MORE Caucus (UFT) Responds to State Imposed Teacher Evaluation Plan, Cites Coordinated Grievance Campaign

GOTHAM SCHOOLS NOTES MORE'S COORDINATED GRIEVANCE CAMPAIGN - THE UFT MAY HAVE LET YOU DOWN; MORE IS THERE TO HELP

UFT president Michael Mulgrew endorsed a state-imposed evaluation system; what a mistake --look what we've got:
Mulgrew is perennially assuaging the UFT's members, saying that things could be worse than whatever bad deal the UFT leadership has agreed to. Wrong, this is worse than other systems in the state. As MORE says in their statement, Mulgrew is claiming victory in the face of defeat. Bloomberg advisor Howard Wolfson openly gloated on Twitter, that the UFT was “shut out on nearly all their demands.”
This system makes New York City join Syracuse as the only one school systems to experiment with student surveys for evaluating teachers.
Insights arising from the Movement of Rank and File Educators' (MORE-UFT) incisive analysis of the NYS Regents-imposed teacher evaluation system (published in full below) and MORE’s Facebook page:

*This scheme operates by the state education law 3012-c whereby a teacher is assumed guilty, as the teacher must prove their innocence, reversing the American system’s presumption of innocence.

*It is difficult to believe Mulgrew’s contention that this is about supporting teachers. Mulgrew has added his disingenuous spin, “Here is the bottom line: The new teacher evaluation system is designed to support, not punish, teachers and to help them develop throughout their careers. That is what we will be fighting for as this plan is implemented.” The lack of pre- and post-observations will mean rash observations by administrators that are uninformed of the entire context of lessons. On the MORE Facebook page, MORE points out that the new system’s removal of the post-observation strikes away the pretense that this evaluation system is constructive, to help teachers and their craft.

*The new system will lead to teachers teaching to a rubric. The Common Core and the Danielson system are ones “that have no scientific evidence of increasing learning."

*The New York City system, in contrast to other municipalities, is effective for at least four years; whereas many other municipalities expire after one year. As MORE points out, “can only be re-negotiated in collective bargaining within the framework of State Education Law 3012-c.”

-> The UFT may have let teachers down; but MORE will be there to help you: MORE will have a coordinated grievance campaign in the fall: Note MORE's statement in the What Now? section of their response: A coordinated grievance campaign around particular issues of implementation can help us make the most of the 15 extra arbitration days to deal with systemic abuses. MORE will be campaigning in the fall to organize and train chapter leaders, delegates and school activists to be effective in defending their colleagues and organizing strong chapters. Kudos to Gotham Schools for running this point in tweet on MORE's response.
-> Wondering how teachers in other New York State cities and towns are faring with their Albany-compliant systems? Want to express your discontent to NYSED or the Cuomo administration for Race to the Top which carried so many elements driving this change (mandating unrealistice evaluation metrics in the new Annual Professional Performance Review [APPR], the Common Core, Value-Added Modeling [VAM])?
Go to Albany, June 8, the rally that the UFT is afraid to publicize, lest NYC teachers learn how much worse their system is, and how teachers are already experiencing tough evaluation systems. (Notice how the May 30 NY Teacher (UFT) does not mention it; but the June edition of NYSUT United has promotion of the rally on the front cover. Some of the stories in NYSUT's paper: "National momentum grows to put a brake on high stakes," "'The sickest testing story of all time'," "School boards agree: Obsession with testing taking toll," "Educators push back on testing.")

UFT Rank and File Says King’s Evaluation Plan Bad for Teachers, Students

While Micheal Mulgrew launches a campaign to convince the membership that the new teacher evaluation system is designed to help teachers improve and give them a professional voice, Bloomberg is proclaiming victory. The truth of the matter is, this evaluation system is bad for educators and the children they serve: the system requires a tremendous amount of additional work with no compensation, time or otherwise. It will create an even greater climate of fear and effectively ends tenure as we know it; putting all educators who partner with parents to advocate for the best policies for children at risk. This system places too much value on testing and is flawed in its high stakes premise. Educators are best positioned to evaluate and assess our students and teachers, not imposed tests, not junk science, not pre-packaged rubrics.
Julie Cavanagh, Elementary School Teacher & Chapter Leader P.S. 15 Brooklyn

The day has finally come. State Education Commissioner John King has imposed a new teacher evaluation deal on New York City. UFT president Michael Mulgrew's attempts to claim a victory in the face of defeat are hardly convincing. In his letter to the membership Mulgrew says “Here is the bottom line: The new teacher evaluation system is designed to support, not punish, teachers and to help them develop throughout their careers. That is what we will be fighting for as this plan is implemented.” Given the enormous amount of money the DOE has spent trying to fire our colleagues over the last few years, it's credulous to suggest that this system will be about “supporting” teachers. The media has honed in on the point that Mulgrew wants to avoid: tenure has been seriously weakened, and it will be easier to fire teachers who are seen as “ineffective” based on flawed standardized tests.

We knew already from State Education Law 3012-c, which was supported by the UFT leadership as part of Race to the Top, that two years of ineffective ratings means a teacher is presumed to be incompetent. In the new termination process for tenured teachers, the burden of proof will shift to the teacher, unlike the current system where the burden of proof is on the Department of Education to prove incompetence. [1]

King's release states: “Teachers rated ineffective on student performance based on objective assessments must be rated ineffective overall. Teachers who are developing or ineffective will get assistance and support to improve performance. Teachers who remain ineffective can be removed from classrooms." In other words, there will be more testing for our students and tests will be the ultimate determinant of a teacher's effectiveness. According to the outline of the plan, "Each school will have a committee comprised of an equal number of teachers and administrators who will determine, along with the principal, which assessments each school will use," however the plan states that principals may reject this committee's recommendations and apply their own default measures. In many schools, this is exactly what will happen.

Only 13 percent of all ineffective ratings each year can be challenged on grounds of harassment or other matters not related to job performance. Is the UFT comfortable trusting that the other 87% of ratings of "ineffective" will be based solely on teacher performance? Given the new principals Tweed is pumping out of the Principal's Academy and their "fire your way to success" mentality, our union leadership has left us in an extremely dangerous situation.

