Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label Joel Klein. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joel Klein. Show all posts

Sunday, October 9, 2011

The Tenure Trap, by Marc Epstein

Marc Epstein, the Ronin Teacher, had this article published by Huffington Post over a year ago.  Little has changed since then, except that the Chancellor is now Dennis Walcott rather than Cathie Black--which is also not much of a change.


Chancellors Cathie Black and Dennis Walcott stand behind Mayor
Bloomberg.  Always.  Unquestioningly. 

When there is evidence of bad public policy, you can safely assume that it took two parties working collaboratively to create the swamp.



New York's Department of Education and the teachers' union have found themselves mired down in a dispute over the fates of more than a thousand teachers, many of whom have no assigned teaching position, but continue to collect full-time salaries.

This group of teachers is collectively referred to as ATR's, or the Absent Teacher Reserve. Large numbers of ATR's are not instructing students in their licensed areas. Instead they often find themselves working as substitute teachers. 

At various times these teachers have been labeled incompetent or too lazy to seek positions by Joel Klein. He wants to fire them.

To judge from his statements and newspaper editorials, we are simply facing a case of old time union featherbedding.

If the problem isn't resolved over the next few weeks, Cathie Black will inherit this mess, and all her public statements to date indicate that she has bought Joel Klein's narrative, hook, line, and sinker. 

The primary reason that so many teachers are out of a job stems from Klein's policy of closing comprehensive high schools, declaring them "failed" enterprises, and replacing them with small high schools.

Since the closing is a "hostile" takeover the teachers too are "failed" and sent packing, rather than placed in the new small schools.

If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, you can lose your position with either a short time served in the system or with 20 plus years on the job.

When you impose this method of staffing on the largest school system in the country, something has got to give. In fact, it's only logical that a number of teachers would find themselves inhabiting the limbo world of the "ATR."

This limbo world can find a music teacher covering classes for absent social studies teachers, while his music program is assigned to a social studies teacher. I know because this precisely what occurred in my school.

The sooner the myths about public school staffing are dispensed with, the better the public interest will be served, because this is Joel Klein's self-created crisis.

Tenure: tenure for public school teachers is not a lifetime sinecure. In most respects it is no different from civil service protections for police, fire, and sanitation workers. You have to have due process in order to fire an employee.

We should recall that the civil service laws first instituted on the Federal level were the direct result of a presidential assassination in 1881, when a disgruntled officer seeker shot President Garfield.

Back in 1883 the cities of New York and Brooklyn served as the model for civil service reform nationwide on the local level.

The New York City schools once had a rigorous accreditation process for teachers. It included a meaningful written examination of the subject area and an oral exam. The Board of Examiners wrote and administered the tests.

As standards ebbed, the once vaunted Board of Examiners was whittled down until it was quietly put out of business in 1990.

The once demanding exam was replaced by a ludicrously easy interview and a more questionable statewide written exam.

It's no accident that the dumbing down of the hiring requirements coincided with the dumbing down of state testing for our children too. 

Mayoral control gave Michael Bloomberg the power to re-establish a Board of Examiners with the stroke of a pen, but nothing has been done to return rigorous standards to the hiring process.

Perhaps Bloomberg, who didn't grow up in New York, is unaware that a Board of Examiners ever existed? After all, it's far easier to run a PR campaign than it is to institute real reform.

The union, never one to miss an opportunity, has yet to call for a return to the hiring standards under the Board of Examiners that helped make New York's schools the finest in the country.Why should an experienced teacher have a tough time landing a new position you might ask? Well, along with the downsizing of schools came Klein's decision to budget schools according to the actual salaries of their teachers.

Before mayoral control, a high school teacher counted as a "unit," which meant whether you had a school with lots of experienced teachers or mostly rookies, the cost for staffing the school was the same. The teacher "unit" would represent the average price of compensating one of the 80,000 teachers in the system.

If a school closed, or its population declined, teachers who were no longer needed there were placed in available slots without having them go into the so-called "open" hiring market.

By forcing the principals to figure the real salary of each teacher into their budgets, they have every incentive to hire younger lower salaried teachers and to avoid the more experienced ones, who were too expensive. In Klein's universe inexperience and lower salaries becomes a virtue, while experience be damned!

Would critics of tenure suggest that if a firehouse is closed because of a reorganization move by the department, the firemen are responsible for finding a new job within the system? Would these critics claim that young inexperienced firefighters are preferable to experienced ones?

With the press providing the wind for his sails, and Bill Gates funding the school voyage, Klein's assault on teachers and comprehensive high schools proved irresistible for someone with no real administrative skills. Ask yourself which role is easier, playing Tom Silva on This Old House, or just taking a wrecking ball to the whole place?

Around now, you might be asking yourself why the teachers union acquiesced to the ATR? To say that the union has taken a pounding in the press and from the chancellor over the past seven years is an understatement.

In typical New York fashion, the union stood by when a good policy, the School Based Option Staffing and Transfer Plan was being strangled, and agreed to the ATR pool.

The SBO had a cooperative team of teachers and administrators select new faculty members collegially. If someone with loads of seniority applied for a job and had nothing else going for them except time in the system, they could be rejected.

The SBO was already in place and had been spreading throughout the system when Bloomberg took over the schools. So Klein's claim that he was being strangled by union seniority rules was simply a myth.

If the union was as omnipotent as the editorialists claim, why didn't it block, or wage a PR campaign against this new fatally flawed hiring process and fight for the SBO?

Yet the public discourse is diminished by the union's failure to make its case for the rank and file teacher to the public. 

There's no way to divine the answer to that question. In all likelihood the UFT knows that no matter how much ink is spent reviling them, no arbitrator would overturn the civil service laws and allow unassigned teachers who otherwise have satisfactory performance records to be fired.

