jersey Jazzman and TeacherBiz, I had no expectations going in, so to reach this number in a little less than a year is humbling and gratifying.

So, thank you for all the shares, likes, re-tweets and whatever else you do on social media to spread the word. I truly appreciate all your support! 

The selling of #CCRAP

In a previous post I compared the selling of PARCC to an as-seen-on-TV gizmo that promises to make your life perfect for only "3 easy payments of $19.95." But unlike the Veg-O-Matic, frustrated, white suburban moms, and parents of all colors in all locales, have quickly discovered that the cost of the PARCC and its conjoined twin, CCSS, is anything but easy. They're standing up and fighting back in droves. And that doesn't sit well with the folks who market and sell this hokum. So, as Anthony Cody recently reported, somebody created an easy-to-use "How to Talk About Testing" ad campaign guide complete with a cute little bunny rabbit graphic and a classroom-friendly layout and fonts. I guess they figure if they treat parents like second graders, all will be well. 

I wonder how many "easy payments of $19.95" this cost? And who created it? And who it's being sent to? 

Do yourself a favor and read the entire manual. It's short on content but long on laughs. Here's Mr. Bunny. Be careful! You don't want to fall down his rabbit hole of 'facts' now, do you?

Before I became an educator, I spent 15 years in advertising. It can be a sleazy business because it's not about presenting the facts; it's is about selling a product. And it's done by appealing to our base emotions and physical states; convincing us that our lives will be infinitely better with any given product. In advertising, the facts look really good in places like the disclaimer, the miles per gallon, or when "4-out-of-5-(fill in the blank)-recommend..."  

But watch out! Cute, little Mr. Bunny cautions you not to stray too close to them:

"Tell the best story you can about your state"? Okay, I've got one: Public schools have been underfunded to the tune of $6 billion... Oh wait, I can't do that 'cause that's not a 'story'; that's a fact. 

So are these 'reformy' stew ingredients, courtesy of Jersey Jazzman:

• There is no evidence charter school proliferation will work; it may, in fact, be harmful.
• There is little evidence vouchers will work; they may, in fact, be harmful.
• There is no evidence test-based teacher evaluation will work; it may, in fact, be harmful.
• There is no evidence merit pay works; it may, in fact, be harmful.
• There is no evidence eliminating teacher tenure will work; there is, in fact, plenty of evidence it may be harmful and expensive.
• There is no evidence the expansion of high-stakes, standardized testing will work; in fact, it is harmful. (emphasis mine)

If the Common Core and PARCC were so amazing and transformational, they would sell themselves. Educators' jobs would be more—not less—meaningful. People would be clamoring to enter the profession, not leaving it sooner. Educators would be lined up at Pearson's front door to provide testimonials. The education blog-o-sphere would be busting at the seams with posts about the incredible transformation of their students, and the joyful classroom atmosphere in which that is occurring. Sadly, none of this is happening. In fact many classrooms are experiencing just the opposite.

The reform movement ad campaign is losing market share because they're selling a lousy product and parents know it. So they're doubling down on their efforts by spreading misinformation about funding cuts to their child's school or worse: how opting out will harm their child's educational future. But the facts simply aren't on their side.

So, dear parents, the next time a 'reformy' cheerleader sings the praises of the PARCC, the next time they promise it will magically make your child 'college and career ready'—even if that career is a stay-at-home-parent or a circus clown—the next time they tell you this amazing test will magically diagnose and cure all your child's learning problems or weed out all those 'bad teachers', demand the facts. Then sit back and listen... 

2014 Education Recap: The Good, The Bad, The 'Reformy'

Happy New Year!

In my humble opinion 2014 was a watershed year for public education. While there were plenty of knuckle-headed 'reform' policies and decisions, there were also some big wins, a lot of small victories and the beginnings of a shift in public opinion. So, let's take a walk down memory lane and look back on the good, the bad and the 'reformy'. 