The union leadership is pleased that the rating system will be using "the complete Danielson rubric, with all 22 points.” The potential for abuse of this complex and multifaceted rubric is enormous.

"This system will lead to educators teaching to a rubric," says Mike Schirtzer, UFT Delegate at Leon M. Goldstein High School in Brooklyn. "Pedagogy is a craft which no two teachers do the same, yet can still be equally effective. This new scheme will limit teachers creativity in the classroom and our ability to differentiate styles in order to reach a diverse set of learners. Our greatest concern is the amount of time this will take from teachers to properly prepare for their classes, due to all of the assessments and/or SLO's that need to be created, the committees need to be formed and countless hours of professional development dedicated to Common Core and Danielson, two directives that have no scientific evidence of increasing learning."

In addition to the onerous micromanagement of the Danielson rubric, observations will be more frequent and at least one will be an unannounced observation. This is problematic, as without pre- and post-observation conferences, administrators will likely be unaware what scaffolding the teacher has done beforehand, and are likely to penalize teachers because they don't have this information. Mulgrew says this is not a “gotcha” system, but in practice it most certainly will be.
The new system also includes a pilot of student surveys. This encourages grade-inflation and a lack of discipline in the classroom. Research shows that student surveys don't work in high-stakes settings. The use of such surveys poisons the relationships between teachers and students, who now in addition to their test scores bear even more responsibility for the future of their teachers' careers.
Crucially, this agreement will not include a sunset provision, unlike districts in other parts of the state. The sunset provision was a key sticking point in negotiations, as the UFT was hoping it would be able to renegotiate the terms of this plan under a new and presumably friendlier mayor. The current deal is in place for the next four years at least, and can only be re-negotiated in collective bargaining within the framework of State Education Law 3012-c.

The mayor and his henchmen have been gloating effusively. The mayor's statement said “Commissioner King has sided with our children on nearly every major point of disagreement we had with the UFT’s leadership, while also rejecting the UFT’s long-held demand for a sunset provision.” Dennis Walcott said he was extremely pleased with the commissioner’s announcement today and we look forward to implementing it.” Bloomberg advisor Howard Wolfson bragged on Twitter that the UFT was “shut out on nearly all their demands.” No matter how the UFT leadership tries to spin it, this is a major defeat for teachers and students.

What Now?

The dropoff in voter turnout in the recent UFT election was already a sign of a disengaged and passive membership. The new evaluation system and the way it was imposed are likely to further demoralize the rank-and-file and increase their cynicism toward the union. The UFT surrendered our collective bargaining rights by turning over the key issue in the next contract to the State Education Department, calling for a biased state official to impose evaluations on us.
MORE campaigned for a membership vote on this evaluation system, and presented a petition with over 1,000 signatures to the December Delegate Assembly. Unity opposed submitting this to the membership since they knew it would be deeply unpopular. The fact that this has instead been imposed by the State Education Department means Mulgrew and the Unity leadership will have an alibi for what will now certainly be a deeply concessionary contract. We must expose the leadership's circumvention of membership in this process, and their contempt for the voices of their rank-and-file.
June 12 will be the day that city workers come together to demand fair contracts. In light of the new evaluation system, one wonders what's left to negotiate. The key concessions, the biggest change to our working conditions in at least a generation, are already in place. It will be crucial for UFT members to attend and discuss the magnitude of this sell-out, and the undemocratic way in which it was imposed on us. Our next contract will inevitably include the new evaluation system. It will also be the first time in this process that the membership has been consulted at all. A campaign to vote no on this contract would send a signal to the leadership that the membership rejects this plan.
Everybody agrees that the key to this will be implementation. Teachers must build active chapters that can be vigilant in calling out abuse of the new system. A coordinated grievance campaign around particular issues of implementation can help us make the most of the 15 extra arbitration days to deal with systemic abuses. MORE will be campaigning in the fall to organize and train chapter leaders, delegates and school activists to be effective in defending their colleagues and organizing strong chapters.

Teachers also need to unite with students and parents to call for an end to the high stakes testing regime that is central to this new evaluation system. Students will now not only be taking high stakes state tests or PARCC assessments*, but also regular "performance assessments" designed to assess teacher effectiveness. Campaigns like the MAP test boycott in Seattle show the power of a community uniting to fight the standardized testing regime.

What this whole sad story tells us is that we can't rely on our union leaders to deliver on our behalf. They have conceded everything, and may now even prove unable to win us retroactive pay for the years we've spent without a contract. It's only by rebuilding the union from the bottom up, school by school, classroom by classroom, that we will begin to stand up to the corporate assault on our schools. MORE is dedicated to a different kind of union, one where democracy and accountability replace backroom deals, where the members make the decisions that matter in their professional lives. Join us!

[1] If a DOE-appointed validator disagrees with the principal’s rating, the DOE keep burden of proof. However, validators are likely to be retired principals, ain the PEP+ system, which is currently used to help fire teachers.

Visit MORE CAUCUS NYC AT morecaucusnyc.org.

*For some criticisms of Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, PARCC, see here and here.
(SLO: Student Learning Objectives.)

BREAKING: Watch WABC 7 @ 6:00 PM for MORE member speaking out against the evaluation imposition

Watch channel 7 (ABC) at 4:30 or 6 and there should be a clip from a MORE member speaking out against the evaluation imposition.

The 6:00 pm show did not show the clip; but you may view it here:
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/html5/video?id=9125478&pid=9123903§ion=news/education.

NY Regents' Imposed Evaluation for NYC; Buffalo's Eval MOU; How Mulgrew Needs to Stand Up to Cuomo

So, Andrew Cuomo's John King and his New York State Education Department have issued New York City specific teacher evaluations. Already Perdido Street, NYC Educator, Accountable Talk, NYCDoENuts, ICEUFT blog, and EdNotes have highlighted parts and opined on them. I won't play a ranking game; look at all of them. This is an important change on our working conditions.

