Loopholes

Some people are up in arms because NYSUT recently told teachers how to qualify for Tier IV before the new Tier V goes into effect. One blogger claims that NYSUT is gaming the system. In my opinion, this is one of the few worthwhile things NYSUT, or any teacher organization, has done in quite some time. It is their JOB to advise teachers of their rights under the law, so they finally got one right.

Detractors would say that NYSUT is simply helping teachers exploit a loophole in the law. Apparently, the detractors say, this is wrong.

We didn't hear much from these same detractors when Mayor4Life Bloomberg accepted the CFE funds that were meant to reduce class sizes and used them not to reduce class sizes. Not a peep was heard when said mayor began using school closings as a backdoor method of putting senior teachers on ice. The same deafening silence was heard when Bloomberg claimed that he could evaluate untenured teachers based on flawed test scores, in direct contradiction of state law, because these teachers happened to have been hired at the wrong time.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin, a loophole is always acceptable when it's in the first person, such as "our loophole". It's only in the third person, "their loophole", that it becomes unacceptable.

Is there a single person out there who thinks Bloomberg wouldn't fire all senior teachers if he could find a loophole that allowed him to? I didn't think so.

The Surgeon's Knife

Looks like I'm going to lose my bet that the teachers' contract would be announced right before Thanksgiving. Unless you let me count Thanksgiving, 2o10.

Mayor4Life Bloomberg launched an attack on the UFT today, asking for the moon and trying to run an end-around through the state legislature. He wants to tie test scores to tenure, have the right to fire ATRs and in the event of layoffs, to get rid of teachers based on test scores rather than seniority. (All of you who believe that good teachers with high salaries won't get laid off, raise your hands.)

Luckily, Michael Mulgrew and the Unity Crew wisely decided to tacitly support mayoral control and sit on the sidelines during the mayoral election. If they hadn't, the mayor might be calling for more serious concessions, such as water-boarding teachers based on test scores.

I'm sure the ed blogosphere will be buzzing with analysis of this latest assault on teachers, so I won't go too deeply into it here. But I did find an analogy by Bloomberg rather telling:

"...Mr. Bloomberg said that banning the use of student achievement in tenure decisions is “like saying to hospitals, ‘You can evaluate heart surgeons on any criteria you want — just not patient survival rates!’ ”

Any doctor will tell you that some of the best heart surgeons around have some of the worst survival rates because they take on patients in the most desperate situations. What teacher will want to take on the most challenging students, knowing that by doing so, they are risking their careers? Bloomberg, who knows as much about education as my dog (sorry, Spot) obviously can't see that.

Stumping for the Mayor4Life

Mayor4Life Bloomberg, apparently not content to outspend his Democratic opponent Bill Thompson by a 16 to 1 margin, has enlisted the help of Rudy Giuliani to help boost his cause. Giuliani immediately set about helping Bloomberg by implying that a Thompson administration would bring a return of violence and crime to NY. The Times reports that Rudy spoke to a group of Orthodox Jewish leaders:

“You know exactly what I’m talking about,” Mr. Giuliani told the group, in what many people in Mr. Thompson’s camp have interpreted as a reference to the days of unchecked violence during the 1991 riots in Crown Heights that started after an out-of-control car driven by a Brooklyn Hasid struck and killed a 7-year-old black child.

Apparently, Mayor4Life shrugged off the comments of his predecessor, which seems to me like tacit approval of possible race baiting by the last mayor who tried to extend term limits.

Giuliani, who is about as polarizing a politician as NYC has ever known, is apparently out to get the "I'm still afraid of Crown Heights and 9/11" vote. He has the added attraction of inspiring hobbyist transvestites to go to the polls.

In order to further support his flagging campaign, Bloomberg is enlisting the help of some other famous NYers:

Eliot Spitzer is drumming up the "Hooker and Johns" vote.

Anne Coulter is courting the "Horse faced pundits with huge Adam's apples" vote.

Bernie Madoff is stumping for the "Greedy Amoral Wall Street Banker" vote.

