As I posted yesterday, NYC public school teachers were supposed to receive their APPR evaluation ratings sometime between 4:00 PM and 12:00 AM yesterday.
The NYCDOE sent my email notice out at 7:07 PM last night.
I didn't check for it until this morning.
To be honest, I have contempt for this system, both the observation components and the test-based accountability components.
My sense is, the observations are often rigged for pre-determined outcomes - teachers an administration wants to get rid of receive "developing" and "ineffective" on much of their Danielson observations while teachers an administration likes receive "effective" or highly effective" on much of their Danielson observations.
Yes, it's true that administrators have to gin up some evidence for the "ineffectives" and "developings" that they hand out to teachers during Danielson observations, but that hasn't stopped them from doing it.
Governor Cuomo called this APPR system "objective" a few years ago during the LIFO battle with Bloomberg, but the truth is, there's nothing objective about it - it just takes a little longer, has more moving parts, requires administrators document a few more things before handing out the "ineffective" and "devloping" ratings on the observation component.
As for the test-based accountability components, until I see the detailed information we're supposed to get in a few weeks from the state, all I have is a number the SED spit out that is supposed to represent how much "value" I added to my students' test scores.
What do the test-based accountability numbers really mean?
Who knows - trust that John King and his merry men and women in reform got the numbers right - at least until you get more detailed information about student scores and can check them for yourself.
Overall, this was a lot of b.s. work that did nothing to make me into a better teacher but sure did add hours and hours to my work year load by forcing me to document so many different parts of my job.
Ultimately that is what APPR teacher evaluations are about - forcing compliance on teaching methods by giving administrators the Danielson rubric to use as a bludgeon fo those who do not comply with administration decree, forcing teachers to teach to the test (or worry that their state or local test VAM's will come up low), and giving the state and the local district more control over teachers and the teaching profession.
One final thought - this system, so easily rigged either at the school level or at SED, can easily be shifted into bludgeoning more teachers as years go on.
Most teachers around the state last year were either effective or highly effective in their APPR ratings.
But with a little shift of the VAM at SED, that can easily be changed.
In fact, SED is already talking about pushing districts to get rid of the local test component and going with the state tests for the entire 40% of the test-based accountability component.
So be careful in how you think about this APPR system.
Just because it went okay for you the first time around doesn't mean John King, Merryl Tisch and their merry men and women in reform in Albany won't decide to rig it for different outcomes next time around.
Perdido 03
Showing posts with label LIFO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LIFO. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Pro-Reform Propaganda Juggernaut And More Court Cases To Follow California Teacher Tenure Ruling
Get ready for millions of dollars in propaganda in the wake of a judge ruling teacher tenure laws in California unconstitutional:
A propaganda juggernaut, paid for by the criminals on Wall Street and in corporate America, to make sure the kids have untenured teachers with no job protections who can be fired at a moment's notice.
And after that, dozens more court cases, also paid for by the criminals on Wall Street and in corporate America, to make sure the kids have untenured teachers with no job protections who can be fired at a moment's notice.
And it's part of the civil rights movement, don'tcha know!
Because it is every child's basic civil right to have teachers with the same job protections as Walmart associates.
It would be great if we had a union leadership ready to fight what is now amounting to a battle to the death for the teaching profession.
But alas, we don't - they're still issuing boiler plate jive that is going to do little to win the public debate or the legal challenges.
I guess they think they'll still be able to collect dues even after teacher tenure laws are dismantled all over the country.
But after that happens, what's the point of having the unions around?
A court ruling on Tuesday striking down job protections for teachers in California deals a sharp blow to unions — and will likely fuel political movements across the nation to eliminate teacher tenure.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf M. Treu found five California laws governing the hiring and firing of teachers unconstitutional.
...
Reformers plan to take the fight to other states, hoping the strong language of the ruling will prompt Democrats elsewhere to reconsider ties to teachers unions. They’re considering similar lawsuits in Connecticut, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and elsewhere. And they plan a relentless public relations campaign, backed by millions of dollars from reform-minded philanthropists, to bring moms, dads and voters of both parties to their side.
A propaganda juggernaut, paid for by the criminals on Wall Street and in corporate America, to make sure the kids have untenured teachers with no job protections who can be fired at a moment's notice.
And after that, dozens more court cases, also paid for by the criminals on Wall Street and in corporate America, to make sure the kids have untenured teachers with no job protections who can be fired at a moment's notice.
And it's part of the civil rights movement, don'tcha know!
Because it is every child's basic civil right to have teachers with the same job protections as Walmart associates.
It would be great if we had a union leadership ready to fight what is now amounting to a battle to the death for the teaching profession.
But alas, we don't - they're still issuing boiler plate jive that is going to do little to win the public debate or the legal challenges.
I guess they think they'll still be able to collect dues even after teacher tenure laws are dismantled all over the country.
But after that happens, what's the point of having the unions around?
Sunday, June 26, 2011
NY Post Says LIFO, Layoff Fight Begins Again Soon
It's never too early for the UFT to get ready for the next battle with Bloomberg and the corporate education reform establishment.
Bloomberg failed to get LIFO changed and therefore didn't REALLY want to do layoffs this year, as he would have had to lay off lots of newbie teachers instead of more expensive vets and the ATR's.
But you can bet in his last full year in office before the 2013 election, he will try extra hard to get that LIFO rule changed and lay off ATR's and vets as well and set things up so that the next mayor can lay off as many teachers as he wants every year without the union being able to protect them.
You can bet that he is manufacturing the budget crisis already.
You can bet the editorial writers at the tabloids - the Times, Murdoch Street Journal, Post and News - are dipping their pens in poison ink to get ready to write the anti-teacher/anti-seniority editorials.
You can bet that Bloomberg is finagling with New York's Tea Party Governor, Little Andy Cuomo, as well as Senate Republicans and corporate Dems to have LIFO changed for good.
You can bet that if you follow the cash Bloomberg hands these people, you will see just how tough this fight is going to be next year.
The UFT MUST not rest now that the threat of layoffs and LIFO changes are done for the year.
When it comes to fighting a man as petulant, as arrogant, as egotistical and as rich as Bloomberg, you cannot rest even one moment.
He's got one more year to make significant changes to the seniority system in the DOE. He's got one more year to make significant changes to the pay system, the pension system, and the health care system as well.
You can bet he will want changes to all of these.
The UFT has to muster all the anti-Bloombergian allies it can to fight these changes, both here in the city and in Albany.
There are enough pols in both places sick of Bloomberg and his shit.
Judging by the poll numbers, the people in NYC certainly are sick of him.
He CAN be beaten.
He MUST be beaten.
He is wounded, especially with all these scandals breaking that show how many hundreds of millions have been stolen on his watch even as he insists upon handing out money illegally to consultants for contracts that have been rejected by the city controller's office.
But he has enormous wealth and resources and won't hesitate to use it.
We cannot rest in this fight.
The fight goes on.
Bloomberg failed to get LIFO changed and therefore didn't REALLY want to do layoffs this year, as he would have had to lay off lots of newbie teachers instead of more expensive vets and the ATR's.
But you can bet in his last full year in office before the 2013 election, he will try extra hard to get that LIFO rule changed and lay off ATR's and vets as well and set things up so that the next mayor can lay off as many teachers as he wants every year without the union being able to protect them.
You can bet that he is manufacturing the budget crisis already.
You can bet the editorial writers at the tabloids - the Times, Murdoch Street Journal, Post and News - are dipping their pens in poison ink to get ready to write the anti-teacher/anti-seniority editorials.
You can bet that Bloomberg is finagling with New York's Tea Party Governor, Little Andy Cuomo, as well as Senate Republicans and corporate Dems to have LIFO changed for good.
You can bet that if you follow the cash Bloomberg hands these people, you will see just how tough this fight is going to be next year.
The UFT MUST not rest now that the threat of layoffs and LIFO changes are done for the year.
When it comes to fighting a man as petulant, as arrogant, as egotistical and as rich as Bloomberg, you cannot rest even one moment.
He's got one more year to make significant changes to the seniority system in the DOE. He's got one more year to make significant changes to the pay system, the pension system, and the health care system as well.
You can bet he will want changes to all of these.
The UFT has to muster all the anti-Bloombergian allies it can to fight these changes, both here in the city and in Albany.
There are enough pols in both places sick of Bloomberg and his shit.
Judging by the poll numbers, the people in NYC certainly are sick of him.
He CAN be beaten.
He MUST be beaten.
He is wounded, especially with all these scandals breaking that show how many hundreds of millions have been stolen on his watch even as he insists upon handing out money illegally to consultants for contracts that have been rejected by the city controller's office.
But he has enormous wealth and resources and won't hesitate to use it.
We cannot rest in this fight.
