Assigned Reading

Brown University conducted a poll the last week in July to gauge voter opinions about the economy, our elected officials, and candidates for office. One of the most interesting questions for those in Rhode Island education came at the very end. Here’s the question as posed by the pollsters to 702 registered RI voters.

A few months ago, in an effort to reform the school system, the state commissioner of education asked the Central Falls school system to make changes. The superintendent of schools asked high school teachers to extend the school day 25 minutes, provide tutoring on a rotating basis and eat lunch with students once a week. The teachers union refused and in response the Central Falls superintendent fired all the high school teachers. After negotiations, the teachers agreed to the requested changes and were rehired. Do you think the decision to fire the teachers was the right thing to do, the wrong thing to do, or don’t know.

Although a solidly blue state with strong labor ties, poor economic conditions might lead to an assumption that many RIers would think firing the teachers was the right thing to do. But most couldn’t possibly have expected the numbers, as reported by the Brown poll. Over 60% of respondents thought firing all the teachers at CF high was the right thing to do.

This poll undoubtedly offers a glimpse at the anger and hostility many RIers have toward teachers unions, as I have pointed to so often. Union leaders would be wise to take notice.

Teachers unions and Department of Education bureaucrats will be seeing a lot of each other in the coming year. Mostly in courtrooms.

The Providence Journal calls one court challenge “inevitable”, and rightly so. Commissioner Gist’s assertion that the Basic Education Program, or BEP, authorizes her to alter the way teachers are assigned to job openings has rankled union leadership. These leaders have been waiting for the first opportunity to challenge Gist’s directive, and have found it with the Collaborative. RIFT, the Rhode Island AFT affiliate, represents teachers and assistants at the Northern RI Collaborative, whose contract expired June 30. Forty-five staff members have been laid off, and will be rehired based on qualifications and seniority, rather than seniority alone.

The RIFT’s Michael Mullane claims the NRIC action “violates the contract”. But with its expiration, this may be another challenge to the law that mandates a contract remain in effect until another is agreed upon.

If the court sides with RIDE and NRIC, the decision could be a final nail in the seniority coffin.

RIFT is planning to file another suit in the coming days. Gist’s overhaul of the recertification process includes the elimination of teacher iPlans. Many teachers have been working for three or more years completing professional development and electronic iPlans in order to renew their teaching credentials. Union leaders will argue that teachers fulfilled the iPlan requirements as directed by RIDE, and the work should be honored. If not, teachers should be reimbursed for the money spent on conferences and other PD. RIFT is seeking at least two teachers from each district to sign the complaint.

From the beginning, the iPlan seemed a bureaucratic behemoth. Teachers required extensive, and expensive, training to understand the process and be able to use the technology. The paperwork alone was enormous, and “professional development” was too loosely defined. The bureaucrats at the Department of Education wasted a fortune putting into place an ineffective recertification tool. Now new bureaucrats have their own ideas, and teachers are left waiting in the dark.

Teachers near completion of their iPlans should be grandfathered, and union is right to argue on their behalf.

**Update: The first Brown poll of candidates for Congress in the first district has David Segal at just 5.7%, dead last.

The Rhode Island affiliate of the AFT made two significant endorsements this week. For governor, RIFT is backing an heir to a family fortune who’s father was an esteemed governor and senator. And for the congressional seat left open by Patrick Kennedy, a man born into wealth who never had a job, the union is backing another man born into wealth, who apparently hasn’t had a full time job since graduating from Brown. The two candidates are, respectively, Lincoln Chafee and David Segal.

Perhaps the union leadership has spent too much time at the State House and socializing on the East Side.

Anthony Gemma, another Democrat candidate, is a plumber who worked his way through college and law school. He them helped to continue the success of his family’s plumbing business as it grew into one of the largest in the state.

It’s not labor, but the politics of labor, that determines the endorsement. Who stands the farthest left.

Incidentally, RIFT head Marcia Reback explained last week that she didn’t interview all candidates for governor because “electability” must be a factor when determining endorsements. Can it be assumed that she believes Segal is electable? Segal is in last in fundraising, some $100,000 less than Gemma, the next highest candidate in the field. Segal’s raised $300,000 less than Republican John Loughlin, and barely a tenth of frontrunner David Cicilline’s $1.1 million. By all accounts, the young Segal is the least known in the district, although no official polls have yet been made public. It would be interesting to know how Reback defines “electability”.

