California Love

In the wake of the Vergara decision regarding teacher tenure, there has been an explosion of commentary both positive and negative. Some are ready to pour dirt on the entirety of teacher tenure.  Others see the decision as a slap in the face of teachers across the country and as another “nail in the coffin” for due process.  Of course, I see it through a third lens.

Back in 2005, which seems like a long time in terms of education policy/politics, then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed on the November ballot an initiative called Proposition 74.  In short, that Proposition advanced the notion that, god forbid, teacher’s be given five years to receive tenure instead of the extremely short window of only two years.  At the time, in my own District, United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA), as well as the California Teachers Association all worked vehemently to defeat this proposition.  They felt it was a slap in face of, you guessed it, due process.  While at the same time people want to engage in historical amnesia concerning this Proposition, they are also failing to advance their own best interest.

If Prop. 74 had passed, both the public and the politicians would have seen the measure as a step in the right direction of teachers understanding the need for more rigor in the tenure process.  Oftentimes, both the perception and the reality is a war of attrition.  Sit in one spot for 2 years (with perhaps 2-3 walk-through's from administrators) and poof, you’re fully tenured.  I understand that there should be more to it, but oftentimes it is not. Let’s be clear, 95% or more of the teaching population is doing the right thing, but that 5% is anchoring us down.

 

I believe in acknowledging the hard work of teachers who show up for work every day, ready and able to fight the good fight and advocate for their students.  As I used to say when I was a high school classroom teacher, “its not the kids who (mess) up my day, it’s the adults.”  With that in mind let me direct my focus to the adults who insist on acting like the children they teach. Rather than engaging in the reflective discourse of what can be done to improve the profession, people have engaged in the dangerous slope of arguing in absolutes.  Either you agree with tenure or you don’t.  Of course, the “truth” lies somewhere in between both extremes.

Highlighting the FACT that there are an extremely small number of teachers who do not do right by their students is not an indictment on ALL teachers who are in the classroom.  Let me say it another way, if you do the right thing, participating in education groups on social media, grading papers, showing up to work early/leaving late, lobbying for better educational reforms, and in many cases raising your own children, no friend, I am not talking about you.  I am talking about those who languish in the darkness, or sometimes right in front of us, and insist on doing the bare minimum or worse. What is abhorrent is that we as the "good" ones do not shed light on those who need help, or assistance (see: No Snitching from 3-5-12)

It seems as if everyone has a story about a teacher - positively and negatively.  Let me highlight why I believe that teacher tenure needs significant reform.  Without going into great detail (to protect the guilty), a “colleague” of mine in South Central, earned his Ph.D online while he was supposed to be “teaching” his class.  Why does this matter?  Well for obvious reasons of doing ones job, but personally his students would come to my classroom crying begging to be in my already overcrowded class.  How could I say no? Real talk.  Is he an aberration? Absolutely.  But he's not alone. Let’s have an honest, truthful discussion. There may not be anyone as bold, or in my mind abusive, as he was, but there are folk who try to “get over” in every profession.  To deny otherwise is simply weakening our argument that this profession should be view as a top-tier profession.

So rather than continue to rant and point fingers, here are 4 things we can and should do to reclaim the tenure discourse:

1. Increase the number of years from 2 years to 4 or 5 years.
2. In addition to the administrators “observations,” there should be bi-annual meetings with a consortium of parents, teachers, students (if 6-12^th grade) and other stakeholders.  Teaching is not just what you do in the classroom, it is how you affect and interact with the school community as well.
3. There has to be some evidence of academic growth, either through Professional Development credits or attendance at academic conferences.
4. As a part of tenure, the portfolio of the evaluation should include; a written component by the teacher, 2-3 letters of recommendation (including the department chair), a written evaluation by an administrator, and some sort of statistical evidence of student growth (not just test scores).

These are just a few of the ways teachers can “take back” the narrative surrounding teacher tenure.  K-12 tenure is not as rigorous a process as the tenure process at the higher education level, nor should it be.  But these four ideas help towards alleviating the misconception that once teachers receive tenure that they become like my former colleague, inept and lazy. 