The fight goes on.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
The Mayor's Cynical Ploy To End LIFO
Now that's it pretty clear that layoffs are coming to the NYC public school system, we are going to see a coordinated effort by the mayor, the chancellor, the DOE braintrust (such as it is), the corporate media, the corporate education reformers and their shill politicians to demonize veteran teachers and lionize newbies - especially members of the Educators4Excellence group, otherwise known around the blogosphere as the Asshats.
The Times went with one of those stories today.
I think this is the mayor's strategy going forward.
He WILL go with layoffs, he will lay teachers like the one in the story off, he will cause as much chaos and disorder in the system, and then try and blame it on the union and the seniority rules.
And of course the corporate media will happily do his work for him just as the Times has this morning.
Then next year, the END LIFO bill re-emerge in Albany and miraculously pass as the mayor and his allies point to the disorder and chaos in the NYC school system that they themselves caused as proof positive that the rules have to be changed.
It becomes incumbent upon the opposition to point out that the choice is NOT between veteran teachers and new teachers in layoffs.
The choice is between keeping ALL teachers currently under the employ of the NYCDOE or laying 4,278 off so that the mayor can spend $550 million to buy new computers and upgrade Internet access to the schools (just a few years after he spent $200 million to do the same thing.)
This is the mayor playing politics with the budget, plain and simple.
There do not have to be layoffs - the mayor can cut the tech budget by $377 million, he can cut the staff at Tweed, he can delay or cancel some of the testing contracts he insists have to be signed or renewed (such as the $4.5 million one with Rupert Murdoch's Wireless Generation.)
This is the reality here.
The damage to the school system is NOT being caused by seniority rules or LIFO.
The damage to the school system is being caused by a mayor who has decided he wants to bust the teachers union and is ratcheting up a budget crisis that doesn't exist in the way he says it does even as he continues to spend money on things we do not need - like new no-bid tech contracts.
The Times went with one of those stories today.
I think this is the mayor's strategy going forward.
He WILL go with layoffs, he will lay teachers like the one in the story off, he will cause as much chaos and disorder in the system, and then try and blame it on the union and the seniority rules.
And of course the corporate media will happily do his work for him just as the Times has this morning.
Then next year, the END LIFO bill re-emerge in Albany and miraculously pass as the mayor and his allies point to the disorder and chaos in the NYC school system that they themselves caused as proof positive that the rules have to be changed.
It becomes incumbent upon the opposition to point out that the choice is NOT between veteran teachers and new teachers in layoffs.
The choice is between keeping ALL teachers currently under the employ of the NYCDOE or laying 4,278 off so that the mayor can spend $550 million to buy new computers and upgrade Internet access to the schools (just a few years after he spent $200 million to do the same thing.)
This is the mayor playing politics with the budget, plain and simple.
There do not have to be layoffs - the mayor can cut the tech budget by $377 million, he can cut the staff at Tweed, he can delay or cancel some of the testing contracts he insists have to be signed or renewed (such as the $4.5 million one with Rupert Murdoch's Wireless Generation.)
This is the reality here.
The damage to the school system is NOT being caused by seniority rules or LIFO.
The damage to the school system is being caused by a mayor who has decided he wants to bust the teachers union and is ratcheting up a budget crisis that doesn't exist in the way he says it does even as he continues to spend money on things we do not need - like new no-bid tech contracts.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
What Deal Did Cuomo And Bloomberg Make On LIFO?
Bloomberg is going full speed ahead with teacher layoffs. Many knowledgeable education observers believe he would not be going with the layoffs if he knew he was going to have lay off cheaper newbie teachers and retain more expensive veterans. But with his attempts to change LIFO having been stymied in Albany so far, the question becomes, what does he have up his sleeve?
New York Magazine may have the answer:
The last time Cuomo met in secret so publicly with "education reformers" was when the NY Times reported he met with some hedge fund managers in a NY hotel room, heard their concerns about education reform, walked out of that room with a suitcase full of cash and released an education plan the next day that was an EXACT replica of a Democrats for Education Reform pamphlet.
Cuomo is a crook, big time, and he is up for sale always, so while he has so far not helped Bloomberg on the LIFO issue, you know that if the price is right, he will change direction like a weathervane in an Alabama tornado.
What is Cuomo's price on the LIFO? What would Bloomberg have to give him for Cuomo to push through LIFO changes by June and allow Bloomberg to lay off any teacher he wants this year?
Dunno, but I would imagine cash would be one thing.
While Cuomo has been as low key as possible about future career moves (unlike his Republican brother in New Jersey, Chris Christie), it is believed that Little Andrew wants to run for president someday, and now that Mayor Bloomberg's own White House ambitions have been mostly destroyed by a snowstorm, a spate of outside consultant scandals, and poll after poll showing people would rather elect Donald Trump than Mayor Bloomberg to be president (though Harpo Marx apparently outpolls both - who knew?), Cuomo may be looking for some rich sugar daddy to fund that campaign for him in 2016.
Could Bloomberg be that sugar daddy?
I bet he could.
2016 may seem like a long time away, but make no mistake, a conniving, ambitious, egotistical man like Little Andrew Cuomo is already thinking that far ahead and lining up potential backers and supporters behind the scenes.
I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction (with my apologies to both Johnny Carson and Mr. Talk at Accountable Talk):
I think Bloomberg has a deal with Cuomo on LIFO and that's why he is comfortable going ahead with these layoffs.
His long term plan is to do layoffs every year, slowly bleeding the NYC public education system of human capital and replace it with technology and computers.
Reduce the teaching force to 30,000 or so over the next few years (always claiming economic deprivation as the rationale, of course), replace those laid off teachers with computerized instruction a la Wireless Generation's School of One, hire some cheap teaching aides to work the classroom management angle, and remake the school system into an online computer education system.
That's what the governor of Idaho is aiming to do too.
And the governor of Florida.
So of course the biggest technojunkie of them all, Mayor Moneybags, the guy who made his fortune via technology, is heading in that direction too.
But the one sticking point is the teachers union and the work protections that teachers have.
He has already incentivized schools to rid themselves of vets via the Fair Funding Formula that charges schools 100% of their teacher costs.
He has already changed tenure rules so that schools have been incentivized to use untenured teachers for three years and then dump them rather than grant them tenure.
Now he needs to end seniority protections for teachers so that any teacher can be laid off at any time whenever he decides there is an "economic emergency."
Once he has that change in place, you can bet your subscription of Bloomberg Businessweek that there will be an "economic emergency" every year.
Year after year, teachers will be let go, the layoffs will accelerate until the system is remade into Bloomberg's vision - a public school system streamlined of teachers and dominated by computerized instruction and data-driven testing.
There isn't much time left for him to start this move. He's only got three more years. So he needs Cuomo to make changes to LIFO now.
You can be sure that whatever these two politicians talked about at their long UWS dinner a few weeks ago, Bloomberg's vision for the school system, a LIFO deal and Cuomo's 2016 ambitions were all discussed.
So Governor Cuomo, what's your price?
To paraphrase Michael Corleone from The Godfather, "How much are you getting paid to set us up?"
And when does the shiv get shoved in?
New York Magazine may have the answer:
The mayor spent much of the winter leading a full-court press, angrily complaining about state government’s unfairness to the city and loudly insisting on the repeal of “LIFO,” the state law requiring that teachers with the least seniority be fired first. Didn’t work: Andrew Cuomo needed peace with the teachers union and Shelly Silver more than he needed Bloomberg’s backing, and the new governor didn’t appreciate the mayor trying to push him around. Bloomberg is still rightly blaming Albany — and, to a lesser extent, Washington — for shifting problems downstream. But today Bloomberg was downright conciliatory and regretful as he criticized, claiming he holds out hope for last-minute help from the state. “I’m very sympathetic to Andrew Cuomo,” he said. “I’m not going to second-guess.” A reporter asked why Bloomberg’s lobbying efforts in Albany had failed; the mayor shrugged off the invitation to attack, instead attributing the setback to prevailing anti-government sentiment.
The soft-pedaling — and Bloomberg’s legitimate touting of his generally solid record steering the city’s finances — didn’t win him much love locally. Comptroller John Liu jabbed at the administration for spending “billions of dollars on high-priced consultants.” Scott Stringer, the Manhattan borough president, accused Bloomberg of playing politics with the budget. Public Advocate Bill de Blasio did better than merely carping: He’s planning to mobilize parent groups to fight the teacher layoffs.
There was also deep skepticism that Bloomberg will follow through with the most painful cuts. “The mayor has a believability problem,” one public official says. “He made a very substantial threat last year to lay off teachers, which dissipated as the revenue dynamics changed. Now, after the snowstorm and Cathie Black and the CityTime scandal, why would he want to do the single most unpopular thing he could do?”
