NEA Delegates Representative Assembly 2010

The delegates at the NEA 2010 Representative Assembly listens to Diane Ravitch's Speech. Ravitch is a beacon of hope. An activists and public education change agent. As public change agents we have to stand up for better working conditions, and for the freedom to collaborate with our colleagues and to be autonomous within our own classrooms. http://www.nea.org/grants/40241.htm#

Common Core Standards New Development

California established its current academic content standards in English language arts and math in 1997. A new initiative is raising the question of whether it is time for the state to re-examine these standards.
What is the Common Core State Standards Initiative?
The Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) is an effort to establish a set of K–12 academic content standards in English language arts and math that multiple states can adopt. Content standards are expectations of what students should know and be able to do. (For example, California's current math standards call for fourth graders to understand that rectangles that have the same perimeter can have different areas.) If a state adopts the Common Core standards, it is expected to adopt them verbatim, and they are to comprise at least 85% of a state's standards in English and math.
The initiative is led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State Schools Officers. The two organizations have brought together scores of curriculum specialists and content experts from all over the country (and a few people from other countries) to work on the standards.
The initiative appears to be supported by grants from foundations, plus funds from the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. A list of specific sources of funding for this initiative is not yet available from the Common Core State Standards Initiative website.
A total of 48 states (all but Texas and Alaska), plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands have signed on as participants in the process--but participation does not necessarily mean that a state will adopt the standards.
What problem is it trying to solve?
Some see the current variety of content standards among states as a "crazy patchwork," with many states having learning expectations that lack rigor, specificity, and focus. Supporters see the CCSSI as an opportunity for states to establish a common set of rich, challenging, specific, high-priority learning expectations. The intent is to create education systems throughout the country that will help all students graduate from high school ready for college or a career and make the United States more competitive in the global economy.
Proponents of the initiative acknowledge that standards alone will not accomplish that goal. They hope the new standards will form a basis upon which states would then build systems of aligned curriculum, assessments, teacher training and preparation, and teacher and student supports.
Some people are downright skeptical of the Common Core initiative. As evidenced by previous efforts to establish common standards, forging a consensus around what content to include is difficult. Furthermore, some question the wisdom of standardization when students vary widely in their needs, goals, and abilities.
How might the initiative affect California?
Now that the Common Core has been finalized, California, like all other states, can choose to adopt it as the centerpiece of content standards in English language arts (ELA) and math. In January 2010, California enacted legislation requiring the creation of a commission of 21 members, a majority of whom were to be K–12 teachers, to develop proposed standards in ELA and math, with the Common Core making up at least 85% of the standards. The commission has until July 15, 2010 to put forward its proposal, and the State Board of Education (SBE) has until August 2, 2010 to accept or reject the proposal. This deadline conforms to a target date expressed in the Race to the Top (RTT), a federal competitive grant program that promotes reform in several areas, including standards and assessments. (Adopting common standards represents 20 points out of 500 in the RTT application process, and the maximum potential grant for California is about $700 million over four years. To put that amount in context, California's total funding for K–12 education in 2009-10 alone was $66 billion.)
If the board accepts the commission's proposal, the superintendent of public instruction and SBE must present to the governor and Legislature a plan and schedule for implementing the Common Core. If, on the other hand, the board rejects the proposal, California would continue with its current content standards.
What factors will the State Board of Education and California's elected leaders consider?
In deciding whether to accept the commission's proposal, the board will need to consider several questions:
Are the Common Core standards better than California's existing, highly-rated standards, and based on what evidence?
In particular, how does the Common Core treat Algebra I, which California encourages be taught in eighth grade? And how does the Common Core treat Algebra II, which California students must successfully complete to be eligible for the state's public universities?
Should the state endorse one set of expectations for all high school graduates, as the Common Core calls for, or continue having varying sets of requirements depending on students' postsecondary plans?
Can California afford to implement the standards and how would it do so? Would the state actually realize cost savings from implementing common standards and assessments, as Common Core supporters claim?
Can California afford not to participate if the vast majority of other states implement these common standards?

OEA Leader Gerson On Jerry Brown Support For Privatization & Union Busting

OEA Bargaining Team member provides information and history about charters in Oakland School District. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1QqePaO-DA

ON MARCH 4, Start the DAY for Students

STAND UP FOR SCHOOLS AND CALIFORNIA'S FUTURE

The UTR Leadership has encouraged teachers to Stand Up for Schools on March 4th in El Cerrito & Hercules.

What about the heart of this school district, Richmond & San Pablo?

