California teachers under attack

[LWolf]

SB 955 is on the table: anti-union legislation. Which is, no surprise, supported by Arnold and the California Charter Schools Association. From CTA:

SB 955 represents an ongoing effort by anti-teacher forces to simply blame teachers for the ills of public schools, without acknowledging years of chronic underfunding resulting in larger class sizes, fewer teachers, nurses, counselors and education support professionals, and the elimination of vital programs that keep students engaged in school.

In his State of the State speech in January, under the guise of responding to the state’s fiscal crisis, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger resuscitated his attack on teacher rights as a diversion from the pressing issue of funding our public schools. In April, the governor recruited Sen. Huff to carry his anti-teacher agenda, and Sen. Huff quickly enticed Sen. Gloria Romero (D-Los Angeles) — a candidate for superintendent of public instruction — to back his bill.

More: http://www.cta.org/Professional-Development/Publications/Educator-May-10/SB-955-seeks-to-eliminate.aspx


Gary Ravani points out that much of the data used to scapegoat teachers is misleading; here is one examle:

One pernicious assertion about the public schools is that it is exceptionally hard to get rid of "bad teachers" and that teacher "tenure" is a big problem in the state of California. In fact, teachers in the state don't have "tenure"; rather, following a two-year probation, during which they can be fired for any reason or no reason at all, they gain due process rights: the right to a hearing before being fired. A look at the statistics from the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Educational Statistics shows California releases 1 percent of its probationary teachers, with the national average being 0.7 percent. Permanent teachers are removed at the rate of 2 percent per year, with the national average at 1.4 percent.

His conclusion?

So why do national and state politicians (and the media, for that matter) ignore the reality and pump up the hysteria, keeping the public's attention focused on a symptom instead of causes?

Perhaps it's because the underlying problems are many, difficult and expensive. This begins with the state's low level of school funding, 46th in the nation on a per pupil basis. An education coalition recently filed a lawsuit calling the current school funding system unconstitutional for denying students the opportunity to master the educational program the state requires. Increasing numbers of students' families, particularly those of minority students, are falling into poverty and homelessness.

The U.S. Education Department reports that the number of schools where at least 75 percent of the students are eligible for free lunch has risen from 12 percent in 2000 to 17 percent in 2008 (prior to the full impact of the recession). The same report indicates that economic segregation of children has increased. Politicians ought to be fixated on these real problems. But it is much more convenient to scapegoat teachers.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2010/06/18/2831294/states-teachers-are-being-scapegoated.html#ixzz0rmU3Crol

California teachers are certainly not alone in being targeted by politicians these days. When the Department of Education encourages privatization and union-busting, it spreads like cancer.

Until enough people join teachers in opposing these policies and tactics, I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel.

[Reader Rabbit]

1. Public education is under attack.

I just wish someone besides teachers would notice it. And do something. We can't do it all by ourselves.

[inna]

2. Public everything is under attack.

I hear every day about further cuts to all kinds of social/public services. And that fascist Whitman (possibly out next governor)is basing her campaign on cutting spending and taxes. :grr:

And it is horrible what's going on in education and that the teachers are under attack. I'm not a teacher, but I've been noticing it...

Solidarity.

[LWolf]

3. Too many of those who should be standing with us

are standing against us. :(

Others recognize the problem, but it doesn't rate high enough on their priority list to take a stand.

[William Z. Foster]

42. yes

I don't understand that.

[tsuki]

6. I noticed it in the late 80s and early 90s. When a big scary church

took over our school (what a nightmare), I started attending school board meetings. Teachers have been under attack since the 80s, and from the establishment. I could not believe it. I talked to the president of the teachers' association, and he had all kinds of excuses why the union could not attend, or the politicians really didn't mean it. They could not attend because they worked hard and were tired. But I could and did for 5 years, a working mother.

Now, after 20 years, you notice that the public has a negative view of teachers. It has been a stealth war on public education that is now full bore.

I don't know what to tell you. Everything is polarized because that is how the politicians gain power. Teachers vs Public, the politicians win.

Meanwhile, in my area, the teachers vote Republicon.

[LWolf]

47. You are correct about

the early seeds planted and nourished by the Reagan administration.

