Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Grading 'Waiting for Superman'
Here's what you see in Waiting for Superman, the new
documentary that celebrates the charter school movement while blaming
teachers unions for much of what ails American education: working- and
middle-class parents desperate to get their charming, healthy,
well-behaved children into successful public charter schools.
Here's what you don't see: the four out of five charters that are no
better, on average, than traditional neighborhood public schools (and
are sometimes much worse); charter school teachers, like those at the
Green Dot schools in Los Angeles, who are unionized and like it that
way; and noncharter neighborhood public schools, like PS 83 in East
Harlem and the George Hall Elementary School in Mobile, Alabama, that
are nationally recognized for successfully educating poor children.
You don't see teen moms, households without an adult English speaker or headed by a drug addict, or any of the millions of children who never have a chance to enter a charter school lottery (or get help with their homework or a nice breakfast) because adults simply aren't engaged in their education. These children, of course, are often the ones who are most difficult to educate, and the ones neighborhood public schools can't turn away.
You also don't learn that in the Finnish education system, much cited in the film as the best in the world, teachers are—gasp!—unionized and granted tenure, and families benefit from a cradle-to-grave social welfare system that includes universal daycare, preschool and healthcare, all of which are proven to help children achieve better results at school.
In other words, Waiting for Superman is a moving but vastly oversimplified brief on American educational inequality. Nevertheless, it has been greeted by rapturous reviews.
"Can One Little Movie Save America's Schools?" asked the cover of New York magazine. On September 20 The Oprah Winfrey Show featured the film's director, Davis Guggenheim, of An Inconvenient Truth. Tom Friedman of the New York Times devoted a column to praising the film. Time published an education issue coinciding with the documentary's release and is planning a conference built in part around the school reform strategies the film endorses. NBC, too, will host an education reform conference in late September; Waiting for Superman will be screened and debated there, and many of the reformers involved in its production will be there. Katie Couric of CBS Evening News has promised a series of segments based on the movie.
Meanwhile, mega-philanthropist Bill Gates, who appears in Waiting for Superman, hit the road in early September to promote the film; while he was at it, he told an audience at the Toronto International Film Festival that school districts should cut pension payments for retired teachers. Other players in the free-market school reform movement, most of whom had seen the documentary at early screenings for opinion leaders and policy-makers, anticipated its September 24 release with cautious optimism.
The media excitement around the film "is beginning to open up an overdue public conversation," says Amy Wilkins, vice president at the Washington advocacy group Education Trust. "Do I think the coverage is always elegant and superior and perfect? No. Of course there is going to be some bumbling and stumbling. But the fact that the film is provoking this conversation is really important for teachers and kids."
Indeed, a tense public sparring match over the achievement gap, unions and the future of the teaching profession is already under way. In August the Los Angeles Times defied the protests of unions and many education policy experts by publishing a searchable online database of elementary school teachers' effectiveness rankings. The newspaper's calculations were made using a new statistical method called value-added measurement, which is based on children's standardized test scores and which social scientists across the political spectrum agree is volatile and often flawed.
In Washington, Mayor Adrian Fenty lost his re-election bid in part because of black voters' skepticism toward his aggressive school reform efforts, led by lightning-rod schools chancellor Michelle Rhee, who pursued an agenda of closing troubled neighborhood schools, instituting a privately funded merit-pay program for teachers and firing teachers and principals deemed ineffective. And at the federal level, President Obama's signature education program, the Race to the Top grant competition, pressures states to implement many of the most controversial teacher reforms, including merit pay based on value-added measurement.
Yet under the radar of this polarized debate, union affiliates across the country are coming to the table to talk about effective teaching in a more meaningful way than they ever have before. These stories of cooperation, from Pittsburgh to Memphis, are rarely being told, in part because national union leaders are worried about vocally stepping out beyond their members, and in part because of the media's tendency to finger-point at organized labor.