Bloomberg insists he means it this time, that the money isn’t there, and that he isn’t laying off teachers to prove a point about LIFO. But if this isn’t the usual shell game, in which city tax revenues spike and Bloomberg saves thousands of jobs just before the July 1 deadline, he really is going to need an assist from Albany. There’s not much chance of the state suddenly coughing up more cash; a compromise on seniority rules or state mandates, though, should be possible. Two weeks ago the mayor and the governor had a long dinner on the Upper West Side. Perhaps today’s quieter tone at City Hall is the next step in trying to get Cuomo to pick up part of a much bigger check.
The last time Cuomo met in secret so publicly with "education reformers" was when the NY Times reported he met with some hedge fund managers in a NY hotel room, heard their concerns about education reform, walked out of that room with a suitcase full of cash and released an education plan the next day that was an EXACT replica of a Democrats for Education Reform pamphlet.
Cuomo is a crook, big time, and he is up for sale always, so while he has so far not helped Bloomberg on the LIFO issue, you know that if the price is right, he will change direction like a weathervane in an Alabama tornado.
What is Cuomo's price on the LIFO? What would Bloomberg have to give him for Cuomo to push through LIFO changes by June and allow Bloomberg to lay off any teacher he wants this year?
Dunno, but I would imagine cash would be one thing.
While Cuomo has been as low key as possible about future career moves (unlike his Republican brother in New Jersey, Chris Christie), it is believed that Little Andrew wants to run for president someday, and now that Mayor Bloomberg's own White House ambitions have been mostly destroyed by a snowstorm, a spate of outside consultant scandals, and poll after poll showing people would rather elect Donald Trump than Mayor Bloomberg to be president (though Harpo Marx apparently outpolls both - who knew?), Cuomo may be looking for some rich sugar daddy to fund that campaign for him in 2016.
Could Bloomberg be that sugar daddy?
I bet he could.
2016 may seem like a long time away, but make no mistake, a conniving, ambitious, egotistical man like Little Andrew Cuomo is already thinking that far ahead and lining up potential backers and supporters behind the scenes.
I am going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction (with my apologies to both Johnny Carson and Mr. Talk at Accountable Talk):
I think Bloomberg has a deal with Cuomo on LIFO and that's why he is comfortable going ahead with these layoffs.
His long term plan is to do layoffs every year, slowly bleeding the NYC public education system of human capital and replace it with technology and computers.
Reduce the teaching force to 30,000 or so over the next few years (always claiming economic deprivation as the rationale, of course), replace those laid off teachers with computerized instruction a la Wireless Generation's School of One, hire some cheap teaching aides to work the classroom management angle, and remake the school system into an online computer education system.
That's what the governor of Idaho is aiming to do too.
And the governor of Florida.
So of course the biggest technojunkie of them all, Mayor Moneybags, the guy who made his fortune via technology, is heading in that direction too.
But the one sticking point is the teachers union and the work protections that teachers have.
He has already incentivized schools to rid themselves of vets via the Fair Funding Formula that charges schools 100% of their teacher costs.
He has already changed tenure rules so that schools have been incentivized to use untenured teachers for three years and then dump them rather than grant them tenure.
Now he needs to end seniority protections for teachers so that any teacher can be laid off at any time whenever he decides there is an "economic emergency."
Once he has that change in place, you can bet your subscription of Bloomberg Businessweek that there will be an "economic emergency" every year.
Year after year, teachers will be let go, the layoffs will accelerate until the system is remade into Bloomberg's vision - a public school system streamlined of teachers and dominated by computerized instruction and data-driven testing.
There isn't much time left for him to start this move. He's only got three more years. So he needs Cuomo to make changes to LIFO now.
You can be sure that whatever these two politicians talked about at their long UWS dinner a few weeks ago, Bloomberg's vision for the school system, a LIFO deal and Cuomo's 2016 ambitions were all discussed.
So Governor Cuomo, what's your price?
To paraphrase Michael Corleone from The Godfather, "How much are you getting paid to set us up?"
And when does the shiv get shoved in?
Monday, March 28, 2011
Post Attacks Teacher Salary
The Post criticizes salary step hikes and longevity increases.
The gist of the article, planted by Bloomberg's people, is that teachers should not get salary step or longevity increases because the contract has expired - even though the city is required to pay these increases through law.
Apparently contracts are only sacrosanct for Murdoch and Bloomberg on the rich person's end of it.
I got my last salary step increase in 2008.
I will go until February 2012 until I get my next one.
So no matter what the Post says, teachers are NOT getting increases every year.
But facts, schmacts - this is about laying the ground work to go after salary step increases and longevity since the mayor is not going to get the changes to LIFO he wants.
The UFT had better take note that salary step and longevity increases are NOT places to compromise with the mayor to reduce the specter of layoffs.
The place to compromise with Bloomberg is to force him to cut outside consultants and tech contracts.
The UFT can do that by going on a coordinated campaign to show how much money Bloomberg wastes on these things.
The gist of the article, planted by Bloomberg's people, is that teachers should not get salary step or longevity increases because the contract has expired - even though the city is required to pay these increases through law.
Apparently contracts are only sacrosanct for Murdoch and Bloomberg on the rich person's end of it.
I got my last salary step increase in 2008.
I will go until February 2012 until I get my next one.
So no matter what the Post says, teachers are NOT getting increases every year.
But facts, schmacts - this is about laying the ground work to go after salary step increases and longevity since the mayor is not going to get the changes to LIFO he wants.
The UFT had better take note that salary step and longevity increases are NOT places to compromise with the mayor to reduce the specter of layoffs.
The place to compromise with Bloomberg is to force him to cut outside consultants and tech contracts.
The UFT can do that by going on a coordinated campaign to show how much money Bloomberg wastes on these things.
Saturday, March 26, 2011
NY Daily News And Gothamist Pick Up Prinicpal Harassment Story
Another great example of why teachers need work protections:
The concerted effort to destroy union representation in schools continues.
Coincidence that the teacher targeted by the principal is a union rep?
I think not.
Coincidence that the DOE has done nothing to look into the matter?
I think not.
If this principal had the opportunity to lay off by "merit, he would lay off this teacher first - regardless of merit.
Even Gothamist gets this part of the story:
Smolkin is a bad guy, he shouldn't be a principal, he shouldn't have power over other people - and yet not only does the DOE still let this guy run a school, they're not even looking into these allegations about the letter.
But ending LIFO and teacher tenure will make schools and education better, right?
A Manhattan principal accused of trying to intimidate a teacher by sending an anonymous and hateful letter is the focus of a criminal probe, officials said.
The property manager at teacher Michael McPherrin's apartment building got the letter in June, according to NY1, which broke the story Friday.
"There is always a strong odor of marijuana coming from their apartment as well as underage boys who are being coerced into unsafe sex practices with those two openly gay men with AIDS," the letter read.
McPherrin, in a followup letter to the property manager, said he thought the initial missive was related to his "role as union representative" at Independence High School.
The teacher hired an expert who analyzed the handwriting on the envelope.
The expert compared the writing in an address to a handwriting sample from principal Ron Smolkin, who McPherrin believes was responsible for the letter.
The analysis showed a match was highly likely, NY1 reported.
Education Department officials declined to comment.
The teachers' union, the Manhattan District attorney's office and the state Human Rights Commission are investigating McPherrin's allegations.
Smolkin didn't return calls seeking comment.
The concerted effort to destroy union representation in schools continues.
Coincidence that the teacher targeted by the principal is a union rep?
I think not.
Coincidence that the DOE has done nothing to look into the matter?
I think not.
If this principal had the opportunity to lay off by "merit, he would lay off this teacher first - regardless of merit.
Even Gothamist gets this part of the story:
Mayor Bloomberg and Gov. Andrew Cuomo have been wrangling for months over how best to reform LIFO, the "last-in first-out" teacher firing policy. One such idea that has been proposed is for principals to be given more power with their recommendations as to who should be fired or not. But there's one downside to this: what if your principal is a crazy lunatic out to get you?
Michael McPherrin, who teaches at Independence High School in Manhattan, told NY1 that he believe his boss, Principal Ron Smolkin, sent a vicious anonymous letter to his co-op as a personal vendetta. The author of the note, who claims to be representing concerned residents of the building, reveals intimate personal details about McPherrin, and makes several accusations about him and his longtime partner Andre Lopes: "The talk of the building is that both Mike and illegal immigrant Andre suffer from full blown AIDS and have no problem infecting others including the underage boys they bring to the apartment." McPherrin was stunned by the note: "As you read, your jaw just keeps dropping because it just gets worse...This was an attempt to destroy our lives and me professionally," McPherrin said.