Teacher Bashing - a Two-Sided Coin

It seems that the low hanging fruit in the education discourse these days is Teach for America.  An organization which was founded to help reduce the teacher shortages in the 1990s and has persisted through the last two decades as a controversial alternative certification program.

What I find problematic is not Teach for America in and of itself, but rather the discourse surrounding Teach for America, or rather Teach for A minute as some have dubbed the organization.  Rethinking Schools has devoted a significant amount of ink its latest issue to the subject of “Resisting Teach for America.”  Let me be clear, I am not a proponent nor opponent of TFA.  I am a proponent of being able to utter the name of an organization that is in the business of educating educators who enter hundreds, if not thousands of classrooms annually, in a respectful manner.  While I agree that TFA is problematic (more on that in a moment), I find the discourse surrounding its existence and practices even more disconcerting.

One of the articles in RS highlights the type of ironic, hypocritical discourse I am speaking of.  A quote, which is highlighted in bold print in the text, argues that “we are all victims – the students, the parents, the communities and the TFA teachers themselves…”  This type of deficit thinking (e.g. we are all victims) is exactly the opposite of my experiences with TFA teachers. As a Small Schools Coordinator in a persistently dangerous and underperforming high school in South Central LA, our school was inundated with TFA teachers each fall.  Rather than be embraced by the general faculty, they were dismissed outright as “only being there for a moment” or “not knowing anything about anything” and worse. [For a better articulation of TFA experiences at my former school see Donna Foote’s excellent book Relentless Pursuit] 

Rookie pitcher carrying Hello Kitty Backpack

Sorry to go here again, but to use a sports analogy, you do not ride the rookies so much that they want to leave as soon as their first contract is up.  You want to make sure that they become an integral part of the team.  Thus, we can do two things at once - criticize TFA as an organization, and uplift those new teachers who are our colleagues in our buildings.  What is even more egregious, when I have made this statement in other forums, the response of too many veteran teachers is that Teach for America corps members are “not teachers to begin with.”  My how quickly the crabs in the barrel try to pull others down, and how quickly people forget their own first few years in the classroom.

My personal journey towards the classroom began around 1999 or so. I went into the Chicago Public Schools district office to get a form to become a substitute teacher.  Remember back then, there was no NCLB and one did not have to be “highly qualified.” Rather than being treated with respect and encouragement, I was summarily dismissed by the staff and handed a form.  I left with a bad taste in my mouth, but still a desire to teach.

Fast forward a few years, after years in politics, public relations and working with students outside the classroom and occasionally substitute teaching, I applied to Teach for America.  In the early months of 2003, after submitting a written application, I was called into an office building in downtown Chicago for an interview which consisted of a focus group discussion, a one-on-one interview and a 5 minute classroom presentation of a lesson.  At the same time I was going through the application process with TFA, I also applied to another alternative certification program, The New Teacher Project, specifically the Los Angeles Teaching Fellows (LATF).  I was also called into LATF to perform a similar job presentation, this time in Los Angeles.  I flew out with what few funds I had, with visions of entering the classroom as a history teacher. 

I was subsequently rejected from TFA and was hired into the 6-week induction program for LATF.  While I cannot concretely point to the reasons I was rejected from TFA, yet hired by a similar program, I believe that I was too “old” having been 33 years old when I interviewed rather than the norm of around 23 for Teach for America corps members and, according to a new article, perhaps too Black – see: A Racio-Economic Analysis of Teach for America.  Nonetheless, what is problematic a decade later is not that both organizations are still around (not LATF, but NTTP), but rather why does Teach for America bear the brunt of the criticism while The New Teacher Project (TNTP) gets off scot free?  It is because it is easier to critique “neophyte” young people who are straight out of college, even if they are graduating from top institutions and at or near the top of their classes , versus second or third career “veterans” who have experience in the professional world, albeit not in the formal classroom?