MULGREW ASKED FOR THIS DISASTER
Shame on United Federation of Teachers (UFT) president Michael Mulgrew. For he cheered governor Andrew Cuomo's pledge to impose an evaluation system.
And don't forget- the resolution between the UFT and the New York City Department of Education was by state fiat. This is outside of contract collective bargaining procedure. The Unity/UFT should have sought arbitration.
And he penned onto the disastrous evaluation system at its genesis, with the APPR factor, when three years ago he joined on with New York's Race to the Top application. See here and here.

Why did they rush to agree to an imposed system? That implies that Mulgrew and the UFT are OK with any idea that New York State Education (NYSED) Commissioner John King and the Board of Regents concoct. In some ways, the system that King and the Regents have imposed is the toughest in New York State.
Mulgrew will spend today with his staff, as he said in his letter 3 days ago. Of course, we can anticipate that he will be prepping staff to put a positive spin on this monstrous disaster.
BUFFALO PLAN: NO TO TERMINATION USE, RECOGNIZES STUDENT ABSENTEEISM
Hundreds of cities --not merely Buffalo-- across the state have side agreements to their evaluation schemes, including stipulations that the evaluations will not be used punitively, that is, in line for teachers to lose their licenses. Back to Buffalo whose evaluation I discussed on Thursday. The memorandum of Understanding (MOU; see here, here and here) the Buffalo school district and the Buffalo Teachers Federation stands in stark contrast to what Mulgrew has conceded to. It guarantees against its punitive use for termination, it factors in student student absenteeism, by degrees of absenteeism.

(On the other hand the Buffalo plan has some flaws --see above links. It makes principals and teachers develop a schedule of student growth goals, akin to the SLO targets that NYC DoENuts refers to, with graduated indexing by factors of students with disabilities (SWDs), English Language Learners (ELLs) and the proportion of students living in poverty. It is unrealistic for teachers to perform as metricians to gauge how students in these categories can change their performance.)
For a fun Buffalo blogger writing in a wildly irreverent Gonzo style, see these posts by B-Lo Ed Scene, writing on Cuomo going nuts over Buffalo's MOU here and here. His most serious one is a fine send-up of how the Republicans on are a crazed Benghazi non-corruption, non-crisis frenzy against president Obama, and how their and the media's non-crisis obsession is a direct parallel to Obama's (and of course Cuomo/King, by extension) endless manufactured emergency war of terror against teachers, see Public School Teachers Feel Your Pain Mr POTUS, which leads with a poster graphic: "Is your child a libertarian?."

Look to what Mulgrew and Unity/UFT have conceded to, the Regents-imposed evaluation system for New York City, released last night.

DANIELSON CHECKLISTS, CRITICIZED BY DANIELSON AND UFT IN 2011, ENDORSED THIS SPRING BY THE UFT Note how the UFT protested in November 2011, but keep in mind that this spring it asked for 22 checklist elements from Danielson's Framework:

When the UFT obtained a copy of one of the checklists, it shared it with Danielson herself to get her thoughts.
Danielson was troubled by the checklists and disapproved of them, union officials said. With that endorsement, UFT Secretary Michael Mendel wrote a letter to the DOE and demanded an immediate end to the practice. He even threatened to cut off negotiations toward a larger evaluation deal that is required by the end of the school year.
. . .
The checklist she saw, Danielson said, was inappropriate because of the way it was filled out. It indicated that the observer had already begun evaluating a teacher while in the classroom observation. She said that’s a fundamental no-no.

NYC AND SYRACUSE, TOUGHEST EVALUATION SYSTEMS IN STATE -- AND THE STUDENT SURVEY FACTOR
The Regents imposed system is one of the toughest in New York State. Again, evaluation systems across the state have side agreements that are more sensitive towards the myriad factors impacting on educational performance. Alone among the hundreds of New York state municipalities only New York City and Syracuse are the only systems that will use student surveys. As one teacher that posted at the Movement of Rank and File Educators UFT caucus Facebook page, "'The new system also includes a pilot of student surveys.' Fantastic. This encourages grade-inflation and a lack of discipline in the classroom." What is behind the Regents' drive for this stipulation? Will the UFT be intellectually honest about how mistaken it was to include student surveys? (Remember, all the Democratic candidates for New York City mayor will lift the cellphone ban.)

The student survey element is a curve-ball that has only recently come up under public discussion, which previously has focused on VAM/high-stakes tests and qualitative (Danielson Frameworks) evaluations. Back in February Gotham said such surveys were unlikely. UFT Secretary Michael Mendel, to his credit, has been on record criticizing student surveys. The Gotham article quoted him:

UFT Secretary Michael Mendel said the union’s position is that it is inappropriate to ask students to make high-stakes decisions about their teachers, because it puts the students under pressure and also could encourage teachers to put student approval ahead of student learning.
“Could you imagine if you were a teacher and you were ineffective by a point or two because you were rated ineffective by the children?” Mendel asked.

Jersey Jazzman, with tongue in cheek, shows how farcical it will look when youths will write evaluations of teachers.
But my favorite is when he shows what a student wrote in response to Merryl Tisch's saying that a Long Island student that threw up during the state tests was healthy. See this post for the full story on Tisch's non-chalance during this episode. (Remember, she's the major campaign aide to Bill Thompson, the NYC mayoral candidate that the UFT is grooming to endorse on June 19.)

ACTION MULGREW SHOULD TAKE -- GO TO COURT -- CUT THE UFT-CUOMO PURSE-STRINGS
Of course, this would reverse numerous pro Regents-imposed evaluation statements by Mulgrew and long-standing UFT policy of blind obeisance to whomever's in power or viewed as costing to power (e.g., Thompson), especially if they are a Democrat, but this is what Mulgrew and the UFT should do: *Challenge this evaluation system in court. No to evasion of collective bargaining.
[UPDATE: ICEUFT Blog reports that there are legal grounds for the UFT to appeal this:

THE PARTIES MAY MAKE AN APPLICATION TO THE NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT TO VACATE OR MODIFY THE DETERMINATION OF THE COMMISSIONER PURSUANT TO SECTION SEVENTY-FIVE HUNDRED ELEVEN OF THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW AND RULES. THE COURT'S REVIEW SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE GROUNDS SET FORTH IN SUCH SECTION.
The UFT would have to argue that King exceeded his constitutional authority, which would be a tough standard to meet but otherwise expect a new universe when we return in the fall.