The building management called it "anonymous hate mail" and wrote McPherrin that, "our records indicate there are no complaints against you or your partner." The handwritten letter was brought to an analyst who found it "highly likely" they matched samples of handwriting McPherrin said were Smolkin's. McPherrin believes that Smolkin targeted him after he became the teacher's union rep and organized staff members concerned about Smolkin's leadership. "He has a history of retaliatory vindictive actions," McPherin said, including one case where a judge ruled Smolkin falsely accused a school aide of an assault inside the building and fired her without benefits.
Smolkin is a bad guy, he shouldn't be a principal, he shouldn't have power over other people - and yet not only does the DOE still let this guy run a school, they're not even looking into these allegations about the letter.
But ending LIFO and teacher tenure will make schools and education better, right?
Friday, March 4, 2011
Cuomo: My LIFO Proposal Covers Evaluations, LIFO, Tenure and Pay Increases
Buried in this Daily News story about the fight between Bloomberg and Cuomo over LIFO is this gem:
Bloomberg wants an all-out repeal of the first in, last out law that requires layoffs be based on seniority.
His forces said the governor's plan to create a new statewide evaluation system of teachers doesn't address the issue, meaning seniority would remain the only criteria used for layoffs.
Over the past few days, Bloomberg aides called the Cuomo proposal a "scam" and a gift to the teachers union.
Cuomo aides shot back, comparing the Bloomberg-backed bill with Wisconsin-style efforts to evade collective bargaining with teachers.
The governor said his bill would not only pertain to teacher evaluations, but also layoffs, promotions, raises and bonuses.
Bloomberg, Cuomo Start Compromise Conversations On LIFO
After a few days of harsh criticism of each other, especially from Bloomberg's side, the Daily News reports that conversations between Cuomo and Bloomberg on changing LIFO are growing more civil:
Cuomo still says he won't put the LIFO repeal in the budget, Bloomberg wants the LIFO deal there.
The stand-off continues.
Gov. Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg walked back from Armageddon on Thursday in their battle over the law governing teacher layoffs.
After two days of sniping, the two were practically fawning over each other - from a distance - with Cuomo even joking about Hizzoner's barbs.
"I didn't think he was critical of me," Cuomo said of Bloomberg with a grin.
"I think the mayor was frustrated in dealing with the legislative process in Albany," he added following a Staten Island event.
At a separate event, Bloomberg tamped down the tensions, saying he and Cuomo have worked "very well" the past two months.
"We both have exactly the same interest, of getting the best teachers that we can in front of the classroom," Hizzoner said.
Bloomberg and his aides had ratcheted up the attacks Tuesday after the governor released his own bill designed to deal with teacher layoffs shortly after the Senate passed a Bloomberg-backed plan.
Cuomo still says he won't put the LIFO repeal in the budget, Bloomberg wants the LIFO deal there.
The stand-off continues.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Does Bloomberg Go Ahead With Layoffs?
Bloomberg won one battle yesterday, then lost one.
He did get his LIFO bill passed by the State Senate, then had Assembly Speaker Silver say he would not bring the bill up for a vote in the lower chamber of the legislature.
Minutes after the bill passed the State Senate, the governor introduced his own LIFO proposal that mirrors the RttT evaluation criteria for teachers but pushes the implementation up to the 2011-2012 school year from the 2012-2013 year.
Bloomberg's aides erupted in fury, calling the proposal a "scam" even though it would give the mayor the right to fire teachers regardless of seniority or tenure protections if they are found to be "ineffective."
Bloomberg wanted the authority to lay off teachers this week with impunity, regardless of seniority protections, and will not get that opportunity under the Cuomo proposal.
So now what do you think will happen?
Bloomberg is saying that if he doesn't get the LIFO changes by Thursday, he is going to go ahead and lay off 4,666 teachers.
As I wrote last night, he doesn't have the same kind of political cover to do this now that the governor has taken action on LIFO to supersede the mayor's actions.
But that doesn't mean the mayor won't go ahead with layoffs anyway.
So what do you think?
Does the mayor lay off the 4,666 teachers he said he was going to lay off on Sunday?
Does he try some Rhode Island jive and send out "You're Fired!" notices to EVERY NYC teacher the way the mayor of Rhode Island did and force a court confrontation between city and union?
Does he try and save face by announcing the layoffs, then come back with some "savings" proposal like furloughs or salary step freezes for DOE employees that he proposes instead of layoffs?
Does he gracefully accept the way this LIFO thing played out and find money in the budget to keep all the teachers on anyway?
Am I missing an option he could take?
What do you think?
He did get his LIFO bill passed by the State Senate, then had Assembly Speaker Silver say he would not bring the bill up for a vote in the lower chamber of the legislature.
Minutes after the bill passed the State Senate, the governor introduced his own LIFO proposal that mirrors the RttT evaluation criteria for teachers but pushes the implementation up to the 2011-2012 school year from the 2012-2013 year.
Bloomberg's aides erupted in fury, calling the proposal a "scam" even though it would give the mayor the right to fire teachers regardless of seniority or tenure protections if they are found to be "ineffective."
Bloomberg wanted the authority to lay off teachers this week with impunity, regardless of seniority protections, and will not get that opportunity under the Cuomo proposal.
So now what do you think will happen?
Bloomberg is saying that if he doesn't get the LIFO changes by Thursday, he is going to go ahead and lay off 4,666 teachers.
As I wrote last night, he doesn't have the same kind of political cover to do this now that the governor has taken action on LIFO to supersede the mayor's actions.
But that doesn't mean the mayor won't go ahead with layoffs anyway.
So what do you think?
Does the mayor lay off the 4,666 teachers he said he was going to lay off on Sunday?
Does he try some Rhode Island jive and send out "You're Fired!" notices to EVERY NYC teacher the way the mayor of Rhode Island did and force a court confrontation between city and union?
Does he try and save face by announcing the layoffs, then come back with some "savings" proposal like furloughs or salary step freezes for DOE employees that he proposes instead of layoffs?
Does he gracefully accept the way this LIFO thing played out and find money in the budget to keep all the teachers on anyway?
Am I missing an option he could take?
What do you think?
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
NY Daily News Says Cuomo LIFO Proposal Was A "Smackdown" Of Bloomberg
Interesting politics going on behind the scenes of the LIFO fight:
It's been a long day of topsy turvy chills and thrills on this thing, but if I am reading the News article correctly, Moneybags was publicly humiliated by Cuomo's unveiling of this proposal without running it by the Bloombergians first.
In addition, because it doesn't give Bloomberg the authority to lay off at will this week, Bloomberg's pissed.
So Bloomberg's people called the Cuomo proposal a "scam."
But Cuomo's people say "Hey, if this is a scam, it's one YOU supported last year during the RttT push."
Touche on their part.
But as much as I like to see Bloomberg humiliated publicly, this Cuomo proposal STILL SUCKS.
Yes, the new teacher evaluation guidelines were supposed to go into effect by 2012-2013, but moving that timeline up a year doesn't make me feel too comfortable that the state will have all the kinks worked out.
Bad enough to have them in 2012-2013 - even worse to have them next year.
Still, it's great to see Bloomberg's LIFO bill go down.
Now Bloomberg is saying he needs to have his LIFO changes by Thursday.
Given what happened today, doesn't seem like that's going to happen.
So what will Bloomberg do?
So far, he's been able to frame the issue as "Sucky Teachers Union Is Blocking LIFO Changes, Forcing Me To Lay Off Good Young Teachers."
The Cuomo proposal takes away that frame from the mayor.
Now he can't lay off 4,666 teachers on Thursday and blame the teachers union when Cuomo took action on the LIFO issue just like Post and the News op-ed writers were begging him to.
Bloomberg has lost some political cover here to do these layoffs.
Does that mean he won't still do them?
No, of course not.
Remember, Bloomberg is one vindictive SOB.
He could still go ahead with them.
But Cuomo, as vindictive as Bloomberg is, seemingly has upped the political price Bloomberg will have to pay for doing them as advertised.
At least that's how I read this tonight.
Given how fast this story has moved today, who knows how the story will play out tomorrow?
ALBANY - Mayor Bloomberg scored a brief victory Tuesday night in his push to end the last-in, first-out law governing teacher layoffs before he was big-footed by Gov. Cuomo.
Moments after the GOP-controlled state Senate approved a Bloomberg-backed measure to overturn the law, Cuomo unveiled his own proposal, effectively restarting the legislative process - and infuriating City Hall.
"It is time to move beyond the so-called 'last-in, first-out' system of relying exclusively on seniority," Cuomo said. "However, we need a legitimate evaluation system to rely upon."
Cuomo said his bill would expand ongoing plans by the state Board of Regents to implement a statewide objective teacher evaluation system that could be used to replace last in, first out by the new school year.