As in the work of influential magazine writer Steven Brill, this intra-union ferment is ignored in Waiting for Superman. The film presents teachers unions as the villains in the struggle to close the achievement gap, despite their long history of advocating for more school funding, smaller class sizes and better school resources and facilities. Guggenheim represents the unions through Randi Weingarten, president of the 1.5 million–member American Federation of Teachers (AFT). Ominous music plays during some of her interviews, which are presented alongside footage of Harlem Children's Zone founder Geoffrey Canada and former Milwaukee superintendent and school-voucher proponent Howard Fuller complaining that union contracts protect bad teachers.
But in real life, Weingarten is the union leader most credited by even free-market education reformers with being committed to retooling the teaching profession to better emphasize professional excellence and student achievement.
"The education landscape has changed pretty profoundly, and the unions have to adapt," says Tim Daly, president of the New Teacher Project, a Teach for America (TFA) offshoot often seen as a counterweight to the power of unions and teachers colleges. "It's no longer just school districts they're dealing with but charter schools, accountability measures that flow from Washington and new governance structures such as mayoral control and state takeovers.
"Teachers unions have really struggled over the last two decades to recruit good, visionary new leadership prepared to help the unions navigate this," Daly continues. "There are exceptions. The most glaring, notable exception is Randi. She has a long career ahead of her."
In the Waiting for Superman companion book, Guggenheim writes about his struggle, as a lifelong liberal, over how to present teachers unions in the film. "Their role in education is not a black-and-white one," he admits. "I've gotten to know union leaders who I think understand that the reforms we need will mean some serious adjustments on the part of their members, and that we need to rethink the rigid systems we've gotten locked into since the New Deal era. At the same time, these progressive union leaders can't get too far ahead of their members. And they understandably don't want to give aid and comfort to some politicians who are in fact anti-worker and are at least as interested in undermining the power of labor as they are in improving our schools."
The movie, though, does not attempt any such balancing act. It presents Rhee as a heroine whose hands are tied by the union. Yet in April, after Rhee's administration finally collaborated with education experts and the union to create a new, detailed teacher evaluation system tied to the district's curriculum, the Washington Teachers Union and AFT agreed to a contract that includes many of Rhee's priorities, including her merit-pay plan and an unprecedented weakening of tenure protections.
The film doesn't acknowledge that Bill Gates, who began his philanthropic career deeply skeptical of teachers unions, has lately embraced them as essential players in the fight for school improvement. His foundation finances a program in Boston called Turnaround Teacher Teams, which works with the district and its teachers union to move cohorts of experienced, highly rated instructors into high-needs schools, while giving them extra training and support.
In July Gates spoke at the American Federation of Teachers convention in Seattle, saying, "If reforms aren't shaped by teachers' knowledge and experience, they're not going to succeed." A few protesters booed, but he received several standing ovations. Members of the Gates Foundation staff later met with AFT executives, and the two teams discussed ways to collaborate, despite lingering differences on issues like teacher pensions.
When I spoke with Weingarten in late August at her office on Capitol Hill, she was livid about Waiting for Superman, referring to its charter school triumphalism as an example of "magic dust." "There's always pressure to find the one thing that's going to be the shortcut," she said. But she was ecstatic about improved relations with Gates and angry that, in her view, the mainstream media have ignored the news of their rapprochement. "The media want conflict," she said. "They don't let us tell our story."
Younger teachers are often the driving force behind union-backed reforms. In Denver in 2008, a group of them launched Denver Teachers for Change, which grew into a 350-member coalition dedicated to supporting performance pay and other student achievement–focused reforms while preserving organized labor's voice at the negotiating table. In Colorado earlier this year, the AFT state affiliate signed on to the state's Race to the Top application, which promised to make student achievement data count for up to 50 percent of a teacher's evaluation score, potentially totally reforming the process by which tenure is granted.
In Memphis the teachers union has worked alongside the New Teacher Project to move some of the best teachers into the highest-poverty schools. The Pittsburgh Federation of Teachers agreed to a performance-pay system for all new hires and to adding a year to the tenure-granting process. In the small city of Evansville, Indiana, the local affiliate of the National Education Association (NEA) worked with the superintendent to craft a turnaround model for three low-performing schools that includes a longer school year and a professional development academy for teachers working with high-poverty kids.