*While Cuomo did not write this evaluation system, he was the one that decided that the evaluation system would be deferred to the Regents. On what legal authority did he take it upon him self to do this? True, King wrote this, with the Regents, but Cuomo is 100% aligned with King. It is time for teachers to pull their support for him.

A century ago, labor movement pioneer Samuel Gompers advocated that unions should reward their friends and punish their enemies. The UFT wants us to support Andrew Cuomo? He has the greatest contempt for New York City teachers in particular. No Committee on Political Education (COPE) dollars to education deformer in chief governor Cuomo!

UPDATE: One blogpost commenter's statement on how the struggle needs to reach beyond the big cities, and reach to the parents:

I was hoping that the URBAN teachers were not going to have to fight this battle alone. I was hoping that when the silent majority of SUBURBAN teachers realized that the APPR was going to unfairly affect their jobs, as well as ours,
we would then achieve some solidarity and strength in numbers. THEN it would be "game on". Two of our local suburban districts, admins and board members, have publicly and in writing complained about testing and tying the tests to evaluation of teachers. THOSE are the districts where the parents are also complaining about the
effect of the insane testing on their students. They GET IT. And as soon as they would begin to see their beloved teachers mysteriously disappearing from the profession due to high stakes test data, they would call a halt to the Commissioner Boy's silly games.
But no. Once again, the urban teachers will have to fight this battle and suffer the legal consequences. Don't forget, we will have a new Board made up to teacher bashers and haters. They, and Albany are hoping (salivating, actually) that Buffalo will strike, so they can swoop in and waterboard us. Maybe make us sit in a hot summer school cafeteria and listen to Bob Bennett and his Commissioner Puppet do their ventiloquist act via skype? (Because we all know that the Little Commissar, er Commissioner, is afraid to travel to Buffalo without his Daddy Bob.)
Urban parents have had their leadership, DPCC, hijacked by Buffalo REform Ed and the like. The leader of Buffalo ReformEd, James Sampson, will possibly be on our School Board. The Chameleons Polowitz and Friedman are highlighted in is fundraiser photos on his facebook page. Here is a blurb form one of Sampson's supporters:
"We will never change public schools from a gulag of sub par education until we make the purpose of public schools education rather than a secure jobs program for people not qualified to teach."
We urban teachers now need strength and solidarity. We need to ally with our other urban districts so as to not make this just about BUFFALO. We need to make this a STATE issue. We need allies and support. We need informed teachers.
I'll end now. In the eyes of our new Board members, I am just another Sub Par Gulag worker who is not qualified to teach.

Buffalo Teachers Fed.'s Evaluations Suit - MOU Too Embarrassing for Mulgrew to Let NYC Teachers See

BUFFALO TEACHERS FEDERATION SUIT OVER PUNITIVE EVALUATIONS - CONTRAST TO UFT ENDORSEMENT OF PUNITIVE SYSTEM - EMBARRASSING TO MULGREW WHO'S IGNORED ALBANY RALLY
Just two days from now, New York City teachers probably will have a New York State-imposed evaluation system. But another red-letter day looms: the Buffalo Teachers Federation (BTF) by all indications plans to file a notice of claim June 1 for a lawsuit to fight their evaluation system.
This is a hugely significant suit, as the BTF is aggressively fighting a flawed evaluation system, over termination use of evaluations. Whereas, the New York City teachers union, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), has promoted evaluation plans which carry terminations. Michael Mulgrew, the latter union's president casts a value-added plus Danielson Framework evaluation structure --plus a termination tie-in-- as a fair reform. (The latter union's givebacks in the last three years amount to a de facto contract.)
At the heart of the Buffalo Teacher Federation's fight are evaluations and the punitive use of them, toward 3020a terminations of teachers. The union did not trust the application of the evaluations. It secured a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Buffalo School District, pledging that they would not be used in a punitive manner to render negative evaluations. The New York State Education Department, State Education Commissioner John King, and Governor Andrew Cuomo are claiming that the agreement is illegal. The BTF is standing by their guns. State officials claim that the agreement was not submitted for approval as part of the districts' official teacher-evaluation procedure, according to Buffalo News reporter Sandra Tan. Buffalo's evaluation fight has gained national attention at the Education Week blog. In a parallel case of Los Angeles, Diane Ravitch in her blog last October cited the United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA) as a "Hero of Public Education," recognizing that value added modeling of teachers is "inaccurate, invalid and unstable." In similar fashion as the BTF would do this spring, the UTLA refused to sign off on the district's request for Race to the Top funds because doing so would subject members to value-added assessment.
"WE'RE GOING TO FIGHT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T USE OUR KIDS AS PAWNS IN ORDER FOR US TO GET THIS MONEY" --BTF president Philip Rumore
Excerpts from Sandra Tan's "BTF going to court to enforce teacher-evaluation agreement" in "The Buffalo News," May 9, 2013:

The BTF Executive Committee unanimously approved the resolution to take legal action against the district by June 1 and file additional grievances for “non-adherence” to a pact the district made with the union in January. The agreement stated that the district would not use two years of teacher evaluations as grounds for termination.
“We will leave no stone unturned to make sure these evaluations, which everybody now realizes were flawed, aren’t being held against our teachers,” said BTF President Philip Rumore.
. . . .
Legal action by the teachers union could threaten the status of more than $30 million in state aid this year, in addition to more than $10 million in various other government funding this year and tens of millions in future years.
Rumore said the BTF will work with the New York State United Teachers union to legally challenge any effort by the state to withhold funds from the Buffalo Public Schools.
“We’re going to fight to make sure that they don’t use our kids as pawns in order for us to get this money,” he said.
Finally, the BTF may still consider rescinding, by vote of all Buffalo teachers, its approval of the teacher evaluations for the last two school years.

CARROT AND STICK or SHADES OF DANIELSON THINGS TO COME?
The use of the evaluations plan has already confirmed Buffalo teachers' suspicions, with virtually blanket ineffective ratings in certain schools.