But Bloomberg, who was blindsided by the announcement, said Cuomo's bill would be of little help in dealing with the more than 4,600 teacher layoffs he's planned for as early as this spring.
"We need the governor to help us now by putting something in this budget by Thursday that lets us not have to use seniority when it comes to laying off teachers," Bloomberg said, referring to the deadline for Cuomo to submit budget amendments.
Bloomberg aides went further, calling Cuomo's plan a "scam" that doesn't actually repeal the LIFO law and even suggesting it was drafted by the teachers union as a "total smokescreen."
Cuomo aides have maintained they don't believe teacher layoffs are even necessary.
"There's no scam here," one said. "All we do is accelerate the law that's on the books, one the mayor supported when they were doing Race to the Top last year."
United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew accused the Bloomberg administration of leading a "disinformation campaign."
"I have not read what the governor is proposing, but if his proposal is that we need to make sure we have an objective evaluation system, I would say that is a pretty good idea," Mulgrew said.
The Senate bill tossing seniority passed on a largely partisan 33-27 vote. "This does not get rid of seniority," said Senate Education Committee Chairman John Flanagan (R-Nassau), the bill's sponsor. "It says it cannot be the only reason [for layoffs]."
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, like Cuomo, said he favored an "objective standard" based on more than just seniority in determining layoffs.
Cuomo said the teacher evaluation guidelines currently being developed by the Regents would be based in part on teacher effectiveness.
It's been a long day of topsy turvy chills and thrills on this thing, but if I am reading the News article correctly, Moneybags was publicly humiliated by Cuomo's unveiling of this proposal without running it by the Bloombergians first.
In addition, because it doesn't give Bloomberg the authority to lay off at will this week, Bloomberg's pissed.
So Bloomberg's people called the Cuomo proposal a "scam."
But Cuomo's people say "Hey, if this is a scam, it's one YOU supported last year during the RttT push."
Touche on their part.
But as much as I like to see Bloomberg humiliated publicly, this Cuomo proposal STILL SUCKS.
Yes, the new teacher evaluation guidelines were supposed to go into effect by 2012-2013, but moving that timeline up a year doesn't make me feel too comfortable that the state will have all the kinks worked out.
Bad enough to have them in 2012-2013 - even worse to have them next year.
Still, it's great to see Bloomberg's LIFO bill go down.
Now Bloomberg is saying he needs to have his LIFO changes by Thursday.
Given what happened today, doesn't seem like that's going to happen.
So what will Bloomberg do?
So far, he's been able to frame the issue as "Sucky Teachers Union Is Blocking LIFO Changes, Forcing Me To Lay Off Good Young Teachers."
The Cuomo proposal takes away that frame from the mayor.
Now he can't lay off 4,666 teachers on Thursday and blame the teachers union when Cuomo took action on the LIFO issue just like Post and the News op-ed writers were begging him to.
Bloomberg has lost some political cover here to do these layoffs.
Does that mean he won't still do them?
No, of course not.
Remember, Bloomberg is one vindictive SOB.
He could still go ahead with them.
But Cuomo, as vindictive as Bloomberg is, seemingly has upped the political price Bloomberg will have to pay for doing them as advertised.
At least that's how I read this tonight.
Given how fast this story has moved today, who knows how the story will play out tomorrow?
LIFO Update
If you're paying attention to the LIFO issue, the last few hours have been pretty wild.
As of 8:40 PM, here is where we stand with the LIFO changes.
The State Senate Education Committee passed Mayor Bloomberg's LIFO proposal, but with "lukewarm" Republican support - 10 members of the committee voted to advance the bill out of committee, but 6 did so "without recommendation."
The Senate as a whole voted on the bill in the evening and passed it 33-27 with two Dems not voting.
Assembly Speaker Silver said the Assembly would NOT take up the bill and referred the issue to the Board of Regents. The Regents are working on new teacher evaluation systems as part of the Race to the Top legislation passed last year that NYSED Commissioner David Steiner says would supersede any changes to LIFO.
Then, moments after the State Senate passed the LIFO bill, Governor Cuomo issued his own LIFO proposal that closely tailors the RttT guidelines but moves the timeline up by a year. Teachers would be evaluated under the new ratings starting in 2011-2012 under Cuomo's proposal rather than starting in 2012-2013 as decreed by the RttT legislation.
Cuomo's legislation essentially undermines tenure and seniority protections for teachers, but unlike Bloomberg's LIFO bill, does so ALL across the state rather than just in NYC.
Bloomberg's aides trashed the Cuomo proposal tonight because the governor issued it without consulting with Bloomberg first and did not give Bloomberg the power to lay off teachers indiscriminately right NOW.
I haven't seen any comments from either the UFT or Assembly Speaker Silver.
Wild day.
More to come, I'm sure.
As of 8:40 PM, here is where we stand with the LIFO changes.
The State Senate Education Committee passed Mayor Bloomberg's LIFO proposal, but with "lukewarm" Republican support - 10 members of the committee voted to advance the bill out of committee, but 6 did so "without recommendation."
The Senate as a whole voted on the bill in the evening and passed it 33-27 with two Dems not voting.
Assembly Speaker Silver said the Assembly would NOT take up the bill and referred the issue to the Board of Regents. The Regents are working on new teacher evaluation systems as part of the Race to the Top legislation passed last year that NYSED Commissioner David Steiner says would supersede any changes to LIFO.
Then, moments after the State Senate passed the LIFO bill, Governor Cuomo issued his own LIFO proposal that closely tailors the RttT guidelines but moves the timeline up by a year. Teachers would be evaluated under the new ratings starting in 2011-2012 under Cuomo's proposal rather than starting in 2012-2013 as decreed by the RttT legislation.
Cuomo's legislation essentially undermines tenure and seniority protections for teachers, but unlike Bloomberg's LIFO bill, does so ALL across the state rather than just in NYC.
Bloomberg's aides trashed the Cuomo proposal tonight because the governor issued it without consulting with Bloomberg first and did not give Bloomberg the power to lay off teachers indiscriminately right NOW.
I haven't seen any comments from either the UFT or Assembly Speaker Silver.
Wild day.
More to come, I'm sure.
Bloomberg Trashes Cuomo's LIFO Plan
Celeste Katz reports that Bloomberg's aides have hammered the Cuomo LIFO proposal:
Gee - it sounds to me from the reports of the proposal that tenure and seniority are undermined, that teachers just have to be declared "ineffective" to be canned.
But I guess that proposal isn't strong enough for Bloomberg?
Sounds like he really wanted the ability to fire any teachers he wants to fire NOW rather than 2011-2012.
Or maybe he's just pissed because Cuomo is superseding Bloomberg in the headlines with this proposal.
Probably a combo of the two.
One thing I have to do here is take back the part I wrote earlier about Cuomo carrying Bloomberg's water.
Apparently he's just carrying the ed deform water.
Carrying Bloomberg's water means never getting in the way of the Mayor of Money's headlines.
City Hall just sounded a major hElmo Alert on Gov. Cuomo's surprise "last in, first out" plan, reports our Ken Lovett:
Aides to Mayor Bloomberg immediately trashed the plan, saying “we’re assuming the Cuomo bill was drafted by the [United Federation of Teachers].” They called the announcement a “scam,” and questioned if it was meant as a “diversion” away from today's Senate passage of a bill by put forth by Sen. John Flanagan with Bloomberg's support.
Hizzoner, the aides say, was not asked for input -- or even given a heads-up about the bill until it was released publicly.
The Cuomo bill does not address two key points the mayor was seeking, they fumed: Bloomberg aides say it does not actually repeal the "last in, first out law" and provides “no legal connection” between the teacher evaulation system being developed and the layoff system.
It also doesn’t provide immediate relief, they say. Bloomberg said layoffs could begin in the spring, while the governor’s bill wouldn’t kick in until the next school year.
Gee - it sounds to me from the reports of the proposal that tenure and seniority are undermined, that teachers just have to be declared "ineffective" to be canned.
But I guess that proposal isn't strong enough for Bloomberg?
Sounds like he really wanted the ability to fire any teachers he wants to fire NOW rather than 2011-2012.
Or maybe he's just pissed because Cuomo is superseding Bloomberg in the headlines with this proposal.
Probably a combo of the two.
One thing I have to do here is take back the part I wrote earlier about Cuomo carrying Bloomberg's water.
Apparently he's just carrying the ed deform water.
Carrying Bloomberg's water means never getting in the way of the Mayor of Money's headlines.
Cuomo's Proposal To Abolish Tenure And Seniority All Across The State By September 2011
Here is the text of Cuomo's announcement of the statewide LIFO proposal:
This proposal essentially destroys tenure and seniority protections for teachers.
Again, the RttT legislation did the same thing, so there's really nothing new here.
What Cuomo is doing is SPEEDING UP the process and putting it in place FOR NEXT YEAR FOR EVERYBODY.