Teachers come in all political stripes, just like everyone else. On the single issue of public education, I don't see how Rs could have been worse this last national election. At least then, the attacks on public education and on teachers would have been perpetrated by the "enemy," and Democratic politicians would have had to put up some token opposition. :(

[wtmusic]

4. Long overdue.

Though permanent teacher dismissals are only 2%/year statewide, in large districts like LAUSD the percentage is .2%/year (89 teachers out of 33,000).

From L.A.'s most progressive paper:

LAUSD's Dance of the Lemons
Why firing the desk-sleepers, burnouts, hotheads and other failed teachers is all but impossible

Several years ago, a 74-year-old Dominguez Elementary School fourth-grade teacher was having trouble controlling her students as her abilities deteriorated amid signs of "burnout." Shirley Loftis was told by Los Angeles Unified School District administrators to retire or be fired, and she did retire, but hardly under the school district's terms.

The principal at Dominguez, Irene Hinojosa, recalls how she spent three years documenting Loftis' poor teaching skills and inability to control 10-year-olds. "From the minute I observed her, she basically didn't seem to have the knowledge of the standards and how to deliver them," Hinojosa tells L.A. Weekly. "I had her do lessons on the same standard over and over again, and children did not get it. On simple math concepts — over and over, she didn't know how to deliver."

http://www.laweekly.com/content/printVersion/854792

[LWolf]

5. You think attacks on California teachers are long overdue? nt

[wtmusic]

7. How dramatic.

I think a lot of teachers have jobs who should have lost them long ago. If that's an "attack", then yes.

[Reader Rabbit]

9. Are you Arne Duncan?

'Cause you're spouting with his typical anti-teacher combination of arrogance and ignorance.

It's depressing how many "experts" squawk about "bad teachers," when they have absolutely no experience inn a classroom and couldn't manage a day of a teacher's job, much less a year-in year-out career. It's even more depressing to hear corporatist talking points belittling teachers on a supposedly progressive website.

But that's how it works. Too many Americans are programmed to blame teachers and are little more than tools of the corporate agenda to destroy public education.

[wtmusic]

10. Do you live in Los Angeles?

I do. If you don't, you have no clue.

What's depressing is the sense of entitlement many (not all) teachers have these days.

[Reader Rabbit]

11. Born and raised.

Got my start as a bilingual classroom aide in a school at which over 40 different languages were spoken. Went to public school at LAUSD from K-12, and my mom and dad taught in LAUSD for 34 and 37 years, respectively. You may want to reconsider who does and doesn't have a clue, here.

Sweet Jeebus. You probably think Fatburger is better than Tommy's, too.

[wtmusic]

12. That's why I asked.

Now if you want to discuss issues, I'm all ears. If you want to cast ad hominems, you'll be ignored.

btw, I asked if you lived here. Do you still live here, or are you trying to pull a fast one? Things have changed, for the worse.

[Reader Rabbit]

18. Oy, gevalt!

are you trying to pull a fast one?

Yes. Yes, I am. Because it's a vast teacher conspiracy against you! You are that important!

If you want to cast ad hominems,...

Geez. Hypocrite, much?

...you'll be ignored.

I learned long ago that arguing with the willfully ignorant is a waste of time and brain cells, so let me save you the trouble.

PLONK!

Ahhhhhh, idiot-free peace!

[Rage for Order]

20. There are no bad teachers n/t

[Luminous Animal]

21. Is that snark?

Sure there are bad teachers. But the vast majority of them are good. Just like there are bad cops, bad firefighters, and bad bus drivers. But nobody advocates for a complete dismantling of those public institutions because of a few bad employees.

[wtmusic]

22. There is a complete dismantling of public education?

I hadn't heard. Pray, do tell...or is it just more AFT hyperbole? :eyes:

[Luminous Animal]

25. Yes. We are on a path towards dismantling public education.

It will be as Reagan's Secretary of Education, Terrel Bell, said in 1984, "the ultimate goal is the destruction of public education by a market-place system of schools run by entrepreneurs."

[wtmusic]

34. No, we're on a path towards dismantling the teachers' unions' stranglehold

on public education. Big difference.