Weingarten admits that because systemic school reform is often about boring topics such as the scalability and sustainability of success in a field "littered with pilot programs," it can be difficult to add complexity to the media war over teaching. "We've never figured out how to tell that story in a compelling way," she says.
The unions are also hurt by public frustration with teacher tenure, a level of job security inconceivable to most American workers, who are barely hanging on during a recession with a nearly 10 percent unemployment rate.
"Only 7 percent of American workers are in unions," Weingarten says, adding matter-of-factly, "America looks at us as islands of privilege."
* * *
It's true that nobody loves a good fight more than a journalist; after all, a story with a bad guy is much more interesting than one in which it is unclear exactly whom to blame for what went wrong.
Perhaps the writer most associated with the teachers-unions-as-villains narrative is Brill, the Court TV founder cum promoter of micropayments for online news. In August 2009 The New Yorker published Brill's report on New York City's "rubber rooms," an exposé focused on the one-twentieth of 1 percent of the district's 80,000 public school teachers (about forty people) who had been removed from the classroom because of gross negligence, such as failing to teach at all or verbally harassing students. Nevertheless, because these teachers had been granted tenure by the district, their contracts—negotiated between the Education Department and their union, the United Federation of Teachers—entitled them to a full salary until a due process hearing determined whether they would be fired or reassigned. While they awaited hearings, sometimes for as long as three years, the UFT portrayed some rubber room teachers as innocent victims of "seniority purges," ignoring evidence of incompetence including, in one case, alcohol abuse. (Many teachers, it turns out, are opposed to such efforts. According to a 2003 Public Agenda poll, 47 percent of them believe "the union sometimes fights to protect teachers who really should be out of the classroom.")
In part because of the outcry generated by the New Yorker piece among the city's elite—many of whom do not send their children to public schools and are ignorant of the system's inner workings—the Education Department and the UFT have phased out rubber rooms.
Brill's crusade continued in a May New York Times Magazine feature called "The Teachers' Unions' Last Stand," which praised the Obama administration's attempt to tie teacher evaluations to children's standardized test scores, a policy the UFT opposed until recently. In one section of the article, Brill visits the building on 118th Street in Harlem that houses both PS 149 and the Harlem Success Academy, a charter school known for its tough discipline, rigid test prep and high scores. He praises the charter school's longer day, uniforms and involved teachers, and criticizes the public school for showing students a film during the school day and providing its employees with a more generous pension plan.
Neither article contains a single scene set in a competently managed public school classroom, nor a single interview with a respected, effective public or charter school teacher who appreciates his or her union representation. (There are many such people. A 2007 poll of teachers conducted by the think tank Education Sector found that only 11 percent believed a union was "something you could do without." A March 2010 Gates Foundation/Scholastic poll of 40,000 teachers found that on issues such as evaluation, pay and benefits, most are roughly in line with their unions.) Brill portrays the UFT as almost the sole force preventing Mayor Michael Bloomberg and schools chancellor Joel Klein from transforming the city's public schools, ignoring issues like segregation and poverty, as well as evidence that the higher graduation rates and test scores the Education Department advertises are the result of lower standards, narrowed curriculums and massaged data.
Brill is working on a book about education reform, to be published by Simon and Schuster. His first book, Teamsters, was released in 1978 and told the story of internal corruption and reform within that union.
Despite their one-sidedness, the influential Brill pieces, followed by the much-hyped release of Waiting for Superman, present a public relations crisis for the two national teachers unions, the AFT and the larger NEA, which has 3.2 million members.
In Washington in August, I had coffee with a lanky 25-year-old Teach for America veteran named Dustin Thomas, who had ascended from teaching high school social studies to a district office job recruiting preschoolers for early intervention programs. Thomas, who founded the group Educators for Fenty, is exactly the sort of young, politically active education reformer teachers unions will need to engage to stay relevant. He grew up in Dallas, attended the University of Oklahoma and decided to pursue a career in education after a friend was killed in gun violence.