So what if the testing and the value-added systems aren't in place yet.
So what if the new evaluation system is being developed and implemented so fast that there has been no time to get rid of the bugs.
This is kids we're talking about here!
Uh, huh.
This is about overriding seniority and tenure protections for teachers even faster than the RttT legislation did.
So far, no comment from Silver.
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today announced that he will be submitting a program bill that would expedite and expand ongoing plans to implement a statewide, objective teacher evaluation system, based on both performance and seniority, for school districts to use when making employment decisions.
By today’s actions, both the State Senate and the Assembly have acknowledged that the state must move forward on improving performance in the classroom as well as improving teacher evaluations.
The real question, however, is what is the alternative to “last in, first out.” The current so-called “last in, first out” policy lacks objectivity by maintaining teachers simply based on years of service without factoring in classroom effectiveness, performance, or need.
“It is time to move beyond the so-called ‘last in, first out’ system of relying exclusively on seniority,” Governor Cuomo said. “However, we need a legitimate evaluation system to rely upon. This will help make a statewide evaluation system ready and allow us to replace ‘last in, first out.’”
Last year as part of “Race to the Top,” legislation was passed to overhaul the existing teacher and principal evaluation system. As a result of the legislation, a State Education Department task force is in the process of developing new teacher evaluation guidelines that includes merit and other factors in time for the 2011-2012 school year. However, the original law only covers math and English language arts teachers in grades 4-8, and would not expand to all subjects and grades until 2012-2013.
The Governor’s program bill would accelerate the new standards to cover all grades and subjects for the 2011-2012 school year. In addition, the Governor’s bill would set clear standards and enhanced transparency requirements, including the posting of guidelines on all school districts’ Web sites.
“We need to put students first by keeping the best educators in the classroom, whether they have worked for one year or 25 years,” Governor Cuomo said. “While seniority should be part of the equation, it cannot be the only factor when making important employment decisions in our schools. Entrenched interests that benefit from the status quo will portray this as an assault, but the reality is we want to work with teachers to support New York’s students.”
Parameters of the new teacher evaluation system include a new rating system including “highly effective,” “effective,” “developing,” or “ineffective.” The evaluations will play a significant role in a wide array of employment decisions, including professional development, tenure determinations, selection for leadership opportunities, and termination. Teachers and principals with a pattern of ineffective teaching or performance could be charged with incompetence and considered for termination through an expedited hearing process.
This proposal essentially destroys tenure and seniority protections for teachers.
Again, the RttT legislation did the same thing, so there's really nothing new here.
What Cuomo is doing is SPEEDING UP the process and putting it in place FOR NEXT YEAR FOR EVERYBODY.
So what if the testing and the value-added systems aren't in place yet.
So what if the new evaluation system is being developed and implemented so fast that there has been no time to get rid of the bugs.
This is kids we're talking about here!
Uh, huh.
This is about overriding seniority and tenure protections for teachers even faster than the RttT legislation did.
So far, no comment from Silver.
Cuomo's Layoff Proposal Extends To ALL Schools In The State, Not Just NYC Schools
The earlier LIFO bill passed by the state senate only changed layoff rules in NYC schools.
The proposal Little Andy issued tonight changes them ALL over the state:
Flanagan says the bill will cause "consternation and angst" because he knows that most Republicans do NOT want these changes in their districts.
Earlier when the senate was debating the bill and Flanagan was talking it up, here is what happened:
So will Senate Republicans be ready to make changes in their own districts for the 2011-2012 school year?
And just how fair can this system be if it's being rammed through so fast.
Bad news if you're a teacher.
Lots of unknowns here and let's face it, when it comes to unknowns, that usually means teachers are scapegoated, blamed and ultimately fired.
Just ask the teachers in Central Falls or Providence.
UPDATE: At 6:56 PM, NY 1 reports that Bloomberg says he has not seen Cuomo's proposal but STILL wants his proposal to abolish seniority-based layoffs passed as soon as possible:
The proposal Little Andy issued tonight changes them ALL over the state:
ALBANY, NEW YORK (WXXI) - The push to change teacher hiring rules to end the policy of last hired first fired got a boost when Governor Andrew Cuomo introduced a bill to extend the proposal to all schools in the state.
The Senate passed a one house bill that would end what's known as LIFO, the last in first out policy for unionized teachers in New York City, something Mayor Mike Bloomberg has requested as a tool to better manage expected teacher lay offs. Moments later, Governor Andrew Cuomo released his own bill, that would end LIFO in all schools in the state and institute a new teacher rating system for the 2011, 2012 school year.
"It is time to move beyond the so-called 'last in, first out' system of relying exclusively on seniority," Governor Cuomo said. "However, we need a legitimate evaluation system to rely upon. This will help make a statewide evaluation system ready and allow us to replace 'last in, first out.'"
Senate Education Committee Chair John Flanagan says he knows the bill will create "consternation and angst", but he is open to it.
Flanagan says the bill will cause "consternation and angst" because he knows that most Republicans do NOT want these changes in their districts.
Earlier when the senate was debating the bill and Flanagan was talking it up, here is what happened:
The debate was relatively speedy, with Flanagan casting the bill as a common-sense measure with numerous provisions designed to bring stakeholders to the negotiating table to work out an agreement that would supersede the legislation. As in this morning’s Education Committee hearing, Sen. Suzi Oppenheimer said the chamber shouldn’t be legislating a matter more appropriately handled in negotiation.
Sen. Kevin Parker earned murmurs for pointing out that if Flanagan’s bill was so effective at improving teacher performance, why didn’t it apply in Flanagan’s own Long Island district, or elsewhere in the state?
So will Senate Republicans be ready to make changes in their own districts for the 2011-2012 school year?
And just how fair can this system be if it's being rammed through so fast.
Bad news if you're a teacher.
Lots of unknowns here and let's face it, when it comes to unknowns, that usually means teachers are scapegoated, blamed and ultimately fired.
Just ask the teachers in Central Falls or Providence.
UPDATE: At 6:56 PM, NY 1 reports that Bloomberg says he has not seen Cuomo's proposal but STILL wants his proposal to abolish seniority-based layoffs passed as soon as possible:
More On Cuomo's LIFO Bill
Okay, the Daily News has details of the bill Cuomo entered on teacher layoffs tonight:
Oh, yeah - this should go really well.
So if you're teaching 4th - 8th grade English or math, they've got a track record on your students' test scores and they'll fire your ass at the end of the year if they feel like it.
Everybody else will be under the gun the year after that.
And the value-added system that Cuomo and the state plans to use has a 12%-35% MOE.
Under this system, ANYBODY can be rated "ineffective."
Maybe eventually EVERYBODY will be.
Objective system, my ass.
This bill essentially abolishes tenure AND seniority.
Not all that different than what the RttT legislation did, actually.
ALBANY - The Mayor Bloomberg-backed bill to overturn the last in, first out law governing teacher layoffs passed the state Senate late Tuesday afternoon.
...
The measure, while a symbolic victory for Bloomberg, has little chance in the state Assembly - and Gov. Cuomo surprisingly issued his own last in, first out bill moments after the passage.
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said hours before the Senate vote that he backs using "an objective standard" based on more than just seniority in determining layoffs.
But Silver said it should be based on an evaluation system being developed by the state Board of Regents as part of last year's successful Race to the Top application.
The interim Regents report is due April 1 and the final report in June, when the Legislature ends its session.
"I think our legislation will come off that evaluating system," Silver said. "What we want to do is coincide something that puts that evluation into the layoff system."
Meanwhile, hoping to jumpstart the process, Gov. Cuomo minutes after the Senate vote surprisingly announced his own last in, first out bill.
The bill, Cuomo said, would expedite and expand ongoing plans to implement the statewide, objective teacher evaluation system that Silver talked about.
Cuomo said that state Senate and the Assembly agree New York needs a new system.
"It is time to move beyond the so-called 'last in, first out' system of relying exclusively on seniority," Cuomo said. "However, we need a legitimate evaluation system to rely upon. This will help make a statewide evaluation system ready and allow us to replace 'last in, first out.'"
Cuomo said the new teacher evaluation guidelines being developed by the state Education Department include merit and other factors in time for the 2011-2012 school year, but only for math and English language arts teachers in grades 4-8.
It would not be expanded to cover all subjects and grades until 2012-2013.
Under Cuomo's bill, all grades and subjects would be covered by the new standards in time for the 2011-12 school year.
Cuomo said his bill would also set clear standards and enhanced transparency requirements, including the posting of guidelines on all school districts' Web sites.
Oh, yeah - this should go really well.
So if you're teaching 4th - 8th grade English or math, they've got a track record on your students' test scores and they'll fire your ass at the end of the year if they feel like it.