In 2011-12, Buffalo was one of a handful of districts across the state receiving federal school-improvement grants.
To qualify for the money, the district had to have a state-approved teacher-evaluation plan in place at the six schools receiving the grants: Martin Luther King Jr. Multicultural Institute; International School 45; and Bennett, Riverside, South Park and Burgard high schools.
That means the 400 or so teachers at those six schools were evaluated last year. They got their evaluations about two months ago, and many reportedly were rated “ineffective.”
. . . .
Much of the resolution highlights what the union considers to be significant flaws in the teacher-evaluation formula.
In one Buffalo school, it states, 11 teachers were rated “effective” on all 22 classroom indicators but still wound up with a composite score of “ineffective.”
In other cases, where two teachers worked with the same set of students, one received 20 evaluation points, while the other teacher received zero.

BTF RESOLUTION STRONGLY ASSERTS THAT NO NYS DISTRICT WOULD CONCEDE TO UNTESTED EVALUATION SYSTEM WITH PUNISHMENT CONNECTION; BUT MULGREW AND UFT DID
“Buffalo teachers and teachers across New York State would not have entered into agreements utilizing untested, untried evaluation systems without assurances that due to its untested procedures, it would not be used against them,” the BTF executive committee statement said.
For months now, off the major media grid, people have written and talked about a seven percent quota of teachers that the UFT has agreed will be lined up for unsatisfactory "U" ratings in end of year evaluations by the New York City Department of Education, setting them in line for 3020a hearings to be stripped of their state teaching license.
NYC Educator has eloquently written earlier this week on this issue, in "Lucky 7." (NYC Educator has written an equally important, informative piece on how easily VAM evaluations have been used to terminate teachers or deny them tenure.) This is concession, along with the NYC DoE-UFT agreement on another quota, 13 percent, the figure for the cases that the UFT will agree take to an independent arbitrator. These concessions stand in bold contrast to the BTF which secured an MOU precisely against the use of evaluations for terminations. Note further the qualifier in Tan's article --the state does not require termination hearings for two successive ineffective ratings: "The state law allows districts – but does not explicitly require them – to pursue termination for any teacher who gets rated “ineffective” two years in a row. It also states that schools “shall” use the evaluations in employment decisions, including terminations." [Emphasis mine.]
The UFT already has conceded this point.

WHILE THE BTF RESISTED, THE UFT WENT ALONG WITH ALL THE KEY POINTS
As is apparent from reportage going back over a year, the BTF has had friction over this issue for a while. This suit is the culmination. On the other hand, the UFT, under Mulgrew's leadership, has always went along, not grudgingly, but enthusiastically, along with the Danielson Frameworks, along with value-added modeling based on student high-stakes test scores. Never in Mulgrew's statements about Bloomberg or the city did you ever hear Mulgrew make a principled statement against VAM, test-based evaluations. It is a big mistake when people swoon over his sneers against NYC mayor Bloomberg. Judge Mulgrew by his actions, collaborating with the reformers on the key points.

IMPLICIT SILENCES IN MULGREW'S LETTER ON IMPENDING EVALUATIONS
Note Mulgrew's letter (reprinted at the end of this post) on the impending Cuomo/King-imposed evaluation scheme. Never in his statement does he say anything re repeat ineffective/unsatisfactory ratings and the termination tie-in. He has caved in on yet another critical point.

TOO EMBARRASSING TO ACTUALLY FIGHT CUOMO?
If Mulgrew confronts Cuomo, he risks the contradiction of his UFT --which supports Cuomo and other Democrats through Committee on Political Education (COPE) contributions-- confronting allied Democrats. The Insurgent Teacher blog, in "Buffalo school officials and BTF going back to court," (May 11, 2013) argues that Cuomo is too beholden to wealthy benefactors. The IT blog points out:

Sadly, the equity firms, banks, and hedge fund investors were the largest donors to politicians including Gov. Andrew Cuomo who sought out Democrats for Education Reform for support and donations. In return these politicians including the NYS Board of Regents coalesced to revamp education law and to install state education commissioners sympathetic to their reform agenda.
And it was to weaken the unions especially teachers and rid the system of tenure by copying a system of employee evaluations developed in the private sector, where the vast majority are at-will employees.

TOO EMBARRASSING AND RISKY TO PUT RANK AND FILE UFT MEMBERS NEAR BTF MEMBERS JUNE 8?

The May NSYUT newspaper, as this blog noted two weeks ago, has struck a far more critical tone re the high-stakes testing mania and how it is affecting our profession; and the same paper drummed up support for attending a June 8 rally at Albany's Empire State Plaza, near the legislature and the NYSED building. (See these links, here and here, for social media connections.) Given the critical (lest we say militant) stances that the BTF is taking --in contrast to the UFT's collaboration (forget about capitulation)-- Mulgrew and the UFT would definitely not want rank and file UFT members anywhere near their Buffalo sisters and brothers. People might start asking questions about evaluation system, their unions' stance, Merryl Tisch's role in evaluations, and too much more. Too uncomfortable as the UFT grooms Tisch-supported Bill Thompson for mayor, and here.
# # #
What Mulgrew has to say, as his friend, Andrew Cuomo's evaluation imposition looms [Again, note his skirting of the termination tie-in question, the whole issue at stake in the BTF's lawsuit]:

Dear colleagues,
Late on Saturday, June 1, State Education Commissioner John King is expected to release an evaluation plan for K-12 teachers in New York City. It will be done through a binding arbitration process and take effect in September.
The mayor and the DOE will no doubt try to spin Commissioner King’s decision to their advantage. The UFT staff will be working through Sunday to get accurate information about the new system out to you by Monday morning in a form that is both clear and concise.
The process to create a new evaluation system has been long and contentious. The final decision came to rest with the commissioner because the city Department of Education proved incapable of negotiating in good faith with us.
The UFT and the DOE each submitted lengthy proposals to the State Education Department on May 8. Arbitration hearings are taking place in Albany today and tomorrow. Commissioner King will consider the proposals and decide on the final evaluation system on June 1.
We have the opportunity to use our collective-bargaining rights to modify aspects of the evaluation plan during future contract negotiations. Practically speaking, since we are in fact-finding now, if any changes were negotiated, they would not take effect until the 2014-15 school year.
Because the commissioner’s plan must be in accordance with the 2010 state law on teacher evaluation that this union supported and helped shape, we expect it to be fair, professional and focused on teacher development to the benefit of our students. The new evaluation system as set out in state law is designed first and foremost to help teachers improve their skills throughout their careers. Teachers who are struggling will get support tailored to their individual needs.
We have our work cut out for us in September, given this DOE’s terrible track record of translating policy to practice compounded with the fact that they will probably be gone come Jan. 1. We have started working on a professional development plan and we will use our rights to make sure that the new system is implemented fairly. It is a big help that we already have an appeals process for New York City teachers nailed down that will give our members stronger due process rights than they have ever had. I hope this email clarifies where we are and what we can expect. Working together, we will make this transition. You can count on your union to continue to fight to get you the support you deserve. Thank you for all that you do for our city’s schoolchildren.
Sincerely,
Michael Mulgrew

POSTSCRIPT: As Ravitch said in the above-cited post, the UTLA is a hero union for its stance on value-added modeling.

Because it has remained true to principle, because it insists on evidence-based evaluation, because it insists on honest accounting for the public’s dollars, UTLA is a hero of public education and joins the honor roll.

The Buffalo Teachers Federation is taking a parallel stance in refusing to allow teacher evaluations be used in teacher terminations. The UFT should act on principle and follow these other big city unions' leads.

Buff. Teachers Fed. Motion Slams APPR Toxic Stew of SLOs, LMAs, Overwork

President Barack Obama and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo set forth the highly questionable Race to the Top which distorts the teaching craft, distorts evaluation of the teaching craft, drives high stakes testing and spurs the growth of charter schools.

Refreshingly, one New York State big city, Buffalo, has a teachers union and president that have exercised critical thinking and have stood up to the madness that has strong-armed unions into rescinding their dignity and their time. The deskilling evaluative protocols appeared flawed early on. The BTF has asked questions and challenged. Finally, this month, they are making a more forward action to break from the chains of APPR mandates. The BTF is calling this action their "APPR offensive."

The union president, Philip Rumore, is recognizing ill-minded features that more New York State teacher unions should reject, and his recognition of these serious flaws should be emulated by other NYS teacher unions. This statement inherently is challenging the state-mandated legislated dictates that stem from Race to the Top compliance. (The 22 classroom performance in the classroom evaluation could well pertain to the Danielson Frameworks indicators. The DF is now being widely adopted across the United States.)
(APPR means "Annual Professional Performance Review;" SLO stands for "Student Learning Objectives;" LMA stands for "Local Measure of Achievement.")
We are watching to see how this case progresses.

The APPR resolution, as publicized, May 10, 2013

WHEREAS: As a result of an untested, untried evaluation system (APPR), Buffalo teachers, as well as teachers across New York State, received APPR composite ratings that not only put teachers’ job security in jeopardy but reflected negatively on teachers’ true performance and,

WHEREAS: In one Buffalo school, for example, as in many similar cases across New York State, eleven (11) teachers were rated as “Effective” on all twenty-two (22) “indicators” on their classroom evaluation; however, their overall “composite score” was “Ineffective”, and one teacher was rated “Effective” on twenty (20) of the twenty two (22) “indicators” and “Highly Effective” on the two (2) remaining classroom observation indicators but received an “Ineffective” rating. In some cases, the State forwarded zero (0) points out of twenty (20) for teachers where there were two (2) teachers working with the same students so that only one received the twenty (20) points and,

WHEREAS: Buffalo teachers and the school district, as with many school districts across New York State, in anticipation of the probability of such invalid results from the new, untested and untried evaluation system (APPR), entered into agreements (MOUs) that protected teachers from the inappropriate negative consequences of said APPRs and,

WHEREAS: Buffalo teachers and teachers across New York State would not have entered into agreements utilizing untested, untried evaluation systems without assurances that due to its untested procedures, it would not be used against them and,

WHEREAS: there has been
· the late approval of and lack of guidance on contradictory positions taken by NYSED in relation to the APPR,
· lack of sufficient training by the District on the APPR process,
· impossible timelines, e.g. teachers “trained” in May for submissions due at the end of May, “training” in May on Artifacts due at the end of May,
· confusing and contradictory statements by District administrators,
· insufficient time provided to complete APPRs, SLOs and LMAs during the work day,
· little or no training on SLOs, LMAs and Artifacts,
· pre-tests given in October, November, etc., instead of September,
· post-tests having no correlation with pre-tests,
· some post-tests given after the completion of first semester courses,
· teachers being evaluated, and observed without an agreement between BTF and District, on what they will be evaluated,
· requiring the use of PGS without training,
· expecting teachers (some not affected by 3012-c) to turnkey train other teachers in their buildings.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the BTF, in concert with NYSUT/AFT/NEA will:
· Pursue legal action to ensure that as per our signed MOU, no teacher is adversely impacted by their 2011-2012 or 2012-2013 APPRs or any process or procedure associated with it, specifically including but not limited to, the service of a notice of claim as necessary for the commencement of legal action under New York State Education Law as soon as feasible but in any event, no later than June 1, 2013 and, additionally, the filing of grievance(s) pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, in addition, if necessary to the following grievances already filed relating to:
o non-adherence to January 15, 2013 MOU,
o non-validated and untimely pre and post tests – also no training during the work day for teachers on them,
o inaccurate APPR scores (2011-2012) based upon flawed system – administrators inadequately trained,
o SLOs/LMAs/Artifacts – little or no timely training, insufficient and untimely data, insufficient and inappropriate timing for completion, etc.,
o contradictory APPR directions to teachers,
o insufficient time during the workday to complete the tasks that the District is demanding of teachers,
o teachers are being evaluated without BTF, District and Professional Council Agreement.
· Pursue all legal actions to prevent the loss of funding resulting from the APPR process and/or procedures,
· If necessary, the BTF in consultation with NYSUT/AFT/NEA will consider rescinding, by vote of all Buffalo teachers, its approval of the 2011-2012, 2012-2013 APPRs, and
· Take any and all other actions to achieve the above objectives.