"The person who pulled the trigger could have used someone like my friend in his life," said Thomas, who sometimes sounds exactly like a committed union leader. "The amount of work that teachers put into bringing results for our kids is not represented in the picture of us," he complained. "The paycheck is not the motivation."
Yet Thomas became visibly uncomfortable when I brought up the Washington Teachers Union or teacher unionism in general. He avoided even saying the word "union," finally telling me, after a long pause, "I had some incredible veteran teachers around me. But we saw teachers in the school who were so far removed from making sure kids were learning, it was shocking. People are glad there's a process now."
Thomas was referring to Rhee's July dismissal of 241 teachers, which the union contested. The AFT spent more than $1 million in support of Fenty's opponent, City Council chair Vincent Gray, who ran on a platform of "one city," promising to push forward on school reform while working harder to collaborate with those angry about Rhee's teacher firings and school closings, and her perceived dismissive attitude toward the local black communities who were losing jobs and institutions. (A typical Rhee comment: "Collaboration and consensus building are quite frankly overrated in my mind.")
It's unclear now what will happen to Thomas's job working for Rhee, or whether the election results will lead him to reconsider his skeptical stance toward unions, which remain powerful across the country. Thomas's attitude is the kind that frustrates Alex Caputo-Pearl, an eighteen-year veteran of the Los Angeles public schools and member of Progressive Educators for Action (PEAC), which works for reform from within the United Teachers of Los Angeles.
In 1990 Caputo-Pearl graduated from Brown and became part of the first class of TFA recruits. Since then, his opinions on school reform have diverged significantly from those of TFA and many of its alums. He believes that teaching is a kind of community organizing and has worked with parents, for example, to bring more computers into high-poverty Crenshaw High School and to advocate for a more culturally relevant curriculum for students of color. (As a reward for his efforts, the district branded him a troublemaker in 2006 and transferred him to a school across town. Students and parents protested, and he was reinstated. Without tenure, he might have been fired.)
Caputo-Pearl sees unionization as key to this work. "What we're promoting is the idea that teachers unions need to become social justice unions," he says. "There certainly are parts of the union leadership and bureaucracy across the country that would argue the public schools are basically doing what they need to do right now and there's not a need for basic reform within the system, other than more funding. PEAC has never believed that is the case, especially in communities of color, and has been in the lead of trying to promote reform models, whether it be around small learning communities or around schools partnering with trusted outside organizations to have more autonomy."
For Caputo-Pearl, the Los Angeles Times teacher rankings are a distraction from what he calls "real school reform." "Data! There's a good term out there," he says with a laugh. "There are all sorts of problems with standardized tests, but that doesn't mean you don't look at them as one small tool to inform instruction. You do. The problem with value-added, on top of its severe lack of reliability and validity, is that if you use it in a high-stakes way where teachers are constantly thinking about it in relationship to their evaluations, you will smother a lot of the beautiful instincts that drive the inside of a school, with teachers talking to each other, collaborating and teaming up to support students."
That message is part of Weingarten's strategy for how to hit back against Waiting for Superman. She has been telling the press that teaching is more an art than a science, and quoting Einstein: "Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." She's also planning a new proposal for fighting the high school dropout crisis and says she's going to "stay positive and focus on how you invest in kids."
Dennis van Roekel, Weingarten's counterpart at the NEA, is also worried about the documentary. His media strategy for the year is to launch a "commission on quality teaching" made up of "teachers of the year," he says. The idea is to amplify teachers' voices in debates about the future of the profession.
Ultimately, though, a new generation of educators, more and more of whom, like Dustin Thomas, have come up bright-eyed and bushy-tailed through alternative certification programs like TFA, will judge teachers unions on whether they share the commitment that motivates many of the best teachers to enter the profession: a drive toward eradicating the achievement gap. Unions will need to make the case through actions and words, not least because of a hostile media climate that stacks the deck against them.