Everybody else will be under the gun the year after that.
And the value-added system that Cuomo and the state plans to use has a 12%-35% MOE.
Under this system, ANYBODY can be rated "ineffective."
Maybe eventually EVERYBODY will be.
Objective system, my ass.
This bill essentially abolishes tenure AND seniority.
Not all that different than what the RttT legislation did, actually.
Cuomo Joins Bloomberg Side On LIFO - Introduces His Own Bill To Abolish Teacher Tenure
NOTE: UPDATED AT 6:43PM - THIS POST ORIGINALLY WENT UP AT 6:10PM.
Okay, so now the equation on LIFO changes.
The senate passed Bloomberg's LIFO bill earlier, but Assembly Speaker Silver said he wasn't going to take up the legislation in the Assembly.
But NY 1 is now reporting that Cuomo has joined the battle to carry Bloomberg's water.
According to a report that NY 1 put up on its website at 6:10 PM, Cuomo has announced a bill that would essentially end teacher tenure by bringing new rules for how teachers would be evaluated in NYC.
Teacher would be evaluated as either "highly effective," "effective," "developing," or "ineffective."
Teachers who are considered "ineffective" would be fired after a hearing, regardless of tenure or seniority status.
How's that for a surprise?
How does this play out?
Who knows, but clearly the mayor, paying the governor off, is going to exert lots of pressure on Silver to pass some kind of LIFO changes.
No wonder Bloomberg didn't travel up to Albany today to lobby for the Senate bill.
He knew he had Cuomo in his backpocket.
Government by the billionaires, for the billionaires, of the billionaires.
So, what are you folks?
Effective? Ineffective?
Only Little Andy knows.
But everybody's job is NOW on the line if Little Andy gets his way on this legislation.
Who the hell knows what criteria gets used in Little Andy's "Effective/Ineffective" evaluation system.
Okay, so now the equation on LIFO changes.
The senate passed Bloomberg's LIFO bill earlier, but Assembly Speaker Silver said he wasn't going to take up the legislation in the Assembly.
But NY 1 is now reporting that Cuomo has joined the battle to carry Bloomberg's water.
According to a report that NY 1 put up on its website at 6:10 PM, Cuomo has announced a bill that would essentially end teacher tenure by bringing new rules for how teachers would be evaluated in NYC.
Teacher would be evaluated as either "highly effective," "effective," "developing," or "ineffective."
Teachers who are considered "ineffective" would be fired after a hearing, regardless of tenure or seniority status.
Governor Andrew Cuomo has entered his own bill on the city's policy on teacher layoffs that will consider performance and seniority, as the state Assembly is stalling a bill passed by the state Senate that will determine teacher layoffs by performance alone.
The policy at question is the so-called "last in, first out" rule that requires the city to lay off the newest teachers first.
Shortly before 6 p.m., minutes after the state Senate passed by a 33-27 vote a bill that would have teachers layoffs based solely on performance, Cuomo announced his own bill for an evaluation system for tenure and layoffs that incorporates both teachers' performance and seniority.
"We need to put students first by keeping the best educators in the classroom, whether they have worked for one year or 25 years. While seniority should be part of the equation, it cannot be the only factor when making important employment decisions in our schools," said Cuomo in a statement. "Entrenched interests that benefit from the status quo will portray this as an assault, but the reality is we want to work with teachers to support New York's students."
Cuomo's proposed system, which would be in place for the new school year in September, would rate teachers as "highly effective," "effective," "developing" or "ineffective."
The teachers and principals who were determined to be "ineffective" would undergo a hearing process to see whether they would be fired.
NY1 is awaiting reaction on Cuomo's bill from the mayor and the United Federation of Teachers.
The Senate's bill, which also passed the Senate's Education Committee and Rules Committee earlier today, is supported by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and strongly opposed by the teachers' union.
However, the leader of the New York State Assembly has already said the body will not be voting on the Senate's bill.
Instead, Democrat Sheldon Silver said his chamber wants the state Board of Regents to create a teacher evaluation system to help decide who should be laid off come September.
The Department of Education released a list over the weekend detailing teacher layoffs at each city school if the state Legislature does not change the "last in, first out" law.
How's that for a surprise?
How does this play out?
Who knows, but clearly the mayor, paying the governor off, is going to exert lots of pressure on Silver to pass some kind of LIFO changes.
No wonder Bloomberg didn't travel up to Albany today to lobby for the Senate bill.
He knew he had Cuomo in his backpocket.
Government by the billionaires, for the billionaires, of the billionaires.
So, what are you folks?
Effective? Ineffective?
Only Little Andy knows.
But everybody's job is NOW on the line if Little Andy gets his way on this legislation.
Who the hell knows what criteria gets used in Little Andy's "Effective/Ineffective" evaluation system.
Silver Kills Bloomberg's LIFO Bill - For Now
Just up in the last fifteen minutes or so at NY1:
Interesting development.
Not surprising that the state senate committee passed the bill.
And I am convinced that the full state senate would have as well.
The interesting part was going to be how Sheldon Silver, who is opposed to the bill, was going to handle it.
What does Silver's handing this off to the Regents mean?
Well, NYSED Commissioner Steiner already told Cathie Black when she came up to Albany that when the Regents redo teacher evaluation guidelines, it will make the LIFO changes Bloomberg wants moot, so Steiner wasn't going to weigh on in the LIFO bill.
Yesterday, Silver said this about the current LIFO bill:
He followed through on that statement today.
So it looks like Bloomberg's lobbying and cash-throwing in Albany over LIFO has come to naught, at least for now.
I'll have more on this later.
The New York State Senate could vote on a bill today that would allow the city to do away with seniority rules when determining which teachers to lay off.
The bill, supported by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and opposed by the teachers union, would repeal the so-called "last in, first out" rule that requires the city to layoff the newest teachers first.
This morning the bill cleared the State Senate Education Committee, but it has to go before the rules committee before the full Senate could vote on it.
However, the leader of the New York State Assembly has already said the body will not be voting on it. Instead, Democrat Sheldon Silver says his chamber wants the state Board of Regents to create a teacher evaluation system to help decide who should be laid off come September.
The measure is strongly opposed by the teachers union.
The Department of Education released a list over the weekend detailing teacher layoffs at each city school if the state Legislature does not change the last in, first out law.
Interesting development.
Not surprising that the state senate committee passed the bill.
And I am convinced that the full state senate would have as well.
The interesting part was going to be how Sheldon Silver, who is opposed to the bill, was going to handle it.
What does Silver's handing this off to the Regents mean?
Well, NYSED Commissioner Steiner already told Cathie Black when she came up to Albany that when the Regents redo teacher evaluation guidelines, it will make the LIFO changes Bloomberg wants moot, so Steiner wasn't going to weigh on in the LIFO bill.
Yesterday, Silver said this about the current LIFO bill:
“I think we will take up a bill that deals with an objective evaluation system that gives people the ability to then make determinations that are not purely last-in, first-out,” Silver said after speaking to a gathering of the United Federation of Teachers and, subsequently, AFSCME. “There will be an objective standard, I’m fairly confident.”
Part of our Race to the Top application, the Regents were charged with the obligation to come up with an evaluating system, and I think our legislation would come off that evaluating system,” Silver said.
He followed through on that statement today.
So it looks like Bloomberg's lobbying and cash-throwing in Albany over LIFO has come to naught, at least for now.
I'll have more on this later.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Framing The Layoff Issue Correctly
Like I noted earlier today, the news accounts of the Mayor4Life's threatened layoffs have so far been almost entirely FROM THE MAYOR'S PERSPECTIVE.
There have been few questions about whether these layoffs are necessary given the mayor's bragging that he has a budget surplus, two billion in extra tax revenue and the governor says they don't have to happen.
Instead the issue has been framed from the perspective that layoffs HAVE to happen, that they are a force of nature that CANNOT be stopped (kinda like a tsunami or really bad diarrhea) but they CAN be mitigated by changes to seniority rules which would allow the mayor to lay off "bad" teachers instead of "good" young ones. But the EVIL teachers union has refused to budge on these archaic (and perhaps communistic) seniority rules and so some schools (particularly ones in Harlem) are going to lose as many as 70% of their teachers and the children will be taught by the custodians and bedbugs.
Or something like that.
There is just NO WAY for the union to win a political fight about layoffs and seniority when that's the way the issue is framed.
So it's imperative that Mulgrew and company stop dining on quail and get out the message that these layoffs DO NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN, that the mayor is CHOOSING to lay people off because he WANTS to, not because he HAS to.
It is also important that the UFT point out all the things Bloomberg and the DOE WASTE money on - like CityTime, tax breaks for rich condo owners, no bid contracts that go millions over budget, etc.