Many of my peers from LATF are still in the classroom a decade later.  The six-week training we experienced was as intense, perhaps more so, than any teacher education program I have encountered.  The question is, it a matter of paying “dues” through years accrued in an undergraduate teacher program, or learning the skills necessary to perform well in the classroom?  I argue, as does Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond, that teacher education programs are not doing as good of a job as they can in training teachers either. 

Perhaps we need to reevaluate the “we are all victims” mantra that has permeated the discourse in public education and flip the script to we are all heroes.  Or maybe we are all learners.  Or we are all in this together.  If we do not begin to become proactive towards a positive goal, as opposed to simply being “against” an organization, educational policy, specific politician, etc…then we are going to be doomed to a continued level of educational inequity and lack of social justice we all wish to achieve.  The time for band-aid’s passing as policy reform has long since passed.  It is now time to begin to marshal our forces towards positive change by being more positive.

No One is Untouchable...

"He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of theirs to the morgue.  That's the Chicago way..." - Jim Malone (The Untouchables, 1987)

Let me preface this week's blog by saying I'm PISSED.  If you take offense easily, then this week you may need to fall back, because I'm going HAM on a host of issues and groups.

Let me start by saying that if you want to challenge my credentials to be in the education game, you're racists.  It is akin to checking Obama's birth certificate and transcripts.  While I may not agree with people (especially this week), I never challenge the notion that you have a right to say what you want to say and that those comments are grounded either in experiential knowledge, research based or otherwise.  Period.  You say your peace, make your points, I get to make mine.

Now the problem is that too many people, not just on social media, but in certain buildings and departments at my grad school (hint: near the SEPTA station, not the Broad St. Line) want people to sing one note.  Repeatedly.  And if you don't sing that note, in their key, you're wrong.  You're disrespecting your race, you're "self hating" or worse.  And on social media, you're "misguided," "a hack" "moron" "not even a teacher..."  Everything but the child of God.  And to make matters worse, only two people in the last week have even ASKED what my particulars are.  Most assume, most use Google.  I'm right here, ask.

On Monday in the town of my last known address, Michelle Rhee, Dr. Steven Perry and George Parker, former DC Teachers Union chief held a Town Hall at my future alma mater.  First, there was a message on a listserv announcing a protest outside, then an e-mail and Facebook post from the college distancing themselves from the event.  I have no problem with either, if it were Fred Phelps (Westboro Baptist "Church") or Ted Nugent coming to campus.  This event, even though not sponsored by, was about education.  I understand not endorsing it, but the distancing was suspect.

Of course the event, a "Town Hall" event went as I would have predicted.  People listened for a few minutes, but otherwise came to the event with their minds already in one corner or the other.  Whatever happen to listening, taking ideas from one person, mixing them with some others, and coming to your OWN conclusions.  The proliferation of forced "Group Think" makes me sick.  Like I said above, and in last week's post, it is asinine to only believe if you don't agree with me, you're against me.

Later in the week, Saint, err I mean Dr. Diane Ravitch graced the same city, speaking at an event promoting her latest book.  You would have thought that God came down to read the 10 Commandments Himself.  As I have said both online and, in person to her when we met, I have profound respect for Dr. Ravitch, her views, her scholarship, and her transformation.  My only problem with "her" is her followers.  Much in the same way that to his flock, Tim Tebow can do no wrong, except not be able to throw the football or get onto the football field in a regular season game, Ravitch followers will swear you up and down the block if you do not feverishly believe that she and she alone can "save public education." Sorry, I don't believe in the hero worship, inflation of messianic individuals we as Americans, so desperate for leadership, perform time and time again on issue after issue.  This is one of our fatal flaws as Progressives, Democrats and as a society in general.
.