"If teachers unions don't make a turn toward the social justice union model, along with fighting for more funding, it's going to mean not just a fundamental weakening of the union but frankly a real possibility of unions passing into history," says Caputo-Pearl. "It's a necessity to fight with and for a broad sector of society that includes teachers, but also the families and the kids we serve. Otherwise, unions, and more significantly, truly public, accessible and equitable education, will go out of existence."
- Posted in



32 Comments so far
Show AllThis movie is merely a marketing device to drive privatization of schools. And like commercial marketing campaigns, it seeks to convince people that the story it tells, which is fully skewed to its point of view, is the whole truth.
What a travesty. The first clue that this movie is BS is that the MSM is fawning over it.
Yes, this says it all about our "failing" schools. What a crock!
POLITICS: Right on! I see the matter exactly as you do. Thanks for the post.
Equating Unions status with the success of education reform is the most idiotic piece of self serving guano I've seen lately.
The young teacher that stood up in the meeting tells us all that there are problems with the union model in education.
Lastly, kids first, unions so far down the list of importance they are invisible.
mightymite,
I am not sure what your point in these three statements is-too disjointed. Please elaborate!
amor y paz,
OYE
Some will tell you disjointed thinking is my specialty! :)
"Equating Unions status with the success of education reform is the most idiotic piece of self serving guano I've seen lately"
The suggestion that I found in this article that student success was bound to union success or that unions were important for educational reform, essentially they were an important part of the formula I found offensive to say the least. Teachers unions perr se are not important in the least.
"The young teacher that stood up in the meeting tells us all that there are problems with the union model in education."
Warching the news last night we saw a young Lation teacher stand up at the meeting "Education Nation" I believe it was and saiod part of her problems stemmed from union limitations, union rules of when she could teach and what... (the latter I'm not sure of, it sweeemed to be what she meant)
"Lastly, kids first, unions so far down the list of importance they are invisible"
This was tied to the first, union successs or failure means absolutely nothing to me, nor should they to anyone else in comparison to successful educational reform, successful educational policies. Our kids should come first and the impression I get here is, that is not the case.
Sorry for my lack of clarity. Got room in your class???
>>Some will tell you disjointed thinking is my specialty! :)
The disjointed I agree with....the thinking part? I am not so sure..;)
I can always count on you!!!! :) :) :)
Mightymite, correct me if I'm wrong, but your opinion is based on a two to three minute clip that some "newsperson" selected for you? I wonder if there were any other opinions at that meeting? And I wonder why the newsperson would want you to hear that one? The union does not set the curriculum or when or how to teach; administrators (think Michelle Rhee) do that. Unions do protect teachers who work to make things better for kids, are valued by students and parents, get labelled as troublemakers by administration because they work to offer kids a better education, and would be fired for this kind of work on behalf of kids without the union -- did you read this article at all?
Yes Nellie, you are wrong, it is not based on a clip. I read the article. And the "clip" is an indicator. And yes, the union does control working hours.
As to Uninons, they are indeed part of the problem. That is quite evident at this point. The number of teachers fired in union districts make that quite plain.
Are unions good. If they are good unions...yes. If they are bad...no. I never confuse teachers with unions.
What we have been doing is not working. The same old bromides have been proved faulty and many of the theories absurd. Changes ARE going to be made.
Unions rail against tests and teaching to the test is absurd, but you must have some measurement of success. Everyone has varying degrees of blame in our failure and no one is innocent.
mightymite,
"What we have been doing is not working". Oh, it's not working???? What makes you think so? I see many, many successes every day, every hour. Are these successes quantifiable/measureable. No they aren't! Those who don't teach do not even begin to realize what occurs on a daily/hourly basis in each and every classroom. Teaching and learning are so much more complex than these "non" educators realize. Any attempts to "measure" teaching and learning are based on the false notion that one can quantify a quality. That is a logical impossibilty and why we even attempt it is beyond my ability to comprehend.
So your statement "but you must have some measurement of success." can't by any logical definition be true or desirable as a social goal. You are using the public schools detractors' "frame", a frame that is illogical and unethical. Unethical in the sense that to use a test that is designed, for example, to assesses a student's knowledge of 8th grade math, to assess the teacher is wrong as the test was not designed to assess the teacher but the students. All major testing organizations-American Pyschological Association, ETS-of ACT fame-have statements that indicate to use a test that is designed for one thing to assess something else is UNETHICAL.