'The bad' and 'reformy'

While there have been many horror stories from around the country, these had me scratching my head more than most:

• Stanford's CREDO Director, Dr. Margaret Raymond says the free market approach doesn't work in public education. Raymond made this statement at a conference in which she spoke about CREDO's latest study. Blogger, professor and attorney Stephen Dyer reported that, "Considering that the pro-market reform Thomas B. Fordham Foundation paid for this study and Raymond works at the Hoover Institution at Stanford — a free market bastion, I was frankly floored, as were most of the folks at my table."
• One Newark. Because sending 4 kids from the same family to 4 different schools around the city, often without school district-provided transportation, and sometimes through dangerous neighborhoods is a really, really good idea. And that's just the beginning of this hot mess.
• Arne Duncan's latest: he wants college teacher programs to be accountable for their students' students' outcomes. No, I am not kidding.
• The York, PA public school district becomes the next 'Post-Katrina New Orleans' school district.
• The rise of Campbell Brown. Because America needs another non-educator talking head with a lot of secret money behind her pushing through policies that will ultimately damage public education, which leads us to...
• The Vergara decision. Money, power and influence deal a huge blow to teacher tenure and open the floodgates for similar litigation nationwide. Brown is leading the charge in New York State. California Gov. Jerry Brown is appealing the ruling.

The really, really good!

This week The Network for Public Education published its Top Ten "Why We Will Win" Stories of 2014, and what an inspiring list it is! There are actually 11 items on the list—how could any one of them be left off? Be sure to check out the full description of each at the NPE website.

• The Common Core and PARCC/Smarter Balance are bloodied and on the ropes. States are dropping both as the reality of 'high-stakes' sinks in. Click on this interactive map to see what's going on in your state.
  Learn About Tableau
• Race to the Top was completely defunded in the 2015 omnibus bill. If there is no money to fund the program, will the program cease to exist?
• The collapse of data-collection giant, inBloom, was a big win for parents and education activists in New York, and further proof that Bill Gates' money is no match for the power of the people.
• The first annual NPE Conference in Austin, TX proved that the push to save public education is only growing stronger. The next one is set for April 25-26 in Chicago.
• Pro-public education candidates are being elected in states all across the country despite being outspent by truly sinful amounts of 'reformy' money. Further proof that money can't always buy elections. Here's who NPE endorsed in 2014.
• Michelle Rhee's education 'reform' policies have been exposed for what they were from the start: failures. Her departure from her grass-roots astroturf organization, Students First, is another symbol of the 'reform' movement's weakening.
• Louis CK takes America's growing frustrations with the Common Core and standardized testing prime time. Check out his appearance on David Letterman.
• 2014—The year of the education author. Still looking for a last minute holiday gift? Or maybe you want to get a jump on this year's gift list? Well, 2014 was a banner year for books written about public education by public educators and those who support public education. Check out NPE's list. Pasi Sahlberg's follow-up to his Finnish Lessons hits this year, too.
• Teach for America loses steam. The WalMart of teacher training programs is closing its NY City training facility blaming "a contentious national dialogue around education and teaching in general, and TFA in particular." Imagine that.
• Two Oklahoma first grade teachers just said, "No!" to testing their students and refused to administer the MAP test.
• Could an end to standardized testing really be in sight? Republican aides are working on a reauthorization bill for No Child Left Behind that would end the federal mandate on standardized testing, leaving those decisions to individual states. 

News from New Jersey

I'm happy to report there has been significant progress in New Jersey. Although Newark, Camden and other mostly poor, minority urban areas are still under the 'separate and unequal' thumb of Gov. Christie and NJ Education Commissioner David Hespe, parents, students and education professionals across the Garden State are pushing back like never before, and that momentum is only growing. In no particular order, here are some of my personal Jersey favorites:

• The rise of the opt-out movement. Commissioner Hespe's statement at the NJEA Convention in November that he was unaware of any opt-out movement in the state lit up the NJ Opt-Out Facebook page and Twitter feed, and ramped-up the group's outreach and advocacy. Hespe may soon regret uttering those words. The next open topic NJBOE meeting is January 7th and I expect it will be standing room only. 
• 77 Newark ministers and religious leaders denounce One Newark. They signed a letter to Gov. Christie denouncing Superintendent Cami Anderson's One Newark plan. More on this disastrous plan below.
• The Delran Education Association threw down the gauntlet against standardized testing. The Delran EA is leading the way in the state-wide push back against the overemphasis of standardized testing. Their showing of 'Standardized' followed by their highly successful 'Take the PARCC' event and publication of their position statement on high-stakes standardized testing was followed by their Superintendent and board of education passing a similar resolution that respects the rights of parents to make decisions that are in the best interest of their children, including opting out. The district will accommodate students who are not taking the test. Many other county and local education associations are now hosting their own events to engage and involve parents.
• The analysis of One Newark by Jersey Jazzman, Dr. Bruce Baker and Dr. Joseph Oluwole proved that the plan discriminates against poor, minority and special needs students, and minority teachers. I am so happy these guys live and work in New Jersey!
• The election of Ras J. Baraka as Mayor of Newark. Despite the millions of ed 'reform' dollars poured into the race, the people of Newark handed 'reformers' a resounding defeat by electing this Principal of Central High School to the city's highest office.
• NJ's pension trustees file suit against Gov. Christie for failing to make the required pension payments he signed into law. What does this have to do with public education? Plenty! State lawmakers have been raiding the fund for decades. If the system collapses, the biggest losers will be the state employees, many of whom are education professionals. Underfunding the pension system is one more tool 'reformers' use to weaken teacher unions and public education. New Jersey has one of the best public education systems in the country and one of the strongest education associations in the country, and that's no coincidence. If you want excellent educators, you have to be able to attract, train and retain them. People simply won't go into teaching if they cannot afford to support themselves and their families.
• Study finds NJ charter schools serve a different population than traditional public schools. Jersey Jazzman and Rutgers Professor Julia Sass Rubin crunch the numbers and their evidence is irrefutable: NJ charters simply do not serve as many at-risk, LEP and special needs students as their public school counterparts.
• NJEA members pushed back against the rush to implement too many unfunded mandates too fast and came up with a big win. The evidence was clear: the State DOE's rush to fully implement the new evaluation system (AchieveNJ), PARCC and the CCSS all in one year was crushing districts and educators. Hundreds of parents and educators testified at State BOE meetings. Thousands more wrote letters. In the end, the NJDOE listened. The biggest victory was their decision to reduce the weight of student standardized test scores to 10% for 2015.
• Student protests in Newark. The Newark Student Union is a force to be reckoned with. Just when you thought the younger generation was too apathetic, the students of Newark rose up. In 2014 they walked out, stood up, sat down, protested, got arrested, shut down major Newark arteries, and continued to fight back against the 'reform' machine. They are smart, passionate and committed to protecting their right to a thorough and efficient public education. Watch for more great advocacy from them in 2015.
• The bloggers and activists. Along with the best tomatoes, corn, blueberries and cranberries in the US (and we can have that debate over the summer), New Jersey is home to some of the best ed bloggers and activists in the country! Yes, I'm biased, but seriously, can you argue with the big 3 bloggers:

Jersey Jazzman (aka Mark Weber): From coast to coast, JJ chews up and spits out 'reformy' rhetoric with lightening speed, solid research and biting wit. 

SchoolFinance101 (aka Dr. Bruce Baker): While he may not be as well-known to the general education public as JJ, Bruce is a nationally recognized scholar in the field of school funding policy and a professor at Rutgers University. His name and/or research is attached to a great deal of scholarly work on education 'reform' madness, especially school funding. In addition to mountains of irrefutable evidence, his blog posts are full of acerbic wit and humor. 

Bob Braun: This former Star Ledger reporter has found his calling in retirement. No other blogger has done more to expose the complete incompetence of Newark Superintendent Cami Anderson's administration. He is a one-man accountability meter, and he's got the folks down at Two Cedar Street running scared.  

And this list ain't too shabby: This is a partial list of bloggers and organizations fighting to preserve public education in NJ, and doesn't even scratch the surface of all the individuals who are out there making a difference every day. If I made a complete list, I'd be here all day, and I do want to post this on New Year's Day. So, please add any additional individual names or groups along with links to their websites or blogs in the comments section below and I will update. The fact that I may forget to list a person or group is proof that 'The Fight', as I call it, is alive and well! All names in blue have links on the right side of this page: Blue Jersey, TeacherBiz, Save Our Schools NJ, Mother Crusader, Melissa Katz, Sarah Blaine Tepper, Stephen Danley, The NJ BATs, NJ Spotlight, The Newark Parents Union, NJ Working Families Alliance, The Education Law Center.  

A special thank you to Diane Ravitch, Anthony Cody, The Network for Public Education, Jonathan Pelto and all the great bloggers at the Education Bloggers Network. 

May you all have a healthy and happy New Year!

"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die." 

~ Sen. Ted Kennedy