House Democrats have attached a provision to a war financing bill that would spend $10 billion to help school districts avoid teacher layoffs, paying for it, in part, with cuts to Education Department programs previously financed by last year’s stimulus bill. One program facing trims would be Race to the Top, the competition that rewards states promising to create more charter schools and carry out other initiatives. The department has been planning to give $3.4 billion to winners this year, but the jobs provision would reduce that to $2.9 billion.
So after changing state law and tying teacher evaluations to test scores, raising the charter cap and doing all the other "reforms" the administration and Bill Gates wanted (including spending millions on "data systems" to track test scores), NY State may actually get less money than anticipated.
That's if NY State actually gets any money at all.
Remember, if Arne and Obama decide no, then it's no.
Gee, what a great deal.
This is why the UFT and the NYSUT needed to combat all the clamor over RttT by pointing out that the money was a one time thing, that it could not be used to stem layoffs, and that the "reforms" needed to win the grant competition could actually cost more than the grant award.
But the UFT and the NYSUT didn't do that.
Instead they let Obama and Duncan and the eduwankers and hedge fund managers funding all the ads on NY1 frame the debate.
Now it looks like states, including NY, could get less money than they thought anyway.
Does that mean teachers get evaluated a little less by test scores?
In regards to NYC, for future contracts, the UFT should include stipulations that the DOE has to abide by or said contracts can be deemed "null and void". Something has to be done to put a stop to the "rules changes" and "skirting the law" instances, the DOE is famous for. Sooner or later, the UFT has to fight for the playing field to be leveled. With all our dues money, aren't our lawyers smart enough to include this?
ReplyDeletePogue,
ReplyDeleteYou're assuming the UFT is ont the side of the membership.
Having watched both Randi and the bald-headed pimp in charge now, I have come to see that the UFT works for Bloomberg/Klein/Obama/Duncan/Gates/Broad et al. and just pays lip service to teacher protections, rights, contractual agreements, etc.
Cynical, I know, but I can see no other rationale for why they do what they do - selling the membership out at every chance they get when a concerted pushback (backed by research, mind you) against charters, data-driven education, merit pay and teacher evals tied to student scores could be mounted and even effective.
It's the right assumption to make, of course - the UFT SHOULD be working for its membership. But instead they are working for management
Imagine if NYS doesn't even get the $$ award for raising the charter cap AND the assessment cave . . . ? That totally negates the bald headed pimp's "official" excuse for caving in on these crucial teacher fronts-"that our Washington people report this is inevitable".
ReplyDeleteIf it's inevitable, then stall until it becomes "inevitable" in reality, not projection.
Or get something for the sacrifice.
He could have at least stalled this for a year , buying precious time.
Now we have so much less than before the bald headed pimp walked through the door.
"Our Washington people report this is inevitable."
ReplyDeletePresumably, "our Washington people" means Randi Weingarten, not the most honest or objective of observers. What she's really saying is that the plutocrats she spends her time toadying up to want corporate ed defom to be seen as inevitable.
Additionally, the statement can bee seen as a bald-faced deception by anyone with minimal political literacy. In the run-up to the mid-term elections, Obama needs the teacher unions a lot more than we need him. The fact is that the unions have, or should have, the ability to tell Obama that without total changes in RttT, then our people will stay home in November.
A real union, rather than the "collaborators" our dues money pays for, would do that.
Exactly Michael. I don't hear our "leader" threatening the Dem. party in any way, rallying his troops to use their collective vote as a weapon and/or leverage.
ReplyDeleteInstead, there is mere silence . . . the sounds of silence.
Just another bald-faced example that this union leadership is dead in the water showing no fight whatsoever for those who need it right now.