OYE
Praise the day when the same metrics or "measurements of success" are applied to our military, the beast that goes about the world bludgeoning endless towns and villages. Please show me what is successful about that? Our sick society would rather turn teachers into sacrificial lambs then face what its calamitously stupid policies are costing this nation at EVERY level, including the education of the young. If kids don't eat, if they don't have homes, if there's a sick family member and no money/insurance to cover treatment, if one parent is one of the 2 million incarcerated (with another 3 million on probation), and if they were born with a learning impediment... they will NOT measure up to the standardized tests. Instead of taking money out of the killing machine to fund a genuinely caring education, this whole initiative is but another inverted Calvinistic strategy intent upon blaming the poor for being poor and disadvantaged. It may well prove as much of a self-fulfilling prophecy as that sponsored by the war-loving End Timers.
Our nation is in moral collapse. We must grieve... as it's next to impossible to BE the change we wish to see, when all around us is evidence of an ignorance so thick and equally well-marketed, that the very act of bringing Truth to power may no longer even register on the collective cognitive Richter Scale!
Thanks for the clafification.
No, no room in my classes-26-31 in levels 1 & 2 (5 classes) except Level 3 & 4 where I have a combined class of 4 and 1 respectively. Supposedly getting another Spanish teacher is the next hire but in these times I doubt it.
OYE
From the article: "I had coffee with a lanky 25-year-old Teach for America veteran named Dustin Thomas, who had ascended from teaching high school social studies to a district office job recruiting preschoolers for early intervention programs."
Let's see Mr. (and I use that term loosely as he is still very wet behind the ears when it comes to public education) Thomas who perhaps graduated from high school at age 18, then if he was "good" graduated from college at age 22 and then taught for all of two years and now is a "recruiter" in the district. Sounds like his boss, Rhee, who also doesn't know squat about teaching. NO ONE, absolutely no one with only two years of teaching experience has any standing whatsoever to comment on teaching and learning as they are still "babes in the woods" and quite ignorant when it comes to the "art" and "practice" of teaching.
And Rhee's comment: "Collaboration and consensus building are quite frankly overrated in my mind." ELITIST BITCH! is all I can say about her.
Amor y paz,
OYE
Oye, thanks so much for your comments and I couldn't agree more. I lasted all of one year in public education before being among the 100,000 who were laid off and frankly couldn't be happier. The business model of education is apparent everywhere, and what made me sick was that a woman with all of two years of classroom experience was paid generously by some private corporation to travel to various districts around the state, giving workshops to teachers and administration on how to improve their teaching skills. We were all expected to adopt her strategies. When a coworker told me how much real-classroom experience this woman had, I wondered how I could cash in on this profession. She probably earned three times more than the average teacher. I'm happily unemployed and continually sickened to watch as they try to make education even worse. Now Obama is suggesting year-round school, as if that's automatically going to improve our schools? Hmm, adding more school days to the school year is going to equate to students getting a better education? Doubtful...
NNLib,
Thanks for your kind comment. It's unfortunate that you were laid off from teaching because you probably would make a good one.
OYE
"Ultimately, though, a new generation of educators, more and more of whom, like Dustin Thomas, have come up bright-eyed and bushy-tailed through alternative certification programs like TFA, will judge teachers unions on whether they share the commitment that motivates many of the best teachers to enter the profession: a drive toward eradicating the achievement gap."
"Bright eyed and bushy-tailed through alternative certification programs" Yep I'm sure he will still be in education in two years. (all sarcasm intended) and "will judge teachers unions"--who the hell are they, with piddling experience to judge 'teachers unions'. About time for me to judge the American Medical Association since I worked in a hospital once for four years. Yeh, we should listen to these "up and coming" young pups-pure bullshit from the author of this article who,having gone to school herself, knows to whom we should listen.