[Luminous Animal]

45. Maybe we should be dismantling the police unions stanglehold on public safety?

Stranglehold? These are human beings who have dedicated their lives towards educating children. Just as firefighters, widely unionized, dedicate their lives to protecting the community. What kind of stranglehold do you perceive that any of these public servants have on the community?

[wtmusic]

51. Many of them have dedicated their lives towards educating children

Many have not, are exploiting the system, and should be removed. Too many.

I've been on both sides of this union coin. I'm not going to recant the whole story because I've told it too many times, but in a nutshell:

I was in a union which was extremely helpful to my career. I paid my dues, and it made sure I got paid - a great arrangement. In fact, the union was so successful it became exactly what it was supposed to protect me from - a huge, intimidating monolith that got greedy. They started making truly ridiculous demands of my employers, and my employers simply bailed, taking my career with them.

So I'm experiencing a little bit of deja vu here, especially when I hear my daughter come home from school and tell me about a teacher that gives an assignment at the start of class, then goes in his office and plays on his computer for the rest of the period. Shall we talk about fear and intimidation? In this class, parents who complain see their kids' performance mysteriously fail them - yes, intimidation can come from either side. I guess I should go to more PTA meetings and sacrifice myself on the altar of endless reviews and bureaucracy, but I'm pretty busy working my ass off trying to save money to send them to college.

Unions will always be necessary, but they should be subject to federal antitrust law just like corporations - more unions, more choices for districts. Too much power is never, ever a good thing.

I know you're aware that police and firefighters are prohibited from striking, so your comparison is moot. But CA is ranked 4th from the bottom in education, while a comparable large state like New York, with huge, unwieldy districts just like LAUSD but with its Taylor Law, is ranked #10 - so maybe the comparison has value after all. Something has to happen.

[amborin]

55. unions have no stranglehold! & pub ed should not go the way of union-busting Nissan Corp

[LWolf]

48. Do you have a list?

Teachers that have personally offended you, or are you assuming that there are "a lot" of teachers who should have lost their jobs long ago?

Is this anecdotal, or?

Are you speaking as a student, a parent, or are you an administrator whose job it is to evaluate teachers and decide whether or not they should "lose their jobs?"

Have you spent much time working with teachers across a wide spectrum of states and districts?

Or is this about LA Unified?

[wtmusic]

53. It goes far beyond being offended.

I have yet to hear anyone be able to explain to me why Carlos Polanco shouldn't be jailed for child abuse, much less paid to teach:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/03/local/me-teachers3

More examples:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-teachers-landing-html,0,1258194.htmlstory

Frankly I don't care about a wide spectrum, I care about public education in California. That's what this thread pertains to.

[LWolf]

60. I've seen teachers removed

for verbal abuse. In California. It wasn't that complicated. It just requires due process, which is a good thing. Why are some admins having trouble with due process?

I've seen numerous teachers removed over the course of my teaching career. In California. In Los Angeles County, no less.

One, back in the early 90s, was our union president.

Meanwhile, to continue the LA Unified debacle:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8630424

[Hannah Bell]

8. you think the destruction of the public sector is "long overdue" & you use that

blatant propaganda piece to justify it?

dear god.

[Reader Rabbit]

17. It's crazy, isn't it?

When I come to DU lately, I sometimes feel like I'm in a bizarro world, where up is down and black is white.

[Hannah Bell]

29. it's kind of like being at free republic, where they also cheer when teachers get fired.

and talk about how teachers get paid too much, don't do any work, have too many holidays, don't know how to teach, etc.

exact same talking points.

[Luminous Animal]

32. As another DUer posted today...

"Beware: All too often, We say What we hear others say. We think What we are told that we think. We see What we are permitted to see. Worse! We see what we are told that we see. Repetition and pride are the keys to this. To hear and to see Even an obvious lie Again And again and again May be to say it, Almost by reflex Then to defend it Because we have said it And at last to embrace it Because we’ve defended it." -- Octavia Butler

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8625125

[amborin]

56. same thing occurred when discussing Nissan's union-busting illegal behaviors....

[Hannah Bell]

59. how about gm's union-busting, union-corrupting maneuvers?

