Stop Saying That

When the governor of my state announced his plan for a new school funding formula, he said, "this is not about teachers, this is about the students." I wish he, and others, would quit saying that.

We hear this refrain almost every time there is an announcement about school reform or funding. It is meant to send a message: teachers do not care about kids.

I had hoped that after Newtown, with teachers selflessly giving their lives for their students, the 'teachers don't care' mantra would stop. Wrong again.

But here is the deal: this type of rhetoric is not only unhelpful, it is just plain wrong.

First, rhetoric like this does not help. We never hear it about other public policy debates. (Imagine: "This farm bill is not about farmers, it is about cows.") I cannot for the life of me figure out why policy makers think teachers are the enemy when it comes to education reform.

It might be that what they really mean is that this is not about the teacher unions. But that approach is incorrect as well. As a veteran administrator, I can assure you that there has not been any proof that non-unionized teachers do better in helping students achieve than those who are unionized. What does matter is how well teacher are supported in doing their jobs, and it's that support that teachers unions fight for.

The real problem with the idea that education reform and budgets are 'not about teachers' is this: if you want students to succeed, any reform must include teachers.

[readon2 url="http://forumforeducation.org/blog/stop-saying"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

Beyond Rhetoric

While the "Cleveland plan" legislation is yet to be finished in Columbus, with some thinking it might not get done at all, the real "Cleveland Plan" is moving beyond lofty rhetoric, and it has nothing to do with students or their success, and certainly nothing to do with creating a world class environment meant to retain and attract the best teaching talent that would lead to that success. In order to close the budget deficit the district faces, the board voted to accept the following cuts

• Elimination of three voluntary professional days, saving the district about $2.85 million.
• Reduction of proposed bonuses for teachers handling extra-large classes, saving the district about $368,000.
• Elimination of three mandatory professional development days, saving the district about $3.45 million.

Despite the calls for merit based pay to incentivize teachers, gone are bonuses for even attempting to deal with massive class sizes caused by previous lay-offs. Despite the historic agreement made with the teachers union over teacher evaluations, gone are professional development opportunities to improve pedagogical skills.

This news is on top of what was already a troubling and telling sign that the rhetoric around the so called "Cleveland plan" was shaping up to be just that, rhetoric.

The Cleveland school district plans to cut about 600 teachers from its payroll by fall to trim a budget deficit, leading to shortened school days and cuts in music, art and gym classes.
[...]
The plan calls for school days for kindergarten through eighth grade to be shortened by 50 minutes, that time being shaved from art, music, gym and media classes.
[...]
The shorter day contradicts Gordon's long-term goal of having longer days or longer school years in some schools.

You can plainly see that the rhetoric used to sell the Cleveland plan simply doesn't add up to the actions being proposed. The real crisis is Cleveland has always been obvious, with it's roots firmly embedded in an unconstitutional school funding system.

One group of people do seem to have a real plan to help all of Ohio's public schools - parents, rallying for school funding

public school advocates pushing for a new funding formula are taking their voices straight to lawmakers. They march on to Capitol Square, carrying signs and chanting…..hoping to make their voices heard.
[...]
the public school funding activists say they don’t like what they’ve seen from the Governor and lawmakers during the past year and a half. And the advocates say they will keep the heat on to try to convince lawmakers to reduce reliance on property taxes and change the system so that all schools have what they need.

It's time to really put students at the center of reform, and that means funding to provide an excellent education, in safe, welcoming schools. Without that, reform is just empty rhetoric.

Cleveland Plan Press Conference

In a downtrodden press conference that broke little new news, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, Representative Sandra Williams (D-Cleveland), House Finance and Appropriations Chairman Ron Amstutz (R-Wooster), Senate Minority Whip Nina Turner (D-Cleveland) and Senate Education Chairwoman Peggy Lehner (R-Kettering) spoke about the "Cleveland Plan".

The plan still has no sponsors, nor co-sponsors. The sticking points for the Democrats continues to be the anti-union SB5 like provisions, and the secretive, non democratic nature of the so-called "transformation alliance". For the Republicans the shadow cast by a plan that has many elements of SB5, and some of the charter school accountability measures that are opposed by some of the largest campaign contributors are sticking points.

Some of Jackson's continued rhetoric, for example "those concerned about the Cleveland plan & Senate Bill 5 shouldn't be", are signs that the Mayor still views his plan as a sacred cow, and not a starting place. That's a pity and might doom an enterprise to rescue Cleveland schools from academic and financial crisis that everyone recognizes and wants to deal positively with.

An Unfair Editorial

The Plain Dealer had a terribly slanted and unfair editorial titled "Cleveland school-reform bill needs teachers' input". From the title it sounded as though some were finally calling for collaboration, before a rush to legislation. Alas, that was not the case, as the editorial demonstrated, first with a straw man argument

When the usually reserved Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson says he would trade his office for "quality education for our children," all of the other adults involved in the high-stakes discussion on school reform ought to determine what they would give up as well.