Utter insanity is the driving force in discussing public education issues.
amor y paz,
OYE
i don't care much about trade unionism that is collective selfishness (jobs program for underachievers).
but corporatization of education, as promoted by the neo-lib dems (obama / clinton and their ilk) as a solution, is the root cause of the problem.
just look how corporatization of basic needs, such as
medicine (AMA, corporate hospital chains, insurance companies, pharmas),
public safety (prison industry, MIC),
food (monsanto et al), and
housing (mortgage industry, banking),
have worked out for people.
CURIOUS: Can we add private military contractors to your list? Same net result. Garbage...
MIC covers private contractors, i thought.
from the article:
~ Ultimately, though, a new generation of educators, more and more of whom, like Dustin Thomas, have come up bright-eyed and bushy-tailed through alternative certification programs like TFA, will judge teachers unions on whether they share the commitment that motivates many of the best teachers to enter the profession: a drive toward eradicating the achievement gap. ~
if eradicating the achievement gap is truly the goal, it is a dead goal...can it even be defined?
what is achievement, in light of planetary murder and environmental destruction? any job? a white collar job? a job that pays as much as a white guy gets?
is it being a nice person, or living in an area not too poor, or chemically saturated?
human achievement is killing our world...any achievemnet equates to an unacknowledged loss elsewhere...we need less achievement, not more...
teach that...
Let's keep our eyes on the ball...
If there were a living wage for EVERYONE, equity and justice in the workplace, and representation in Congress for working people, Unions would not be necessary in the first place. Let's not be distracted by all the distractions. War has been declared on the idea of community, a living wage, and democracy itself. Both republicans AND many so-called democrats are waging it. They're sabotaging everything that's the enemy of business and corporatism. Infiltrate to destroy (aka terrorism)...
Here's Proof: Infiltrate to destroy...
"Starving the beast" is a fiscal-political strategy of some American conservatives [AND so-called democrats] to use budget deficits via tax cuts to force future reductions in the size of government. The term "beast" refers to the government and the programs it funds, particularly social programs such as welfare, Social Security, Medicare and public schools.
The tax cuts of former US President George W. Bush's administration, still in place, are an example. He said in 2001 "so we have the tax relief plan... that now provides a new kind - a fiscal straightjacket for Congress. And that's good for the taxpayers, and it's incredibly positive news if you're worried about a federal government that has been growing at a dramatic pace over the past eight years and it has been."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help." -Reagan (a guy from the government)
"Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. -Reagan (a guy from the government)
"My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub." - Grover Norquist http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Grover_Norquist
...and many many more quotes are out there.
Typical Nation article.
Consider:
"[The movie] presents Rhee as a heroine whose hands are tied by the union. Yet in April, after Rhee's administration finally collaborated with education experts and the union to create a new, detailed teacher evaluation system tied to the district's curriculum, the Washington Teachers Union and AFT agreed to a contract that includes many of Rhee's priorities, including her merit-pay plan and an unprecedented weakening of tenure protections."
Basically, the author is praising the union for SELLING OUT its membership. This is precisely why the unions are meriting praise from the likes of "mega-philanthropist" Bill Gates.
These days, unions in general have assumed the role of accommodating their membership to the austerity regime being imposed by the Democratic-Republican duopoly in the interest of the financial aristocracy. So it makes sense that a writer for The Nation would see the duplicity of the teachers unions in such a positive light, given that the raison d'etre of his magazine is to provide cover and support for Democrats.
Right on-point, eyerag!
It's frightening to watch the all sorts of populist groups, like unions, buy-in to all the blue dog bullshit. Instead of fighting back, as the lead article hear tells us about labor protests all over Europe, here in the U.s. both left and right, conservative and liberal, seem to buy in, equally, to neo-liberal talking points.
We're doomed as long as working people don't get it.
It's unfair to accuse the AFT of selling out the DC teachers. DC schools are in crisis (along with the rest of urban America), and the adults in the system, including teachers, for too long tolerated substandard schools in exchange for their paychecks. One part of fixing that disaster (again, not just in DC) is to develop an evaluation process that promotes good teaching and weeds out the incompetent. Teachers unions by and large used to say that was management's problem, but clearly that was and is an inadequate response.