[Luminous Animal]

14. LA Weekly is NOT progressive. It is owned by "New Times Media"

now known as "Village Voice Media" which owns weekly entertainment/news magazines all over the country. In San Franicso (The SF Weekly) the paper is known for their race baiting cover stories and T&A sense of "humor". In every market, they try to undercut their competitors by selling ad space at a loss. They recently lost a huge lawsuit for this to the SF Bay Guardian.

There is zero/nothing/nada progressive about the corporations or the papers that they publish. They support the right wing corporate agenda on every issue.

They suck.

[wtmusic]

23. The Village Voice isn't progessive?

:rofl:

You are very funny, and have no idea what you're talking about.

[Luminous Animal]

26. The Village Voice has been incresingly unprogressive since it was purchases by...

New Times Media in Arizona which then, in inspired news-speak, changed it's name to Village Voice Media to lend the stereotypical plodding corporation an urban hip panache. There are plenty of New Yorkers who mourn the Voice's decline into corporate America mediocrity.


And yes, I do know what I am talking about.

[wtmusic]

35. Whatever.

Like I said: the L.A. Weekly is the most progressive paper in Los Angeles. You can dismiss it as a tool of big corporations, but ironically they do quite a few exposés on big corporations too.

How does that work?

[Luminous Animal]

37. The same way it works with the NY Times and Washington Post.

I do have to question your judgment of what is progressive when you present a three year campaign of intimidation directed against a 74 year old woman that made it difficult, if not impossible, to do her job, as an example of a bad teacher.

[wtmusic]

38. The only reason it took three years was the union dragging out an expensive

and ultimately futile review process. I see it as a three year campaign of intimidation against LAUSD - the union made it difficult, if not impossible, to do their job of firing an incompetent teacher.

You know the "74-year-old" part is a tug on the heartstrings which is irrelevant to the issue at hand. I know you do.

[Luminous Animal]

41. False. The admin hearing clearly stated that she was teaching within an

atmosphere of fear and intimidation AFTER she lodged a complaint of child abuse against one of the administrators. They also clearly stated that they had other options besides asking her to retire or firing her. And yes, directing a campaign of fear and intimidation is never okay, but directing it towards the very young or old or weak or frail is despicable.

[Hannah Bell]

36. the voice was sold in 2005. the new voice is not the old voice.

[Luminous Animal]

15. Putting Shirley Loftis into perspective...

From the Admin hearings transcript ( http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xLD_cgyNIT4J:www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2009-05/46659441.pdf+%22Shirley+Loftis%22&hl=en&gl=us )

Notwithstanding the District's legal authority to dismiss, it would be inequitable for it
to do so in the light of the Findings of Fact relating to the background and genesis of this
dispute. In short, Ms. Loftis's errors were minor to begin with, but grew in a culture of bias,
fear and intimidation. The appropriate District authorities should consider her reassignment.

So, the administration targeted a 74 year old woman. Kudos to her for fighting to keep her job.

[wtmusic]

24. And after half a million dollars she lost anyway

No wonder CA is broke. :eyes:

[Luminous Animal]

27. Actually, she didn't. The administration hearing found that her working

environment, through fear and intimidation originating from the administration, had a negative impact on her work and recommended that she be retained within the system but transferred away from her tormentors.

[wtmusic]

33. She was fighting to be reinstated. She lost.

If she was such a great teacher, why didn't the parents stick up for her? Why didn't the kids stick up for her?

She drained LAUSD of a half million dollars, which would have paid for 8 better qualified teachers to take her place for a year. A tragic waste of resources. And you wonder why teacher's unions are going down?

[Luminous Animal]

39. The administration hearing ruled that she retain her job as an educator.

Jeez. I wonder how well you would do your job under the pressure of a 3 year campaign of intimidation and fear. Like the administrative hearing concluded, the issues were trivial UNTIL her performance suffered because of the atmosphere of fear and intimidation. It was the admin that escalated the problems through FEAR and INTIMIDATION.

Do you also propose that, not only do teachers have to produce the same product with wildly different levels of raw material rear after year but they must do pass a 3 year test of fear and intimidation in order to keep their jobs?

Woohoo! USA! USA! We can pit our teachers against Chinese factory workers any day!