RECOMMENDED BY: Philip Rumore, President, BTF
MOVED: Edith LeWin, Vice President, BTF
SECOND: Barbara Bielecki, Treasurer, BTF

UPDATED: Karen Lewis Responds to Attack on Schools With Political Mobilization; and the UFT is Endorsing Thompson?

UPDATED: Surprise, Surprise: Randy Mastro and Al D'Amato, top Thompson campaign contribution bundlers

At the 18:12 minute point in the Chicago Teachers Union video on researchers' work and teacher testimonials on a closing school --autopsy of an executed school, Karen Lewis, CTU president, moves onto the ball onto the sphere of political action: "CTU releases school closings study, ramps up political activities", April 16, 2013.
More recently, she noted that in the 2011 mayoral election by which Rahm Emanuel became elected to mayor's office, thereby enabling him to control the school board, Emanuel was elected with only 22 percent of the eligible voters ("CTU Kicks Off Effort To 'Change The Political Landscape," video, May 23).

“Brothers and sisters, mayoral control is a disaster,” said Karen Lewis, president of the CTU. “We must change the political landscape in Chicago.”

She then went on to say that the Union will start getting involved in politics, in registering voters and getting involved in political education including recruiting real grassroots candidates for elective office, in Chicago and in the Illinois state legislature in Springfield. The media have read in a more pointed fashion, with several headlines like this, "CTU hosts voter registration drive, aims to have Mayor Emanuel ousted in 2015 over school closings," and "The 2015 Mayoral Campaign Begins Tonight: CTU trains registrars in effort to unseat Mayor Rahm Emanuel."
Given the CORE-lead CTU of the last three years, we can anticipate that CTU political action will be on CTU terms, on teacher advocacy, that keeps in mind teachers' interests and stances.

# # #

THE STUDY IN CONTRASTS: UFT, JOINING IN THE POWER GLOVE WITH "EDUCATION REFORMERS"
Lewis' and the CTU's stance will stand in contrast to the dominant faction of the United Federation of Teachers, which at the May 22 delegate assembly, had reps from various boroughs ringing the bells for former comptroller and School Board President Bill Thompson.
The choice is problematic on so many levels. He is partially himself to the education reformers' agenda, committing himself to continue parts of the Bloomberg legacy, such as charter school co-locations. And the central role of New York State Regent Merryl Tisch in his campaign is disturbing. Diane Ravitch has called Tisch the doyenne of high-stakes testing. Is it any wonder that so many Teachers College (Columbia University) students protested her award this month?
Note that the Gotham Schools site reported May 15 that Thompson with his education platform is seeking to not merely continue some Bloomberg initiatives, such as lengthening the school day, but expanding other ones:

Thompson would expand, not end, many of Bloomberg’s school policies.
He said he would replicate some of the small schools that Bloomberg has opened, continue the city’s nascent efforts to link high schools with industry partners, and revise — not abandon — the Department of Education’s method of evaluating schools.

The article continues:

But a number of items on Thompson’s platform would be extensions of Bloomberg’s policies. He said he would replicate schools such as Pathways in Technology High School and the Academy of Software Engineering that give New York City students direct paths to jobs.

Some of Thompson’s proposals could even run afoul of the union, depending on how they are implemented. He said he would “hold teachers accountable for what happens in their schools and classrooms” in part by using test scores, as is required under state law, and would launch a citywide initiative for longer school hours and school years. He said he would also work to pay “our most effective teachers” more to teach in high-need schools.

Thompson did not say how he would define effectiveness, taking a pass on a crucial issue that the next mayor will have to resolve. He also did not explain how he would pay for his costly proposals, other than by cutting “the excessive amounts of hundreds of millions of dollars” that the Department of Education has awarded in contracts to private vendors. (Public Advocate Bill de Blasio has so far been the only candidate to say he would raise taxes to support schools.)

Note that Thompson dodges the charter school issue:

And Thompson did not mention the divisive issue of charter schools at all, except to say that he would hold them to the same standards as district schools. (Because the schools are publicly funded but privately managed and authorized by state entities, the mayor has little sway over city charter schools’ operation.)

Endorsing Bill Thompson for mayor? No, our union should instead be educating its members on the differences between the candidates. The UFT should be warning against voting for Thompson.
(For on overview of the candidates, see Dana Rubinstein of Capital New York's "How different are the mayoral candidates from Bloomberg on education, actually?"
UPDATES - WEINER POSITION - QUINN: THOMPSON A MOSAIC OF THE BLOOMBERG PROGRAM:
Anthony Weiner, former Queens Congressman and new entrant to the mayor's race, has staked himself to the right, asserting that city employees need to pay more of their health insurance costs. Christine Quinn, city council president, will drop out of tomorrow's education debate hosted by New Yorkers for Great Public Schools. Weiner will participate in the debate.
If Merryl Tisch's support for Thompson is not reason alone to give teachers pause enough for supporting Thompson (with money and as a top campaign advisor), there is the news that former Senator Alphonse D'Amato (Republican and stalwart ally of president Ronald Reagan) is financially supporting Thompson as well. This last point produced the ironic situation whereby front-runner Christine Quinn makes the reasonable critique in the race --ironic, as she is, with good reason, universally seen as the Bloomberg fourth-term candidate. As the New York Times reports:

“The last thing Democrats are looking for in a mayor of New York is someone who is ‘proud’ to have Al D’Amato’s support,” the e-mail said, citing a statement Mr. Thompson made to The New York Times.

Note the new New York Times interactive chart on campaign contributions to the mayoral candidates. Apparently, Randy Mastro (former Rudy Giuliani deputy mayor) and Al D'Amato are the number one and two campaign bundlers for the Thompson campaign. The site also links to a map with campaign contributions. The top fund-raiser in Manhattan, particularly in the ultra-wealthy Upper East Side district: Christine Quinn.
A Quinn campaign spokesperson continued the attack on Thompson, on points progressive teacher unionists should concur with:

On Wednesday, her campaign spokesman also belittled Mr. Thompson’s proposals on education, calling them “a mosaic of things that Christine C. Quinn has already proposed or done.”