In the end, the DOE and the union have been clever by half. Hundreds of millions have been wasted. The hiring process hasn't been improved, and teachers who remain the vital component in the education process are further diminished.

If this self-inflicted "crisis" were given to a business management class as a case study, it's likely that they would conclude that the negotiators on both sides of the table were idiots.

Photo credit: http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/hash/d0/09/4_439.jpg

Sunday, September 4, 2011

Quotation of the Day 9/4/2011


The following words of wisdom are from a blog called Ed in the Apple. I haven't had time to read anything else by the Apple, but this one is a big, shiny McIntosh--crisp, tasty, and more than a bit tart. 


Perhaps the most deeply flawed of all the Klein faux “innovations” is the policy which requires that excessed teachers are not placed in other schools but placed in a pool that replaces absent teachers on a day-to-day basis, at a cost to the system of over $100 million a year. 

The theory: every single teacher entering a school must be chosen by the principal, with strong suggestions that new teachers will be more malleable and effective than senior teachers.
There is no evidence that this policy has improved student achievement, there is evidence that the policy has eroded student achievement...
The ATR pool concept is a failure, it not only does not improve student achievement there is an excellent argument that it reduces student achievement, at an enormous financial cost. The ending of the policy would place more experienced teachers in the classroom, and, free up more than $100 millions a year.

Graphic credit:  http://www.writingforward.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/punctuation-marks-quotation-marks.gif

Friday, August 26, 2011

Hyperlogosensitivity

In this age of public confession, I would like to make a confession:
I suffer from hyperlogosensitivity.
In other words, I am overly sensitive to words.  Sticks and stones might break your bones, but it's words that drive me crazy.  Maybe it's the result of my studies that led to degrees in Literature and Reading; or maybe, my hyperlogosensitivity is what attracted me to those wordy fields in the first place.  

In any case, my eyebrows arched up to my receding hairline when I read in the New York Times that the word excessed is "union language."  

Sorry, Ms. Fernanda Santos of the Times, the word excessed is not an invention of the UFT.   The word appears 61 times in a document entititled "Agreement Between the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New York and United Federation of Teachers."  

A hyperlogosensitive person such as myself recognizes this as an awkward, bulky title--but also as a title packed with meaning.  It is an agreement between two parties; its content and its wording are just as much the work of Joel I. Klein as they are the work of Randi Weingarten.

And what does this venerable document say about teachers who have been excessed?  Take a look at these provisions (all from Article 17 of said document) and allow NYCATR to provide a bit of explanation:

* "Within the school, district or other organizational unit, the teacher with the least seniority within license will be the first to be excessed."  Teachers are not excessed because they have performed poorly; they are excessed because they have the least seniority within a license area.

* "Teachers in excess...must be placed in vacancies within the district to the fullest degree possible." The burden of finding positions for "teachers in excess" is upon the DOE, not the teacher.     

*  "The central board has the responsibility for placing teachers who are excessed from a school...and cannot be accommodated by their own district/superintendency."  Again, it is the DOE that is obligated to place excessed teachers; it is not the teachers' job to wander about with sheaves of resumes and attempt to sell  themselves. 


* "Unless a principal denies the placement, an excessed teacher will be placed by the Board into a vacancy within his/her district/superintendency.  The Board will place the excessed teacher who is not so placed in an ATR position in the school from which he/she is excessed, or in another school in the same district or superintendency."  The Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) is intended to be a last resort for an excessed teacher who cannot find a principal who will agree to hire him or her.


True, a principal has a "right" to deny placement to a particular teacher.  One wonders, however, who is directing principals to deny placement to so many qualified ATR teachers?  One of my former principals once complained that directives from the DOE streamed into her email in-box "by the moment."  Principals do as they are told to do by their superiors.  If the DOE were serious about its contractual obligation to place excessed teachers in permanent positions, they would issue the appropriate directives to the principals, and there would soon be few, if any, teachers left in the ATR.   














Thursday, April 28, 2011

Bing's Big Lies


     Jonathan Bing must be a very talented writer--in just two sentences he manages to spread four chunks of misinformation about the Absentee Teacher Reserve (ATR) in our city's public schools.     
     1) Bing writes that the ATR's do not have "permanent jobs." To the extent that any teacher's job is permanent, so are the ATRs' jobs.  They were hired, they did their work satisfactorily, and they were never fired.  What did happen is that they were "excessed," meaning that they were released from a particular school because it needed fewer teachers within a particular license area.  Considering that there are approximately 1,000 public schools in the city who could use these qualified and experienced teachers, one wonders why the D.O.E. has failed to place them in appropriate schools.    
     2) Bing writes: "State law dictates that the city spend $110 million a year" to pay the ATRs.  It is not state law that obligates the city to pay the ATR's their hard-earned salary; it is the Collective Bargaining Agreement that was negotiated and signed by Mayor Bloomberg and former Chancellor Joel Klein.  State law--as well as federal law, common law, and common sense--merely require the city to fulfill its contractual obligations.    
     3) Bing writes that the city must pay the salaries of the ATR's "indefinitely."  Wrong again.  Like all other teachers, ATR's can be terminated if they do not perform acceptably.  They are observed and rated by their principals just like all other teachers.     
     4) The biggest of Bing's Big Lies is that he refers to the ATR's as "teachers who aren't teaching."  ATR's are assigned to schools where they are given  daily or longer-term teaching assignments by their principals.  They usually don't have books, curriculum, class lists, or even a place to hang their coats, but they do have students to teach.    
     I know all of this because I am an ATR.  Mr. Bing could have known all this too, if he had bothered to do a little research.