[wtmusic]

40. You keep barking up the 'fear and intimidation' tree

but why is it only Shirley and her union saw this happening? Again: where were her kids? Where were her kids' parents? Where were other teachers, ANY administrators?

I"m no fan of NCLB but I do think TAP and Obama's support of it is a huge step in the right direction.

[Luminous Animal]

43. That was the Admin's hearing conclusion when they reviewed all of the evidence.

Not the union's conclusion. Not Ms. Loftis' conclusion. But the conclusion of the administrative judges.

"Notwithstanding the District's legal authority to dismiss, it would be inequitable for it
to do so in the light of the Findings of Fact relating to the background and genesis of this
dispute. In short, Ms. Loftis's errors were minor to begin with, but grew in a culture of bias,
fear and intimidation. The appropriate District authorities should consider her reassignment."

Not fired, but reassigned. The school's admin may have been successful at driving her out of that particular school but they were unsuccessful at driving her out of the district and out of educating in that district.

[William Z. Foster]

44. why?

Why are you promoting privatization and Union busting?

This gets at the controversy here. People claim that anything and everything can be called "left" or "liberal" or "progressive" so long as some Democrat supports it, and then attack those who stand fast for the traditional principles and ideals of the party.

Privatization is the main stone in the foundation of right wing political thinking, and the destruction of public education has been a dream of the right wing for a long time.

You say "from L.A.'s most progressive paper" which is an obvious attempt to claim that the extreme right wing position - and that is what attacks on the Union and calls for privatization are - is progressive and so therefore should be seen as legitimate and should be promoted here and given consideration by people.

[wtmusic]

54. Please show me where I'm promoting privatization.

Your attempt to polarize this issue into "left wing/right wing" thinking will fail, because it assumes that unions are immune from the same type of power plays that large corporations use.

They aren't. That's what the LA Weekly, with stellar liberal credentials, is very successfully illustrating here.

[William Z. Foster]

57. that article

That article is a hit piece on the Union and a promotion of privatization.

Saying that defending the Union is an "attempt to polarize this issue into 'left wing/right wing"' thinking" and that "unions are (not) immune from the same type of power plays that large corporations use" betrays a complete ignorance about organized Labor and those statements are anti-Union and in favor of privatization.

I though you might have inadvertently made an anti-Union post. Your response clears up any doubts about that.

[Swamp Rat]

13. k&r

[Starry Messenger]

16. One bright spot of news today.

Mayor Kevin Johnson lost his bid for "strong mayor" of Sacramento last night. He's Michelle Rhee's boyfriend (young Broadites in love). I'm taking pleasure in the fact that he's having a lousy day today. Other than that, I' got nothin'.

[Luminous Animal]

28. That is a bright spot! Thanks for that.

[proud2BlibKansan]

30. That is a bright spot indeed!

:)

[Hannah Bell]

31. the perv lost? wonderful news. why does michelle rhee cover for him, i wonder?

[Starry Messenger]

49. He lost big too.

Maybe he will lose his luster with Rhee with the whiff of failure all over him now. I wasn't sure whether to put this in the Ed. forum but this is really funny:


http://cbs13.com/local/strong.mayor.rejection.2.1769357.html

Jun 23, 2010 7:20 pm US/Pacific

Expert: Johnson's Strong-Mayor Defeat Was Message

Mayor Kevin Johnson suffered one of the biggest political defeats in his young career when the Sacramento City Council rejected his strong mayor proposal, and one expert is calling the vote a message from the other council members.

Council members voted 7-2 against the measure that would direct city staff to draft a November ballot measure for Johnson's proposal, which sought to give the mayoral office the power to veto measures and direct the budget, among other changes.

Johnson boldly predicted a 7-2 vote in favor of the measure, or even unanimous support.

The frustrated mayor spend a half hour after the Tuesday night vote blasting the council's decision. Johnson's supporters erupted in boos at one point after Councilmember Sandy Sheedy quipped, "That is why we don't have a strong mayor," during a verbal sparring match

In the immortal words of Nelson Muntz:

[Hannah Bell]

58. score 1 against the borg. may more follow.

[LWolf]

46. Every scrap of good news is welcome. nt

[Luminous Animal]

19. kick

[maryf]

50. K&R

Solidarity!

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.