It is important for the UFT to make a principled stand. With Weiner's entry into the race the anti-Quinn vote is further divided, potentially giving the Quinn a boost after her recent fall in the polls. Going with Thompson --simply to get a seat at the table with an insider power man-- is wrong-minded and incredibly short-sighted.

Chicago Closes 50 Schools in 1 Minute; TFA Will Pick Up the Pieces

[A bright, inspiring figure in the sad events of the school closings and popular reaction last week is the 9 year old student, Asean Johnson, speaking in defense of his school --watch this video. A great speech from a very well-spoken young man; a leader today and likely in the future. Some adults hosting him on network TV need to get over getting the giggles when a 9 year old speaks as astutely as a 29 year old.]

The sad, sad story in Chicago yesterday. Across America, we mourn for Chicago and what the CPS is doing to its schools.

The link to Karen Lewis, Chicago Teachers Union president's statement on the occasion of the school closings.

From democraticunderground, May 23, 2013:
"In less time than it takes to boil an egg" Chicago closes 50 schools.
From the Chicago Sun-Times (May 22):

CPS makes history, closing scores of schools in less time than it takes to boil an egg

History was made in Chicago Wednesday in about 90 seconds, but most of the folks who witnessed firsthand the death of a record 50 Chicago Public Schools didn’t even realize it.

Rather than list the names of the doomed elementary schools, the Board of Education took a single group vote on most of the closings that will affect some 27,000 children. The board secretary read out the numbers assigned to each resolution and asked for the vote.

But onlookers didn’t even get that, as the board president resorted to parliamentary maneuver to speed the process along.

“Madam Secretary, if there are no objections from my fellow board members, please apply the last favorable roll call,” Board President David Vitale said, referring to the previous vote of six ayes and 0 nays. And with that, the bulk of the history — 49 of the 50 schools closed — was made in a unanimous sweep.

Tone deaf to the audience:
(From Mike Klonsky's Small Talk blog:)
SCHOOL CLOSING QUOTABLES

Columnist Mark Brown

In the end, the board was so tone deaf to its audience that on the crucial vote that closed most of the schools, they used the parliamentary maneuver of adopting the previous favorable roll call — instead of taking the extra 30 seconds to each say “yes” once more. The average person in attendance didn’t even know the closings had been approved until it was over. -- "CPS closings vote shows it’s time for an elected school board"

Sports writer Dave Zirin

It all starts with the person who seems committed to win the current spirited competition as the most loathsome person in American political life: Mayor Rahm Emanuel. The same Mayor overseeing the closing of fifty-four schools and six community mental health clinics under the justification of a “budgetary crisis” has announced that the city will be handing over more than $100 million to DePaul University for a new basketball arena. -- The Nation

= = = = = = = = = = =
And this post on who gains from the losses during the school closures:

TFA to expand in Chicago areas where many schools were closed, quality teachers laid off.

It's hard to imagine that a record number of school closings in Chicago is so obviously opening the way for Teach for America to take over those areas.

From Katie Osgood at The Chalk Face blog:

Teach for America Has Gone Too Far

But TFA’s recent actions have sent me over the edge. Last night, on twitter, I was appalled to watch tweets fly by about a very fancy, very expensive fundraising dinner taking place in Chicago’s swanky Drake Hotel. As a union-supporter, I am used to the dirty old union halls, folding chairs, sometimes church basements, and maybe a bag of Cheetos for eats, if you’re lucky. I can barely imagine the sort of people who pay $10,000 for a table. Ok, I CAN imagine. They are the same people we must battle everyday in the EdReform Wars.

....Guess which neighborhoods TFA is targeting for their expansion? The very same communities being traumatized by the largest single number of school closings in the history of America. TFA is poised to profit dramatically from the misfortune of hundreds of teachers and thousands of students.

And how TFA has rationalized this expansion to themselves, or anyone else, is beyond me. CPS has told schools they must be closed due to “underutilization” (A suspect claim at best). They say Chicago has too few kids and too many schools, including too many teachers/staff. Due to a supposed budget shortfall of $1 billion dollars (also HIGHLY suspect), CPS says schools must be consolidated. Let me say that again, CPS is telling us that we have essentially too many teachers and buildings in the system.

And TFA wants to go into those communities after mass layoffs–where many quality veteran teachers will be displaced and many may not be rehired, teachers who fought side-by-side with the students and parents of the schools, teachers loved by the community–and offer them uncertified, poorly-trained novices many of whom have never even been to the Midwest, much less know the varied individual neighborhoods of Chicago. It’s like TFA is kicking these communities while they are down. “I know your school was just robbed from you, despite your loud, relentless, justified protest, but here are some uncertified, severely undertrained non-educators who won’t stick around long. We at TFA don’t think your kids deserve properly trained teachers dedicated long-term to your community any more than you deserve the choice of democratic neighborhood schools.”

That is truly insulting to the career teachers who are losing their jobs, to the parents and students who are losing their community schools.

TFA needs to stop thinking their group is superior to experienced teachers. Some Democratic leaders I know need to speak out about the way they are moving into communities when schools are closed.

From 2012 another condescending move by TFA toward public school teachers.

While the budget picture looks no more pleasant than it has in past years, Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources Jacqueline Ellis said the A.J. Fletcher Foundation, a Raleigh-based nonprofit, has offered to cover the $3,000-per-teacher placement fee that TFA would have charged the district for the 15 teachers.

The positions that TFA teachers would fill are among 21 made available by retirements, resignations and transfers.

.."The 15 teachers primarily would be placed in math, science and exceptional children's classes -- all of which can be difficult to fill, especially in a low-performing school like Neal. TFA would also like to offer training to traditionally trained teachers who are already at the school.

They wanted to "train" veteran teachers to think that all kids can succeed. The hubris is overwhelming.

A big piece of Neal's program would be the training for veteran teachers - it's all about changing the mind-set of teachers to believe that every student can succeed, Lakis said. He said TFA is still working out the framework for the training program..."