More what-the-heck from my CTA

I’m still trying to figure out if this is a little white lie, a dose of doublespeak, or an “innocent” obfuscation meant for manipulation. I have always been under the impression that the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as “the nation’s report card” is the best measure we have for comparing student achievement nationwide. Whereas different states can set their own assessments and proficiency bands (which leads to all sorts of difficulties when comparing states based on their standardized test score performance), NAEP measures students from all states against the same criteria.

CTA has a few words on NAEP on their latest issue of California Educator, which focuses primarily on tests. They argue that NAEP scores are an

unreliable method to gauge the progress of students from one state to another due to differing standards. Because the NAEP assessments are not currently aligned to California’s content standards, and each state is allowed to set its own standards under No Child Left Behind, NAEP scores are an inaccurate means of comparison.

I don’t think this is meant to be purposefully asinine. But what the heck? Isn’t the reason for NAEP’s reliability rooted in the fact that it DOES NOT align itself to any particular state’s standards? And if it did, wouldn’t that make it an unfair means of comparison between states? Is CTA actually suggesting that the CST’s, which they so often decry, are actually the gold-standard? I acknowledge that many researchers have deemed California’s standards among the most rigorous nationwide, but the fact that California is doing poorly on NAEP should cause pause, not disqualification of the messenger (NAEP).

So, in conclusion: NAEP says we’re not doing well, so NAEP is not a good indicator. Because after all, California has tough standards, and our tests are standards-aligned, and NAEP is not aligned to our standards…so disregard NAEP data. Makes no flipping sense.

CTA Supports New Teachers

Guffaw.

On a personal note, I think the message behind this cartoon from my latest version of California Educator falls somewhere along the spectrum between lies and total bullcrap.

“Standing up for teachers,” it seems, involves ensuring that new teachers are the first to go when budget woes strike.To my understanding, the catastrophic layoffs that took place last March-June were enacted entirely upon the backs of new teachers. Makes no difference how many hours you work, how effective you are, or how valuable you are to a school.

The fact that CTA fights for more funding more funding more funding, and yet refuses to budge on many of its extant structures (especially those that pertain to laying off new teachers first), should be small consolation to newbies, especially when publications like California Educator continue to bleed them down to their last drop of political capital.

The CTA and Me: Chemistry cooling

Oops. I guess the title of this post was rhetoric. I wrote there regarding the altruistic tendencies of the CTA (there pursuit of helping children, widows, etc.) A spokesperson for the venerable organization was bemoaning cuts to education, ostensibly because of the insidious effects these cuts would have on children. One would think then, that such an organization would itself consistently pursue policies and behaviors that are salutary towards children’s “best interests.”

Alas, I had forgotten these posts. And I’m not exactly a prolific poster, a union watchdog, etc. These have come from my personal experience, from the last year or so, and I did not start out with any vitriol, ill will, or general nausea at the mention of unions. I have gradually become more and more disillusioned as I witnessed instance after instance of manipulation, mob-mentality, hypocrisy, and opportunistic exploitation of innocents (kids, children, the young, OUR young, etc.) who are sure to garner a sympathetic ear. I’ve witnessed this at the local (“no classrooms of the future with salaries of the past,” don’t help make calls to support bond measures that would help kids until they address our salary issues, don’t do anything extra beyond contractual obligations, etc.), state, and federal level of my union, and I have simply had it. 

My resignation letters are typed, ready to be printed and sent out. Agency fee payer status is on the way.

Let’s Put Rhetoric Aside. What’s Best for the Children?

I love reading comments like these:

Frank Wells, spokesman for the California Teachers Association, said he hopes legislators find a solutions to the current problem that doesn’t cut schools more than they already have.

“Schools have taken more of their proportional share in cuts, and it’s already impacting this coming year – the question is how much more?” he said.

“…When you get into these type of situations, you’re at the point where you’re making cuts that are going to affect kids.”

 

It warms the soul to know that some organizations are singlemindedly pursuing the good of the poor, the defenseless, and specifically, the young. While many would exploit  the institution of public education for their own ends, some choose to forego personal or collective benefit, and forge ahead as a vanguard protectorate of children.

The intricacies of politics of education notwithstanding, the CTA and its representatives set an example to us all in their fortitude, advocacy, and altruism.

Get Me Out

Well this is disconcerting.

Audacious. Salacious. Deprecacious. Perhaps, even, fallacious? Squeezing off a few cents from my ponderous paycheck to hook up the venerable Gavin Newsome and his gubernatorial gathering?

Appears to be an educationally empty and unjustifiable endeavor.

Downright disconcerting.

The Emergency and Exploitation

Thousands of teachers are going to be laid off. We must do something now to save our kids.

Then the wet blanket at EIA has to drop these party pooping steamers:

In 2003, California issued 20,000 pink slips, and only 3,000 teachers lost their jobs. The percentage will be higher this time around, but it is likely that a majority of the pink-slipped will be called back. So why so much angst? Because state law requires districts to give teachers what amounts to five months’ notice of a possible layoff. More notice is better than less if you knew you were definitely losing your job, but months of uncertainty only exacerbates the problem.

Then we get stories about local teachers of the year in Burbank and Santa Barbara County receiving pink slips with zero mention of why. What kind of system forces you to get rid of teachers of the year and keep others?

But why get caught up in such flummoxing factoids? CTA certainly doesn’t. Here are few rules for bargaining during trying times like ours, where kids, communities, and the general welfare of our democratic society are at stake, as sign-swinging screamers have recently reminded us:

* “Roll over current contract without re-opening any articles. Maintaining salary and benefits at current levels is a priority; keeping the status quo is a constructive victory.”

* “Do not agree to freeze step and column costs temporarily.”

* “Do not trade salary for jobs; in an effort to save positions, you could lose both.”

* “Do not agree to furlough days.”

* “Do not agree to or advocate for divisive budget cutting proposals, such as cutting certain positions (e.g. counselors, librarians or Education Support Professionals/classified).”

At least CTA had a pink background on their website a few weeks back. Solidarity. For the tenured. The rest get sent packing in a puff of pinkness. The hypocrisy is galling.