Finally, let me chime in on educational groups on social media.  It seems like every day another "teacher based organization" is popping up online.  And, humorously, just as quickly, I get banned from them... To my 3-4 readers I'm not going to give these groups their shine, but hint, one of them is where family money went to pay their salaries in Chicago. Let me paint these so called organizations with a broad brush.  Progressive organizations such as these, and others, are in serious need of not learning more about the issues or practice of education, but rather are in serious need of an evaluation of their lesson plans concerning their tactics, politics and how policy works.  Too many are content with being on the outside look in, singing that same singular note with protest sign in hand.  As someone who had to file the thousands of postcards sent to a Congressional member's office regarding a particular issue, answered numerous vitriolic phone calls and responded to angry constituents in person during member's breakfasts, I have experience on the other end of what these so called Progressive "groups" (more like a hodge podge of like minded folk) are doing.

Marching in the streets, writing letters, protesting only goes so far.  At some point, you have to decide what you are FOR rather than continue to yelp about what you are AGAINST.  So, with that said, whenever I enter a group or challenge people to do better, why is it that they take offense?  It is because we are not the same gender? Little do they know, for the most part, we are at least in the same generation. Perhaps it is because of race (as much as I despise saying that). No matter.  Like I noted above, people need to be able to have a conversation about division or tactics without being disagreeable - regardless of age, race, creed, nationality, age, educational level, etc...  Let me be explicitly clear, I'm not just talking to well meaning Whole Foods going Progressives, I'm talking to people that look like me as well.

I am sick of being challenged from all angles of the left.
 
So let me sum this rant up...Less fear, more listening.  Less reaching conclusions based on misinformation, more asking.  Less whining, more winning.  I already have 20 years in the education game and I'm going to be around for a lot longer, I'm not going away...If I can admit I am, or can be an asshole, are you willing to admit at the very least, the same?  Collaboration and cooperation is a two way street.  I'm coming to the table with both hands in plain sight, are other groups and individuals willing to do as well?

Here's to truth, reconciliation and Peace.

"I didn't think it was a game..."

Welcome back from summer vacation.

Right away it seems that this school year has stepped off, or perhaps into, a heap of controversy.  While good things are happening on the personal front for me academically, the blessings afforded me are not being spread through out the educational landscape.  With this said let me re-initiate my blog with a review of a previous blog post and a continuation of the discussion.

My post entitled "We Love that Basketball" (June 4, 2012) was my attempt to link sports analogies with the educational discourse.

In a "conversation" on twitter a woman engaged me in a heated discussion about educational policy which resulted in her using the line which is the title of this post.  I made the argument that the education policy landscape is a game.  I'd also argue that politics as a whole is a game - some would argue, more often than not, a zero-sum game. A zero-sum game is briefly defined as one making gains and the other side making equally similar gains and therefore the total gains are zero.  As a political science major, and policy wonk in both Washington DC and Chicago, I understand the hand to hand combat of politics - for better or worse.  I am also seeped in a deep, philosophical understanding that there are those in education who believe this divisiveness does not exist.  When speaking of education and education policy, they are the ones who generally speak in platitudes such as "all children can learn" or that "everyone deserves a fair shake."  The reality, for many of us, in particular persons of color, is that we know that the world is skewed towards "winners" and "losers."  To deny that this is, for better or worse, the current landscape, is to deny, and I believe disrespect, both the process and its participants, namely children.

We have to acknowledge that there are winners and losers in everything that takes place in the public arena. The goal shouldn't be to deny that the large chess board exists, but rather we should aim towards teaching everyone how to play the game.  The goal shouldn't be trying to espouse false platitudes or unrealistic goals or expectations, but rather fight to close gap between those who are "winning" and those who are "losing."  The most ideal situation would be one in which we are able to not only close the "achievement gap" of the nation's public school students, but also close the "political gap" which exists among many of their teachers.

I have thought long and hard about why what I call the "political gap" among teachers exists.  More to the point, I've often wondered why.  Here's a thought.  Let's look at the numbers in regards to who is teaching our children.  Between 1986 and 2011, the number of male teachers dropped from 31% to 16%.  Further, the race of those who teach our children has continuously been predominantly white 84% (down from 91% in 1986) (http://www.edweek.org/media/pot2011final-blog.pdf).  Consequentially in an increasingly "Browning" country our teaching population is predominantly white females.  For example, in Chicago, the current student population is only 9% white (which is similar to other large school districts such as LA or New York).