David Berkowitz is aiming for the "Psychopaths who Take Orders from Dogs" vote.

Mayor4Life is truly leaving no rock unturned, however slimy it may be underneath.

Mike and Joel Plus Eight

In a recent poll, it appears that Mayor4Life Bloomberg is a mere 8 percentage points ahead of Bill Thompson. According to the Daily News, in a poll that identified Bloomberg as a Republican and Thompson as a Democrat (as they will appear on the ballot), only those 8 little points separate the two.

Camp Bloomie is also concerned because they believe there will be a huge turnout among those who hate him, and a much smaller showing among those who just kind of tolerate him.

I'd be a little worried if I were the Mayor King, as well. He's probably spent at least $80 million dollars so far, and he is losing steam fast. All his negative ads serve to give Thompson name recognition and plausibility as a candidate.

And although most of the dailies analyzed the mayoral debate as a draw, IMO it was a clear win for Thompson. Bloomie looked dull and defensive, while Thompson was sharp and nailed all his talking points--especially the one that may well dethrone the Mayor King--term limits.

Of course, the UFT is standing by, twiddling their thumbs. A full throated endorsement from our union might be enough to put Thompson over the top. Don't expect it any time soon.

UPDATE: Philip Nobile wrote an interesting post on this topic on EdNotes here. It appears the DA, to the surprise of no one, has decided to twiddle their thumbs a little longer.

Wrong, Wrong, Wrong

You have to wonder how the Daily News can get it wrong just about every single time. Today's attack on teachers focused on Fair Student Funding, a bullshit idea that BloomKlein have fed to the press as a way of democratizing schools but is nothing more than a way for the DOE to skirt the UFT contract and try to fire or marginalize senior teachers.We blogged on this issue several months ago.

The opinion piece wrongly says that under the old system, richer school districts got more money. In truth, the money was for the salaries of more senior teachers who transferred into those schools. As far as I know, almost none of that money went to the kids, but to the teachers who worked in those schools.

This article says that under 'Fair' student funding, money is allocated based upon student needs, which again is false. Schools get a certain amount for each student, but they can spend the money as they wish, including on large catered affairs for the superintendents who visit or on extra copy machines or perhaps even betting on cockfights for all I know. The idea that the students get the money is absurd. What has happened in reality is that principals have denied high needs students something they desperately need in order to succeed--highly qualified teachers. If a principal can hire a newbie for 50K or an experienced veteran for 90K, whom will he hire? And there is LOTS of evidence to show that newbie teachers are not as effective as senior teachers--most research shows that it takes 5 years to become really proficient at teaching--but principals generally don't hire those teachers because they cost more.

The article says, "What's wrong with this? Nothing. The students in these schools are clearly in need. If they either can't entice senior teachers, or if they are happy with the junior teachers they have, why shouldn't they be allowed to use the money allocated for their particular students' needs for more books, supplies or additional staff?"

Actually, there's a great deal wrong if a school can not entice senior teachers. That usually means that the school is broken in some way. It's violent, it's abusive to teachers, or it has no intention of enticing them in the first place. Rather than take real action, such as actually fixing the schools no one wants to teach in, BloomKlein concocts a cockamamie funding scheme.

Let's use an example. Suppose a school has 100 teachers making an average of 80K. That would be 8 million in salary. Let's further suppose this school has 1500 students, which is about right for this many teachers. That's a student teacher ratio of 15:1. If fair student funding worked as advertised, a principal could hire 100 newbies at a cost of 5 million, leaving 3 million. With that 3 million, a principal could hire another 30 newbies, bringing the total staff to 130 and a student teacher ratio of 11.5 to 1. Can anyone show me a single example--just one--where this has happened? Where anything close to this has happened? So where does that extra 3 million go?

I'll tell you exactly what happens in real life. Principals look to cut senior teachers to save money, or they replace retirees with newbies. Then when the savings come in, Bloomberg institutes draconian cuts to school budgets and tells principals to just deal with them. So teaching staffs become less and less experienced, and needy kids don't get squat because Mayor4Life cuts the money from the budget anyway.