East Greenwich is taking a giant step in its efforts to more wisely spend its education dollars. The School Committee voted 4 to 3 to end its relationship with the local union and outsource custodial services.

As one can imagine, unionists are not happy. Supporters came out in full force to disrupt the school committee meeting Tuesday night. Arriving early, they chanted, addressed the audience on their own, and refused to clear the room for the regularly scheduled executive session. According to the website my02818.com, the lone police officer at the meeting called for assistance to ensure the safety of the school committee members as they moved to a separate room for executive session.

After School Committee Chairwoman Jean Ann Guliano announced the vote to go into executive session, no one left. For the next 25 minutes, people got up to speak to the crowd while School Committee members appeared impassive.

Finally, additional police officers appeared and they escorted School Committee members down the hall to the library, followed by a group of chanting, horn-blowing union supporters.

Police stopped the parade at the top of the hallway, prompting renewed chanting. For the next 45 minutes, while the Committee met in closed session, police stood guard and union supporters waited, their numbers growing.

School Committee members in East Greenwich are making tough choices. With huge cuts in state aid, local communities need to be more efficient with tax dollars, and spend the limited funds where it will have the most impact on kids and learning. Privatizing cleaning services is a sensible option. Like busing and cafeteria services, districts can negotiate limited-time contracts through competitive bidding, and quality of service and cost will determine whether these contracts are renewed.

The hostility at last night’s meeting is an example of consequences of the difficult decisions school committee members make on behalf of taxpayers and kids. It appears the members in East Greenwich are up to the task.

Gregory Kane, columnist for the Washington Examiner, ends his most recent column this way:

When will critics of charter schools just be honest and admit that they just don’t want them to work?

Exactly. No one expects every charter to work. Some will fail, while many, like Chicago’s Urban Prep, will be wildly successful. The failure of many, but not all, of our urban public schools suggests we need to find alternative ways to educate children. Charter schools provide those alternatives.

Most who oppose charters do so not out of any concern for the children, but for the employees. For the most part, they are union supporters. Otherwise, charter opponents would be just as critical of the failing public schools.

The implication is that because charter schools don’t work, then we shouldn’t have them. What the charter school bashers don’t realize is that if this logic applies to charter schools, then it applies to failing public schools that aren’t charter schools as well. They clearly aren’t working; that’s why proponents of charter schools support charter schools in the first place.

Protecting the status quo means hoping charters will fail.

Surprising was the RI Future post headline Victory for Central Falls teachers! when they agreed to Dr. Gallo’s transformation model last month. This was the very same model the teachers union had rejected back in February that resulted in the mass firing.

But there doesn’t seem to be any victory post over at RI Future concerning the contract agreed to yesterday by East Providence teachers. Approved by more than 3 to 1, the contract makes permanent the salary cuts and healthcare contributions enacted by the school committee early last year. Teachers also agreed to longer school days, longer school years, and in increase in class size at the secondary level.

Could it be that the teachers, in general, understand the financial woes of the city? Or that the majority of the union membership did not support the hardline position of its leadership. Perhaps, the East Providence teachers saw what happened at Central Falls high school, and realized concessions were worth job security.

Regardless, the teachers in EP did the right thing. The paychecks may be a little lighter, but in these tough economic times, it’s much better than none at all.

Mark Patinkin is right. His column in today’s Providence Journal praises CF Superintendent Fran Gallo. Despite all the attacks (read the comments following Patinkin’s column), Dr. Gallo stood her ground, and in the end got what she wanted for the students at the high school.

Supt. Gallo herself was the target of profane hate mail. She was ridiculed in school hallways and at public rallies. It’s a disgrace what they put that woman through. For Gallo, it was a horrific period of attacks and derision. And yet she did not back down.

Dr. Gallo remained steadfast, even when under personal assault. Like it or not, the way administrators and unions deal with failing schools has forever changed.

Rick Hess, on his blog and at National Review Online, shares similar sentiments about Dr. Gallo.

The Rhode Island story is a truly encouraging development. As with Michelle Rhee’s new contract in D.C. or Commissioner David Steiner’s ability to win new language on teacher tenure in New York, this story shows how leaders with backbone can eventually force union leadership to accept a new reality. Yes, Gallo walked back the bold action that won her many education reformers’ approval, but good management is about discipline, not bloodlust. The point of school turnarounds is not to count scalps, but to win necessary changes, force out lousy teachers, and reset the board.