So far, judging from the Cleveland Teachers Union's tepid response to the mayor's Cleveland-only school reform package, the answer appears to be little or nothing.

One should hardly be confused by the empty rhetoric of a politician and then compare it to actual sacrifices working people ought to make on the basis on that rhetoric. So straight away we knew this editorial was headed south.

The mayor says that despite hours of meetings with union representatives, he has received no written reply to his wide-ranging draft legislation on school reform.

The draft legislation was only made available less than 24 hours ago as of the writing of this editorial! People have barely had chance to even read and digest it, let alone craft some policy response document in considered terms.

If the Mayor and the Plain Dealer truly wanted teacher input, why didn't they seek it during the crafting of the actual legislation, then they could have rolled it out with a lot more support and a lot less controversy. To now blame teachers, yet again, for his own failing to collaborate with critical stakeholders is very unfair.

When Governors Talk Education, It's About the Economy, Stupid

Interesting.

Most governors are fond of talking about education—why it needs to be improved, how they're going to improve it, the consequences of not improving it, and so on.

But when governors attempt to use the bully pulpit to sell their ideas about education to the public, what are their favored rhetorical themes? A new analysis examines that question, and finds that governors overwhelmingly choose to frame education as important for economic reasons, rather than for the development of individual abilities, or as a matter of civic responsibility. And that political strategy has implications for society and its schools, the researchers say.

The analysis, published in the International Journal of Education Policy and Leadership, is based on a detailed review of governors' "state of the state" addresses between 2001 and 2008. Why focus on those speeches? Because they're the most widely reported examples of gubernatorial rhetoric, and, the record shows, they typically provide an accurate roadmap of where governors' policies are headed, according to the authors.
[...]
Over the time period studied, the authors found that governors defined the importance of education in economic terms much more often—62 percent of the time—than they did in other ways.

Governors touched on the importance of education for self-realization only 27 percent of the time. And they connected education to civic responsibility just 7 percent of the time.

A pernicious argument

There's a pernicious argument being made by supporters of S.B.5. It's quite vile in its attempts to pit middle class against middle class. It was on full display in the Plain Dealer over the weekend in an op-ed article written by Brent Larkin

Supporters of Senate Bill 5 own a convincing argument in the staggering cost borne by taxpayers for sweetheart health care and pension benefits now enjoyed by public-sector employees. That's especially true when those perks are contrasted with sacrifices made by private-sector employees.

Lest you think this is an isolated case, the Buckeye Institute leads with the same nasty rhetoric

government workers continue to prosper at the expense of their private sector neighbors. As our State of the State report details, the average government salary (not even to mention the entire compensation package) increased at all levels. Local government increased by nearly $1,000, state government by over $1,500, and federal government by almost $800.

You would think they had talked to each other before writing these screeds.

But these are the same failed tactics to divide that were made by people who opposed increasing the minimum wage, which Ohioans recently voted in favor of overwhelmingly. The same failed tactics used by the chamber of commerce pushing union busting "right to work", that in 1958 went down to massive defeat 2,001,512 to 1,106,324.

These forces against progress have always had the same prescription - the middle class boat should not be raised for everyone, it should be lowered in persuit of lower taxes for the wealthy, only then can everyone prosper. It used to be an insultaing argument, that has since been proven to be demonstrably false, now it's just craven and damaging to the fabric of our communities.

The Washington Post has an article today which reveals the true effects of this kind of rhetoric

It had never occurred to the Embrees that firefighters and nurses could be unnecessary. They thought of themselves as linchpins of the community — and one of the biggest rewards of their jobs was knowing that the rest of the world thought so, too.

“Kids go trick or treating in firemen’s costumes,” Jim Embree, 48, said. “Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts come and take tours and sit in the truck and blow the horn. People talk to you in the grocery store. I’m used to positive interactions with people. So it shocked me. To hear people speak in a public venue like I’m a Rockefeller . . . it shocked me.”
[...]
One of those was Heather Baugess, 44, a librarian married to a firefighter. Baugess said she was less upset about proposals that would require her to work longer and receive less when she retires than she is about how people view her and her husband.

“It’s not the money,” said Baugess, who earns about $60,000 and whose husband, Larry, earns a bit more. “We’re comfortable. It’s the teacher-bashing. It’s the negativity. I guess I live in my own perfect would where everybody supports teachers and everybody supports firefighters. I don’t want that to change.”

The whole WaPo article is worth a read. We need to stand together, to oppose these forces that seek to divide, we need to stand together and defeat S.B.5 to send yet another reminder that Ohioans will not be divided and pitted against each other.