Finally, the author of the article, one Raymond Domanico, makes the patently absurd claim that, "...fair Student Funding plays no role in putting teachers into the reserve pool." Pardon me? When schools close or enrollment declines, excessed teachers are put in the ATR pool and principals do not hire them because they do not want to take on the salary of a senior teacher under fair student funding because doing so will cost them as much as 50K a year. As a result, we have a bloated ATR pool that has cost the city well over 200 million dollars so far.

Imagine how that much money could have helped needy kids.

The Many Faces of the Mayor-for-Life

Maybe you've seen the ad. It's been plastered all over the airwaves. Bill Thompson is being portrayed as a hypocrite for a position he supposedly took opposing the millionaire's tax. The ad overlooks the fact that Mayor-for-Life Bloomberg also opposes it, and has raised the cost of living for middle class New Yorkers in many ways, including water rates that went up 12.9% in the middle of a recession and housing crisis. Of course, Bloomberg can afford to flush his toilets with Perrier for the next million years without feeling the pinch.

The larger question is, who is really the hypocrite here? Isn't Mayor4Ever the man who opposed Rudy Giuliani staying on for 3 extra months in the aftermath of 9/11, yet claimed that he had to give himself another four years so he could save us from the fiscal crisis? Hasn't he been the mayor been in charge during the entire span of the fiscal downturn? Nice job, Mr. Mayor.

Isn't this the mayor who banned cake sales in the schools while stuffing himself with unhealthy garbage?

Isn't this the mayor who once called any attempt to overturn term limits "disgusting"? I guess it didn't seem so disgusting last year when Mayor Eternal and his minions on the city council voted to give themselves a chance to run for a 3rd term.

Instead of voting to limit Bloomberg to two terms, we should have voted to limit him to one face.

But what would be the point? He'd have the law overturned anyway.

This Takes the Cake!

Literally. Mayor-for-Life Bloomberg has banned bake sales in public schools.

Determined to micromanage every aspect of children's lives, including what passes through their digestive systems, Hizzoner Eternal has made an exception for dark brownies and lemon bars, which may be sold once a month. Why? Because HE has spoken.

Mayor-for-Life claims that he's doing this for the health of children. This has not stopped His Mayoralty from jeopardizing his own health with a steady diet of salt and fat laden foods. That is different, of course. Bloomberg is a billionaire and gets what he wants. We common folk need to be led by the hand.

The Third Time's the Harm

Now that 97% of city schools have 'earned' As or Bs on their report cards, there's really no place to go but down. The State Ed. department vows to make the tests harder next year, and even the Post, with its masthead firmly up the mayor's ass, called for Klein to fix the broken report card system so that there is a more even distribution of grades.

So what does all the mean on a practical level? Schools that went from F to A this year will most likely fall down the elevator shaft grade-wise, but students will receive basically the same education next year as this. Schools, being living breathing institutions, don't change much from year to year. The only thing that really changes is where the city sets the bar.

Which is why, to no one's surprise, the bar was practically buried underground this year. It's an election year, if you couldn't tell by the pictures of Bloomberg plastered all over the city in an Orwellian fashion. It doesn't matter that the grades are so inflated that some of the city's persistently dangerous schools got As, as I mentioned yesterday and the Post reported today. Mayor for Life Bloomberg has an election to win, dammit, and it they have to use these inflated scores to boost up the 'education mayor', well, that's the cross they have to bear.

What this may mean for teachers is quite another story. If the mayor gets his third term and test scores drop along with report card grades, it creates a golden opportunity for BloomKlein to go on an unprecedented purge of teachers that could make the current ATR situation pale in comparison.

If the tests really do get harder, the scores of the vast majority of students will plummet. And that may be spun as a reflection on YOU, dear teacher. So what could the outcome be? With the election safely over, Mayor for Life could decide to start closing even more schools and sending more teachers to ATR hell. In a non-election year, more ATRs aren't a political liability; they're a blessing, because they would give the mayor the ability to push for the firing of ATRs without any political fallout.