Let me be clear, I am not disparaging the work of these teachers, but rather I highlight this to raise a few questions.  One, what role does the teacher's gender and race play in the expectations of their students?  Two, what role does the teacher's gender and race play in their interest or engagement with the oftentimes confrontational and heated arena of politics?  It is noted by folks far more intelligent than I, that women tend to be less confrontational and less interested in politics at the school site for a multitude of reasons, not the least of them being the many other hats they wear as a teacher (mentor, role-model, advisor, counselor, etc...).  As such many teachers tend to do or listen exclusively to the leadership of their union which brings me to the next point.

As I have raised on twitter and elsewhere, this seems to be a huge case of irony. While these same teachers teach students to "challenge authority" and they themselves challenge authority, namely the School Board, the Administration and the like, they seldom seem willing or wanting to challenge their union en masse.  With the exception of large scale turnover of union leadership, which occurs rarely, teachers (regardless of gender) seem content to believe and follow their union.

While I am in favor of both teachers and unions, I do not think that teachers unions, over the past few decades, have served the needs of their rank and file as positively as they could have.  No one can argue that there is an extreme need for infrastructure repairs in many of our crumbling urban schools.  No one can argue that class size should be lower, and that teachers need more autonomy.  The questions are how do we achieve these goals while at the same time, 1) continuing to teach our students to love learning and ask critical questions 2) balancing the budgets and 3) increasing graduation rates and reducing drop out rates?

I do not have the answer, but I do know that more teachers need to examine the leadership of their unions as closely as they scrutinize the schooling choices of their Mayor's children or any of the other multitude of distractionary arguments which have been advanced since Chicago teachers went on strike Monday (9/10).  As this strike thankfully comes to a close, examining the residual effects will be something which will be under the microscope in the next few weeks and months.  It will be interesting to see what becomes of the current leadership of the Chicago Teacher's Union and how the teachers will repair their relationships at the school site.  Trust is key, but also extremely hard to build.

We love that Basketball…

In honor of the NBA Conference Finals, I wanted to think out loud about a few parallels between sports (basketball in particular), education policy/discourse, and teaching.   It seems like the sports adage, “winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing” has permeated into the educational discourse.  We are hell bent on “winning” (all apologies to Charlie Sheen).  What does winning mean?  Who wins?  And, as I used to implore my history students to ask, who wins and at what cost?

In an earlier blog post, I lamented about teachers, it seems like everyone from Diane Ravitch, to Randi Weingarten to the local teacher doing lunch duty of helping their children cross the street, feeling as if they  are being “bashed,” “scapegoated” or worse.  Let’s examine this current political climate and discourse through the lens of sports (sorry for those of you who are sport phobic).

If schools and their stakeholders are “teams,” who is the “owner?”  Parents?  The Community?  The District?  Let’s put the ownership aside and look at the micro level.  If teachers comprise  the “team” we have to admit, as in any sporting endeavor, that there are “superstars,” “stars,” “role players,” and “has-bens.”  On a basketball team, there are 12 players. Multiply that dynamic in a school building and you have the potential for a powder keg.   While everyone wants to believe that they are either the “superstar” or the “star” most people are “role players.”

During their unlikely and improbable run to the Eastern Conference Semi Finals, the Philadelphia 76ers were the epitome of “overachievers.”  They survived the first round of the playoffs only after the reigning MVP of the NBA, Derrick Rose went down with a season ending knee injury.  They were helped even further by an injury to another important starter and one of the biggest energy guys in the league, Joakim Noah.  The Sixers not only dispatched of the Bulls in 6 games, but in the next round, took the 2008 NBA Champion Boston Celtics to 7 games before succumbing.

