Our worry is not KIPP or Green Dot taking our students. It's the favor these enterprises find with Bloomie and Klein who want to replicate those conditions in our schools.
I'm certain there are plenty of readers of this board who know the work required to create TANs and conference notes for each child. Things that had never been mentioned five years ago and now are required.
The one disagreement I have with many on here is that I do not believe the driving force behind this is cost. Public schools are not a money making enterprise. They are funded by taxpayers and CEOs like Bloome and Klein take no more money home for themselves if the schools spend less.This is not the Tammany NYC of my grandfather who ran the hospitals.
I believe it's about power and control. What is taught and how it is taught will exert great influence on our students in the future.What we see is a vision of future American society. A stratified educational system where few if any could achieve beyond their station.
Teachers who make this calling a career are far more likely to instill a sense of achievement in our kids. Far more likely to see beyond the scores to the realms of critical thought.
To personalize it. Last year I went to a 30 year reunion of a class I taught in '76. My wife and I were treated, with the other teachers, like rock stars. I gave a little speech where I apologized to the kids for not being the teacher then that I was now. That then I had had the enthusiasms of youth, but not the wisdom of experience. As they were at an age well into their lives with family, jobs and careers, they got it.They understood. So does Klein, but his vision sees that experience and wisdom as an obstacle to be removed. It's not about money, that's business. it's about who we are and what we stand for. That's personal!!
Well, it is about power and control of course, but the city controls quite a bit of money, and as far as I can tell it costs less to educate a kid in a charter school than in a public school. There are fewer layers of administration, fewer places for money to disappear.
And Green Dot is really not comparable to KIPP, I have to say. I've been reading the Green Dot Contract, which Eduwonk made available. While it's still reprehensible that the union lies to us about Green Dot, they do not appear to be remotely in the same category as KIPP.
That said, I'd much prefer to stay where I am, and there are serious issues with Green Dot's contract, none of which propagandist Leo Casey saw fit to bring to our attention.
I'll have more on that, but if you or anyone would like to examine it and bring issues to my attention, it would be much appreciated.
A cursory view shows:
183 teaching days a year--Up to 193 days a year for teachers
Class Size
Up to 33 is fine. Beyond that, you may have a conference to discuss options.
All teachers are observed and evaluated each year. There are no exclusions for seniority.
Teachers are encouraged to do jury duty during vacation time. Jury duty is compensated up to five days. If you’re stuck beyond that, too bad for you.
If your kid’s school calls, or anything happens requiring you to leave more than half a day, you’re docked a full day’s pay. If you miss less than half, you’re docked a half day’s pay.
Layoffs are based on “legal requirements and qualifications,” “satisfactory evaluation,” and “expertise and relevant experience.” Seniority is considered only if they’re not able to make a determination based on these factors.
Strikes are not permitted, and violations will go to binding arbitration.
If teachers choose a PPO health plan (like GHI), Green Dot will pay a maximum of $525 a month.
Maximum teacher salary is $74,182.
As far as I know, the "just-cause" system, the one Unity says is better than tenure, has never actually been tested. Their claims, therefore, are based on pure conjecture.
Notice all the rich corporate types behind the KIPP/longer school day/longer school year movement (e.e., Bloomberg, Gates.)
I think they're trying to socialize Americans of all stripes to expect longer work days and longer work years as part of the wonders of globalization. If kids spend 9.5 hours in school, they won't blink later on when they have to work 10 hour days. And if kids get 4 weeks off all year, they won't blink when corporations lower vacation time to 1 week plus a few sick days.
It's about the re-feudalization of society. They want us to be grateful for the jobs they deign to give us, be grateful for the pittances they pay us and be forever fearful that we can be canned at a moment's notice for any reason. But they also want us to continue powering the economy w/ consumption spending and personal debt. Therefore they want to educate people just enough to be able to run the machinery and the offices, but not so much that they realize they're getting royally screwed.
It's a delicate balancing act, but shills like Tom Friedman ("The Mustache of Understanding") help sell this shit in the NY Times and other media outlets when they say we have to compete w/ China, India et al. by lowering our labor standards to theirs, work longer, work harder, and work more for less pay. But it's not an accident that these fucking billionaires are all behind the "school reform" movement.
What is most insulting is that there are plenty of models for success within struggling schools now.
My bilingual-education 7th graders, (average time in the US: a little under 3 years) outscored the regular students at my school on the state ELA exam. I did not get so much as a word of congratulations or thanks from *anyone*.
It would be vastly less expensive than charters and non-traditional schools simply to make a close examination of existing schools and see what is working and what is not.
Hey RBE good call. I've been telling NYCed for monthst that it's about BIG vs the rest of us. That's Big Business, Big Media, Big Gov't.
You'll note that you see no call for this bravo sierra in educ in places like Manhasset or Hartsdale or Garden City. They'll be the bosses our kids will follow. It's alright for them to be taught to think.
XK,
I hope you I haven't given you the impression that I disagree with any of that.
I've been saying forever that models in towns like that are what we'd follow if we were really interested in quality schools.
From what I see in my high school, it doesn't much matter what model is applied. It's parental involvement. Though it's anecdotal, my experience has been that those kids whose parents value education and are involved with their learning do best. So, I think our question as a nation should be, "How can we engage parents more in the education of their children?" To me, that means taking some of the burdens from parents. Michael Moore's film "Sicko", agitprop though it may be, reminds us that many Americans continue to struggle to provide adequate medical care. How can children do well in school when finding acceptable, affordable health care is so difficult? Might we not, as a nation, consider how that burden could be lifted?
^Amen to the above!
Commenting by HaloScan