Likewise, if your admin doesn't care for you, he or she could use those lowered scores to charge you with educational incompetence, filling up the rubber rooms. The mayor could use those swollen ranks to press for expedited firings of 'incompetent' teachers.

You may be thinking that Bloomberg wouldn't do that, because it would jeopardize his run for a fourth term. Silly you. All he would have to do to get his fourth term is drop those standards again in 2012 and 2013 so that the test scores rise once again. He could attribute the rise in scores to his purge of bad teachers, and Bingo!--term number four.

Yippee ki yay.

Can Even Klein be this Evil?

I've seen so many dirty tricks played in the 7+ years of the BloomKlein reign that perhaps I've started seeing things where nothing exists, but this item caught my eye because of the timing.

According to Gotham Schools, Teaching Fellows who have not been placed by September 18th can earn $250 a week for six weeks by doing four days of "practice teaching" a week (if someone knows what practice teaching is, please fill me in. I can only picture a classroom full of mannequins being huddled in groups of 4). That is certainly not a lot of money if you're out of work, and it's a pittance in NYC. Still....

It just might be enough to keep those TFs on a bit longer. And this is where the timing comes in. Six weeks after September 18 brings us right to election day weekend. Suppose Mayor for Life Bloomberg wins--is it possible that he will lift the hiring freeze immediately after he is re-elected and hang all the ATRs out to dry? As of right now, Klein insists that the hiring freeze will remain in place, but that may be just to give Bloomberg cover in an election year. Mike can claim he's doing all he can to place the ATRs and avoid the political fallout of the 80 million a year the ATRs cost the city, and then fill the vacancies with TFs as soon as he gains his unethical third term.

Is it far fetched? A coincidence? I don't know. but we've had the football pulled away from us too many times to be sure.

Mayor for Life? Maybe Not....

There's an interesting article in New York Magazine that details how Bill Thompson just might be able to unseat Mike Bloomberg. My favorite is suggestion #1, which is Keep Repeating "Mayor for Life. Mayor for Life." There are five other suggestions, and they are all good ones. I have said for months that I think Bloomy is vulnerable, and that mayoral control can be wrested from him only by voting him out of office.

And let's not forget the veracity to the old axiom "Familiarity breeds contempt". Not only have NYers had 8 years to get familiar with this mayor, but he has bombarded us with his image everywhere he goes, like a political Waldo. You're not even safe surfing the web, where Bloomberg's ads seem more ubiquitous than Netflix pop-ups. BTW, you can stop those Netflix ads with AdBlock Plus, which can also stop banner ads, including Bloomberg's. Don't tell your friends until after the election.

Party Like It's 1984!!!

OK, so my last attempt at telling the future hasn't exactly gone as planned. If you recall, I predicted a number of things, such as the return of mayoral control of schools, and that at least one of your admins would continue to be a dick. I admit, those were pretty safe predictions.

I did make one other prediction that came true in a big way, however. All the way back in February, when the mayor was having a hard time finding a political party that wanted him, I predicted that he'd start his own. I even suggested some possible names for his new party, such as:

The Napoleon Complex Party
The At Least I'm Not Joel Klein Party
The Screw The Workers Party

Today, my prediction came true. Uncle Mikey has decided to start his own party. In a move so transparent and Orwellian that even I couldn't have come up with it, Bloomberg named his party --wait for it---the Jobs and Education Party.

According to the News, "A Bloomberg campaign source called this 'a way for us to communicate with a voter about the mayor’s record and vision for the future when they’re making their decision'."

Really. If that's what they wanted to communicate, they could have come up with a better name, like:

The Sphincter Party
The Train the Masses for Long Boring Jobs Party
The Mayor for Life Party
The Test Prep and High Unemployment Party

If you have any ideas of your own, post them in the comments section. But I doubt you'll come up with anything funnier than the mayor.