 

The point of mentioning the Sixers is not to whine more about my beloved Bulls being upset in the playoffs, but to make this point.  There are teams, organizations and situations which look perfect on paper but in the practical application of events, things fall apart – in other words, stuff happens.  Could have’s begin to dominate the conversation as opposed to what actually is taking place.  In the discussion surrounding public school teachers, too many pundits and especially many "leaders" in the teachers unions would like us to believe what I said above, that there are only superstars and stars.  In the discussion surrounding education reform, no one mentions the role players or worse, the has-beens. 

What this means is that ed reformers and pundits continue to present a false dichotomy.  Whereas in sports, those of us who have played the game, or are avid fans, know that in order to make a truly great team you need a mix of players and coaches who know how to bring the best out of their teams (see Phil Jackson, or more recently Greg Popovich as examples of excellence).  

In schools therefore, it is critical that we not only be more honest about the make up and composition of our teams, but also that we help attract and foster coaches (administrators) who are able to bring the best out of their teams.  Hopefully we can begin to have the tough conversation of acknowledging that not everyone is a superstar.  But that is ok.  It takes all members to not just think they are a superstar, but to strive to be one.  Not the one who scores the most points, or gets the most endorsements, but the one who knows their role and is the best in the clutch and, most importantly, helping their team win.  It goes without saying that more successful teams allow for coaches to have the ability to create, organize and manage their own teams and members, but that discussion is for another day.

No Snitching is Not Just a Neighborhood Phenomenon. Teachers are Guilty Too.

Starting with Obama’s Inauguration in 2009, it seems as if every public intellectual, public school teacher and education reformer felt that a new day in public education had arrived..  Gone would be the punitive NCLB law with its coercive mandates and demeaning labeling that goes with those measures.  Although the Administration has advanced new education policy measures, NCLB is still in existence and countless critics have argued that some, namely Race to The Top (RtTT) are as bad, if not worse than the previous Administration’s policies concerning public education.

          The largest numbers of hopeful people were public school teachers.  Public school teachers are overwhelmingly Democratic and their Unions (both the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA) contributed greatly to the Democratic Party and Obama’s Campaign.  What have they received in return?

            If one were to do a survey of public school teachers today, they would probably respond that the return on their investment has not yielded much, if anything positive.  In fact, many would say things have gotten worse.  Doing a simple Google search, over the past month the words public school and; “teachers sabotaged” (35k) “teacher bashing” (40k), “teacher failure” (3.4million) and “bad teachers” (3.8million) have shown up in the public discourse more than “Lady Gaga” (144k) and “Whitney Houston” (237k) combined.  What does this mean?

            At the very least, looking at the raw numbers, one can conclude that there is currently a large amount of public discussion centered on the efficacy and influence of public school teachers.  What is problematic is that “good” teachers either self-identified or otherwise, are generally the ones leading the chorus of cries about teachers being mistreated, bashed, sabotaged and labeled failures.  Absent from this discussion are the teachers who perform poorly, do no help students succeed, and do not serve their profession well.  Where are their voices?  When do we actually hear from those who are the ones all of these policy changes and accountability are supposed to flush out?

            Poor performing teacher voices are silent.  They are not the ones who write into the The New York Times (see: Confessions of a “Bad Teacher” - http://tinyurl.com/7bdgt9d and Hard Working Teachers, Sabotaged When Student Test Scores Slip http://tinyurl.com/7cs28ct as two recent examples).  They are not the ones who March on Washington (See http://www.saveourschoolsmarch.org/).  They are the ones who languish behind closed doors, out of the public eye and the public arena, and continue to contribute to the downfall of public education in this country. 

             While it is admirable for “good” teachers to stand up to “being bullied,” they also need to tell the truth.  Not everyone in the profession is as high achieving, motivated and disciplined as those who continue to feel bashed, and those who comment so frequently in the public arena.  Rather than feeling inadequate and less than, perhaps it is time for the good teachers to not just call out those who need assistance, but at the very least, admit they exist.  To deny their existence is to continue to deny the reality of the profession.  It also makes good public school teachers susceptible to feeling that when the public discourse speaks of inadequate and ineffective teachers, that they are talking to you.  It is time to start snitching and start telling the truth.