So in many places around the country progressive educators are making an effort to develop effective evaluation systems. Of course, doing it right will not be easy and probably not cheap. The data worship coming from the Obama administration is not helping. Teaching cannot be reduced to a number. Meanwhile funding is being slashed, charter schools are presented as panaceas, and teachers and their unions are vilified.
Randi Weingarten and the AFT are attempting to address these issues in a balanced way. Use student test scores as one factor, but not the main factor. Develop peer assistance and review programs to aid those teachers who are struggling. And through it all, defend public education as fundamental to American values, against the privatizers and charter promoters who would be happy to tear everything down as long as they get theirs. Have they made mistakes? Of course, but that's what happens when one is trying to develop new systems.
These are serious issues and demand serious solutions. Slogans won't cut it, on either "side."
So weakening tenure, mounting no serious opposition to "value-added" evaluations, and continuing to support the Democratic party as it kicks teachers in the groin are all somehow a good thing?
This is the second CD article about this documentary in a few days. What concerns me at this point is a potential mistake among parents and citizens to allow anyone--and I mean anyone--to control or in any way manipulate the discussion about American education.It's high time to count ourselves in and stop allowing others to do the thinking and framing for us, to open our minds to new ideas, creative approaches and better questions; ask ourselves what we want--as opposed to concerning ourselves with what they want. What do we want for kids? What do we want for American society? What are we trying to accomplish with American education? What vision for education and kids do we have 5, 10, 50 years from now? In some cases, maybe we'd be wiser to throw out altogether the entire American system in some states and communities, start over. I don't have the answers although this is such an important subject for the future of kids and civil society in America that we need to include, hear and discuss many, many more points of view and possibilities in our neighborhoods and communities. We need to hear from students, too, particularly those for whom the education system has failed terribly. I've posted this before and here it is again for the purpose of introducing a completely different perspective. A quote: "The goal of instruction should NEVER be high grades or test scores." Take a look around the homepage, too:
www.johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm
"I am somehow less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." Stephen Jay Gould
Love the Gould quote.
Friends, relax, relax. Everyone throws up their hands about education every half dozen years or so. Books, magazines, TV--and this year a movie!--pontificate about reform. Obama tells us we must lengthen the school year. Set higher standards. Kick out those millions of incompetent teachers.
Then the reality of change sets in: change costs money. You want to raise standards? Fine, but you have to deal with all of those students who come to school with backgrounds that do not honor education. You want to lower the dropout rate? You might need alternative schools to do that, charter or public--and that costs money. You want mentor programs to help new teachers? Get ready to shell out real money. Lengthen the school year? Better raise school millage.
The point is, it isn't going to happen. The hundred million what's-his-name gave the the Newark public schools is chicken feed. Gone in a year. All these hand-wringers about the state of education in our schools are cheapskates. They don't want to raise anyone's taxes to make things better. It's just a big show and it will pass.
Cover your mouth with a hankie before sneezing more useless status quo.
The loss of teacher tenure is the loss of freedom of speech in our schools. Once achieved, teachers will only be allowed to teach the official totalitarian doctrine. It represents the end of education in America.
STONE: You raise an excellent point. I suppose this is the corporate follow-up to the plan that asked students to turn in their radical/liberal/progressive teachers. I believe it was dreamt up by Horowitz, the same creep that came up with the adage, "Compassionate Conservatives," the supposed kinder, gentler 21st century version of rapacious carpet baggers. If I am not mistaken, he wrote up a report on the 100 most dangerous professors in America.
Well, "Fat Free" got us a fatter nation.
"Thought-free" may get us one that's even more stupid!
Reminds me of the rant by Caroll Newquest in Jules Pfeiffer's brilliant film, "Little Murders."
"Put up a fence around every block! I want my freedom!"
education in a society built on the "maximum-private-profit-at-all-cost" principle has no hope to produce the global citizens for justice and peace for all.