STAND UP FOR CHANGE ON MARCH 4TH

Join teachers from Stege, Grant, Dover, Chavez, Lake, Coronado, Riverside, Washington, King, Verde, Peres, Lincoln, Bayview, Helms MS, De Jean MS, Gompers HS, Kennedy HS, and Richmond HS

6:30-7:30 AM Cutting & San Pablo Avenue, Richmond

OAKLAND TEACHERS VOTE ONE-DAY-STRIKE

Oakland teachers vote for one-day strike-Vote To Back March 4 Action Strike For Public Educationhttp://www.ibabuzz.com/education/2010/01/20/oakland-teachers-vote-for-one-day-strike/
Oakland teachers vote for one-day strike
By Katy MurphyWednesday, January 20th, 2010 at 8:56 pm in OEA, OUSD central office, teachers, union contract.
Hundreds of Oakland teachers union members who turned out to a meeting tonight voted to authorize its leadership to call a strike, once it’s legal.
The vote: 726 yes, 45 no.
The Oakland Education Association represents about 2,800 employees, including teachers, counselors and librarians, according to its Web site. If you round up to 800 participants (and if the 2,800 figure is accurate), voter participation comes to about 29 percent.
“It’s a real clear message to the bargaining team that they have the support of the membership,” said union President Betty Olson-Jones.
As I wrote in an earlier blog post, this doesn’t mean there will be a strike, and it could be weeks before the union can take such an action. But Olson-Jones has said she’s not optimistic the district will offer teachers a raise; the district’s chief financial officer has projected a deficit of nearly $40 million for 2010-11.
Next week, we learn more about how the new superintendent plans to make those cuts.
http://oaklandea.com/2010/01/21/oakland-teachers-reject-district-offer-authorize-strike/
Oakland Teachers Reject District Offer, Authorize Strike!
Thanks to all who came out to this afternoon’s OEA membership meeting! Despite the rain, we had a turnout of nearly 800 members, who responded enthusiastically to the information provided by the Bargaining Team and President and voted accordingly. Final tallies of votes taken:

Motion #1: “The OEA Membership confirms the position of the OEA Bargaining Team to reject the last OUSD contract proposal.” By voice vote, the vote was unanimous in favor of rejecting the District’s last offer.

Motion #2: “The OEA Membership authorizes the OEA Executive Board or Rep Council to call work actions up to and including a one day strike to resolve the current contract dispute. A membership meeting will be held following any strike to consider further actions.”
Yes: 726 No: 45 Total: 771 94% Yes

Motion #3: “The OEA Membership supports action(s) in solidarity with the March 4, 2010 Statewide Action in Support of Public Education.”
Yes: 689 No: 51 Abstentions: 31 89% Yes
=

Richmond Education Forum

Richmond Education Forum
Defense Of Public Education and Lessons of Privatization

Tuesday January 12, 2010 7:00 PM
Richmond Public Library Community Room
325 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond, CA


Public education faces a massive attack from layoffs of teachers, closure of entire schools, cutback on supplies and the drive to privatize entire schools districts as was
proposed by the CTA in Richmond. Panelists from the Oakland Education Association OEA, the United Teachers of Richmond and there will be a report
on the experiences of charters and privatization in the state including the Green Dot schools.

Panelists:
Mary Flanagan, UTR School Delegate
Diane Brown, UTR rank and filer
Eduardo Martinez, UTR rank and file
Craig Gordon, OEA Executive Board
Cecily Myart-Cruz, UTLA West Area Chair-NEA

Sponsored by
Progressive Teachers, United Teachers of Richmond
510-501-7347
http://progressiveteachersrichmond.blogspot.com/
United Public Workers For Action UPWA.info
(415)867-0628

Richmond, California, teachers union pushes through concessions contract

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/educ-d19.shtml


“Teachers were crucified as a step in the destruction of public education”
By Joe Kishore 19 December 2009

On December 14, teachers in California’s West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) narrowly passed a contract that includes a pay freeze, larger class sizes and a sharp cut in health care benefits.
The WCCUSD includes several cities in the San Francisco Bay Area of California, including Richmond, Hercules, Pinole, El Cerrito, San Pablo and parts of El Sobrante and Kensington. The district had insisted on concessions to help close a deficit of about $16 million.

Accompanied by charges of irregularities, the 423-415 vote came after 18 months of discussions in which teachers continued to work without a contract. There is broad opposition to the concessions, which will hurt teachers and students alike.

In August, teachers voted overwhelmingly to authorize a strike, which the union—the United Teachers of Richmond (UTR), an affiliate of the California Teachers Association (CTA)—never called. In November, teachers rejected a very similar contract by a vote of 701-671. That “No” vote was only affirmed after the union acceded to teachers’ demands for a recount.
Only a month later, the UTR leadership returned with a new agreement, and the contract vote was called on extremely short notice. The contract was pushed through in part due to a significant decline in the number of teachers voting. The 423 teachers who voted yes amount to less than one quarter of the membership.
Among the most punishing cuts for teachers is the elimination of fully paid health benefits for workers and retirees. Teachers retiring before July 2010 will still get full health care benefits.

This provision is intended to push out more-experienced, higher-paid teachers, allowing the school district to bring in younger teachers at lower pay and fewer benefits.
For new teachers and those who do not retire by 2010, employer contribution to health care will be capped, forcing teachers to pay more out of pocket. This will set the stage for further reductions in benefits over the coming years. The younger teachers will also be left with a substantially higher workload. Class sizes will be increased, allowing for a “maximum class size average” of 38 students for most major subjects in grades 6 through 12. In lower grades, the maximum class size will be raised as well, including to 31 students (from the current 20) for kindergarten through third grade and 33 students for fourth and fifth grades. These class sizes are far too high for adequate instruction and attention to each student.