Finally it is important for Mulgrew and company to DEFEND seniority anyway, to note that seniority protects older teachers and veterans who WILL ALWAYS be the ones laid off if seniority protections are weakened or destroyed. In addition, if seniority protections are ended, layoffs will happen EVERY year instead of once every two generations because the mayor and the DOE will be able to FIRE ANYBODY THEY WANT FOR ANY REASON THEY WANT WHENEVER THEY WANT.
These are the important frames for this issue to me, and so far, I haven't seen Mulgrew address the issues very well in the corporate media.
Or if he is framing the issues that way, the corporate media certainly isn't going with that particular frame.
This NY 1 article, for example, STILL frames the issue from the mayor's perspective. The article even uses parents upset about LIFO, saying they don't understand why the union won't budge on seniority instead of FORCING the city to lay off all these great teachers.
Arghh!!!!
I wish I could say to these folks, "Listen, I understand your feelings, but this is an issue that the mayor HIMSELF is forcing. Your kids DON'T have to lose their teachers AT ALL. There is plenty of money in the budget to KEEP ALL of these teachers, but the mayor refuses to do so.
Instead he is FORCING this issue because he is playing politics with the seniority rules.
Why is it so DIFFICULT to get this essential TRUTH about the layoff issue out?
If the union is unable to get this message out SOON, they will lose on this issue and we will see layoffs EVERY year, no matter how the budget looks or the economy is doing because the mayor and the DOE are ALWAYS going to look to save money by laying off veteran teachers.
Just the way they love to lay off older people in private enterprise and private corporations.
They used to call it downsizing.
Then it got renamed outsourcing.
Whatever you want to call it, it basically means that if you hit a certain age or make a certain level of income, when a company decides to let people go, your ass is first on the list.
If the mayor and his ed deform shills are allowed to win this seniority issue, the school system will quickly become a 5 YEAR AND UNDER racket.
I know that's exactly what Bloomberg, Obama, Christie, Rhee, Klein, Black, Cuomo, et al. want.
But the public doesn't know that's what they want.
The public needs to be informed about this.
Perhaps they think it's a good idea to have a constantly rotating teacher corps of 22-27-year old Barbie and Ken Educators4Excellence dolls in the classroom.
But I doubt it.
They, like most humans, know that the schools need both younger and older teachers, that experience in both the classroom and life informs a teacher's work as much as the energy and verve that the ed deformers say the younger teachers bring.
That has been my experience, at any rate.
I suspect it has been the experience of many of you out there in the DOE too.
Now let's get this TRUTH across to the city.
And UFTer's, for god sakes, can you frame an issue correctly for once?
The layoffs and budget cuts are NOT about snow.
They are about a mayor and a power elite that would rather cut income taxes on millionaires and let millionaire condo owners pay pennies to the dollar on their real estate taxes while slashing school budgets to the bone and laying teachers off than do what's right for the school system.
If you're having trouble framing things that way, you could get Cynthia Nixon to do it for you.
She managed to do this Cuomo budget issue pretty well:
There have been few questions about whether these layoffs are necessary given the mayor's bragging that he has a budget surplus, two billion in extra tax revenue and the governor says they don't have to happen.
Instead the issue has been framed from the perspective that layoffs HAVE to happen, that they are a force of nature that CANNOT be stopped (kinda like a tsunami or really bad diarrhea) but they CAN be mitigated by changes to seniority rules which would allow the mayor to lay off "bad" teachers instead of "good" young ones. But the EVIL teachers union has refused to budge on these archaic (and perhaps communistic) seniority rules and so some schools (particularly ones in Harlem) are going to lose as many as 70% of their teachers and the children will be taught by the custodians and bedbugs.
Or something like that.
There is just NO WAY for the union to win a political fight about layoffs and seniority when that's the way the issue is framed.
So it's imperative that Mulgrew and company stop dining on quail and get out the message that these layoffs DO NOT HAVE TO HAPPEN, that the mayor is CHOOSING to lay people off because he WANTS to, not because he HAS to.
It is also important that the UFT point out all the things Bloomberg and the DOE WASTE money on - like CityTime, tax breaks for rich condo owners, no bid contracts that go millions over budget, etc.
Finally it is important for Mulgrew and company to DEFEND seniority anyway, to note that seniority protects older teachers and veterans who WILL ALWAYS be the ones laid off if seniority protections are weakened or destroyed. In addition, if seniority protections are ended, layoffs will happen EVERY year instead of once every two generations because the mayor and the DOE will be able to FIRE ANYBODY THEY WANT FOR ANY REASON THEY WANT WHENEVER THEY WANT.
These are the important frames for this issue to me, and so far, I haven't seen Mulgrew address the issues very well in the corporate media.
Or if he is framing the issues that way, the corporate media certainly isn't going with that particular frame.
This NY 1 article, for example, STILL frames the issue from the mayor's perspective. The article even uses parents upset about LIFO, saying they don't understand why the union won't budge on seniority instead of FORCING the city to lay off all these great teachers.
Arghh!!!!
I wish I could say to these folks, "Listen, I understand your feelings, but this is an issue that the mayor HIMSELF is forcing. Your kids DON'T have to lose their teachers AT ALL. There is plenty of money in the budget to KEEP ALL of these teachers, but the mayor refuses to do so.
Instead he is FORCING this issue because he is playing politics with the seniority rules.
Why is it so DIFFICULT to get this essential TRUTH about the layoff issue out?
If the union is unable to get this message out SOON, they will lose on this issue and we will see layoffs EVERY year, no matter how the budget looks or the economy is doing because the mayor and the DOE are ALWAYS going to look to save money by laying off veteran teachers.
Just the way they love to lay off older people in private enterprise and private corporations.
They used to call it downsizing.
Then it got renamed outsourcing.
Whatever you want to call it, it basically means that if you hit a certain age or make a certain level of income, when a company decides to let people go, your ass is first on the list.
If the mayor and his ed deform shills are allowed to win this seniority issue, the school system will quickly become a 5 YEAR AND UNDER racket.
I know that's exactly what Bloomberg, Obama, Christie, Rhee, Klein, Black, Cuomo, et al. want.
But the public doesn't know that's what they want.
The public needs to be informed about this.
Perhaps they think it's a good idea to have a constantly rotating teacher corps of 22-27-year old Barbie and Ken Educators4Excellence dolls in the classroom.
But I doubt it.
They, like most humans, know that the schools need both younger and older teachers, that experience in both the classroom and life informs a teacher's work as much as the energy and verve that the ed deformers say the younger teachers bring.
That has been my experience, at any rate.
I suspect it has been the experience of many of you out there in the DOE too.
Now let's get this TRUTH across to the city.
And UFTer's, for god sakes, can you frame an issue correctly for once?
The layoffs and budget cuts are NOT about snow.
They are about a mayor and a power elite that would rather cut income taxes on millionaires and let millionaire condo owners pay pennies to the dollar on their real estate taxes while slashing school budgets to the bone and laying teachers off than do what's right for the school system.
If you're having trouble framing things that way, you could get Cynthia Nixon to do it for you.
She managed to do this Cuomo budget issue pretty well:
Bloomberg Releases Layoff List - Then Travels To Albany To Lobby For End To LIFO
The media mogul/billionaire dictator really knows how to frame issues.
First he had the DOE release a list of projected layoffs late last night that shows some schools will lose almost half their current teachers to layoffs.
Then he travels to Albany to lobby for the bills in the Assembly and the State Senate that he HIMSELF paid for that end seniority protections for teachers.
And of course all the papers frame the story the way he wants it framed and will no doubt frame the Albany story the way the mayor wants it framed too unless some Assemblyman gets up in his face and says he's full of shit pushing this LIFO issue when layoffs do NOT have to happen because the city has a surplus and $2 billion extra in tax revenue.
I guess media coordination is what you get when you have a billionaire media mogul with close allies at all the other corporate-owned media outlets who wants to get out his anti-union anti-teacher propaganda aimed at creating fear among teachers, students and parents so that he can demagogue the LIFO issue.
First he had the DOE release a list of projected layoffs late last night that shows some schools will lose almost half their current teachers to layoffs.
Then he travels to Albany to lobby for the bills in the Assembly and the State Senate that he HIMSELF paid for that end seniority protections for teachers.
And of course all the papers frame the story the way he wants it framed and will no doubt frame the Albany story the way the mayor wants it framed too unless some Assemblyman gets up in his face and says he's full of shit pushing this LIFO issue when layoffs do NOT have to happen because the city has a surplus and $2 billion extra in tax revenue.
I guess media coordination is what you get when you have a billionaire media mogul with close allies at all the other corporate-owned media outlets who wants to get out his anti-union anti-teacher propaganda aimed at creating fear among teachers, students and parents so that he can demagogue the LIFO issue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)