The contract also includes a wage freeze, along with the elimination of five paydays per year—amounting to a 2.5 percent pay cut. As is happening to workers throughout the country, the economic crisis is being used by California’s corporate and political establishment, backed by the media, as an opportunity to reduce wages.

The Oakland Tribune, in an editorial supporting the contract, declared, “Fortunately for the district, the cuts come at a time when many teachers are looking for work [due to layoffs statewide]. Consequently, despite the wage and benefit reductions, district officials will have an opportunity to bring in new talent.”

Steve Greaves, a preschool teacher in an elementary school in Richmond, told the WSWS that the contract is “a real violation of the rights of our students. To have a maximum average of 38 students in a class, that means that you can have 60 students in one class and 16 in another, as long as it all works out to an average of 38.
“These large class sizes mean that teaching becomes a problem of behavior management rather than an academic setting for cooperative study.” “We have taken lower salaries than many teachers in the state in order to have full health benefits,” Greaves added. “The union leadership basically sold us out and betrayed that tradition.”

“Teachers were crucified as a step in the destruction of public education,” commented Eduardo Martinez, a sixth grade teacher at Sheldon Elementary in Richmond. As with so many districts, the schools in the Richmond area have been underfunded for years. “With the fiscal problems perpetuated by the state with their unwillingness to tax corporations, we have seen our supplies dwindle,” Martinez said. ”We have a very little supply of construction paper and not in the colors needed for projects. There is no pencil sharpener in my classroom; the students use their own paper and pencils. The ones without borrow from other students.”

Greaves expressed the opposition many teachers feel to the role of the UTR leadership. “They shot-gunned this contract through, not letting anybody know until Saturday afternoon [two days before the vote] that there was a definitive agreement reached. A lot of people did not vote because they did not know about it or were not able to change plans on short notice.”

Many teachers have complained about irregularities in the voting procedure. In addition to calling the vote on short notice, it was held at a distant location. Teachers were not asked to show IDs, and some have voiced concerns that it was possible to vote more than once. Despite the very close vote, the UTR has refused to have a recount. Whatever the specifics of the vote, it is clear that the UTR and the CTA were determined to get the contract passed, accepting entirely the line of the district that there was no alternative to concessions.

UTR President Pixie Schickele said after the vote, “This was a very difficult bargaining session because of the state of the economy and the state of the district.” A spokeswoman for the school board declared, “It’s not the agreement we wanted to bring to the teachers. It’s the best we could do under the circumstances.”

In fact, these “circumstances” are the product of the policies pursued by the Democratic and Republican parties on a state and federal level, now led by the Obama administration. The treachery of the UTR and CTA is fundamentally a political question, bound up with its subordination to the Democratic Party, which controls the state legislature. In the summer, the Democrats reached an agreement with Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to slash billions in state spending, including $6 billion from K-12 education. This is now being translated into crippling cuts in school districts throughout the state.

Both parties have ruled out any tax increases on the wealthy or corporations to address the crisis. The $16 million budget deficit for the WCCUSD is less than one-one-thousandth of the net wealth of the richest man in California, Lawrence Ellison ($27 billion according to Forbes). Ellison owns a $200 million palace across the San Francisco Bay in Woodside.

Responding to the claim that there is “no money” for maintaining teacher pay and benefits, Martinez, the middle school teacher, noted, “In a state that has one of the largest economies in the world, this assertion is ludicrous. In a district that houses [oil giant] Chevron, a corporation with record-breaking profits, this is shameful. There is no money because our government is either too weak to do their job or they are in league with corporations to destroy public education. I would tend to believe the latter since much of educational policy is set under the guidance of the Business Roundtable, and the federal government’s educational policy continues down the path of destroying public education.”

Indeed, the attack on public education is now being overseen by the Obama administration, which is promoting right-wing measures such as charter schools, merit pay for teachers and increased testing. Meager federal stimulus dollars are being tied to the introduction of these measures in the administration’s so-called “Race to the Top” program.

After handing out trillions of dollars to the banks, the Obama administration refused to bail out states facing budget deficits. The California budget crisis in the spring and summer was seen as a model by the administration, with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner declaring that states would not get substantial financial aid but should instead “put in place reforms that will restore their creditworthiness.”

The consequences of this policy are now being realized, and not just in California. Among the cuts in education now being implemented are: $540 million in Michigan, $300 million in Indiana, $101.5 million in South Carolina, $110 million from one school district in Maryland; $43 million in Oklahoma…. The list goes on. The combined budget deficit for all 50 states this year was about $180 billion. While substantial, this sum pales in comparison to the bailout of the banks, as well as the $636 billion military appropriations bill just passed by the House of Representatives.

The economic crisis, which has hit California particularly hard, is being used as an opportunity to sharply reduce funding on social programs and education, while driving down wages for workers across the board. More cuts are likely, with California facing a projected $20 billion shortfall next year. For its part, the Obama administration is preparing to make 2010 the year of “fiscal responsibility,” in which further cuts to domestic programs and services will be a priority.