The union losses in Central Falls and East Providence have shaken the pedestal upon which the union leadership has stood for so long. Expect it to get nastier as the union position becomes more perilous.

Hopefully there will be more like Dr. Gallo, who will firmly stand for what is best for students. We, as teachers, should do the same.

Congratulations to Dr. Fran Gallo.

Despite attempts to demonize the superintendent by unions and their friends in the media, Dr. Gallo stood strong for reform at Central Falls High School. Back in February, her proposals were all but ignored by the union, which insisted on more money for any additional time with students. This was money the city simply couldn’t afford.

So Dr. Gallo terminated them all. Teachers were most likely assured by the union leaders that their jobs were not in danger. But as hundreds of applications poured into Dr. Gallo’s office, and current teachers were forced to reapply for their jobs, it must have become clear that this was no bluff.

Tonight, the Providence Journal is reporting the two sides have reached an agreement that will allow all teachers to keep their jobs.

In return, teachers will have to “recommit to their jobs” and interview with the school’s new principal. They will also be expected to work a longer school day, provide more after-school tutoring, accept a new evaluation system and participate in “targeted and embedded” professional development sessions, according to a joint news release issued Sunday.

These conditions just happen to be the very same reform proposals put forth by Dr. Gallo at the beginning of the year. Whether teachers will be paid any additional salary is not yet clear.

Dr. Gallo has won this battle. And so have the students.

In a post Friday, Brian Hull at the RIFuture blog worries how changes will affect education at Central Falls High School. Writing from a union viewpoint, Hull’s worries are reserved mostly for the teachers, and he claims those who seek to put students first are taking the debate to “new lows”. In truth, the situation in Central Falls is about kids more than teachers. Questionable are the motives of those who claim otherwise.

I was more than a little surprised to hear that over 800 applications have been received to fill the 93 positions that are available at the high school.

To be surprised is to misunderstand the employment opportunities for teachers. There are so many who want to make education a career, but cannot find jobs. More importantly, there are many professionals who believe that all students, regardless of their home environment or socioeconomic status, can learn, graduate, and be successful. I suspect many of those applications received from outside the state are from teachers up for the challenge.

There seems to be an assumption that “operational flexibility” will force teachers to be better instructors because their job depends on their performance. In this scenario, teachers are the problem. Teachers are lazy, teachers are spoiled, and teachers never care about the students, only about their huge salaries and benefit packages that come without fear of losing their jobs, no matter how poorly they perform. I don’t agree with this vision.

Dr. Gallo believes change is necessary at Central Falls High School. With the low student achievement and graduation rate, who can argue against the need for change? But Hull’s assumptions are faulty. The reason for the mass firing is because current teachers were unwilling to make the changes necessary to better meet the needs of the students. Proposals by Dr. Gallo were rejected or ignored. Backed by the union, teachers demanded the status quo be maintained. Student performance simply could not allow this. While the change of faculty will mostly likely have an impact, it will be the change in the way instruction is delivered that will bring about the most change.

On the other side of the coin is job security, high wages, and decent benefits as incentives for attracting the best and brightest to be teachers, and a commitment to support teachers with additional training and development so that they can be the best instructors possible. Stripping away the safeguards and protections will make the teaching profession less attractive (especially for math and science teachers), and in the long run students will suffer by not having the most qualified and effective teachers in the classroom.

This has been the long-term position of the unionists. Only if teachers are given more will the best become teachers. The 800 applicants for the positions at CFHS, many willing to relocate, should end this argument. Dr. Gallo and the hiring committee will have a giant pool from which to choose the strongest teachers. Undoubtedly applicants will be asked if they are willing to work longer school days, use some Saturday mornings for professional development, and eat lunch with students. Those who agree will be hired, or rehired, and the community at the school will begin to change almost immediately. Because all of the teachers will be non-tenured, it will not be difficult to send packing those that don’t meet the higher expectations.

My fear is that because the assumption from the reform movement seems to be predicated on “bad teachers are the problem and all teachers are bad,” there is no movement toward fixing the actual problems that exist in the state’s education system which lay outside of the classroom: poverty, stable education funding, language barriers, teen pregnancy, special needs students, family instability, lack of professional support, lack of stability in curriculum, lack of stability in school leadership, etc. etc.

The real fear of unionists and union supporters is that education at CFHS will improve. But it’s sophomoric to suggest those who seek reform simply believe “bad teachers” are the cause of all problems in education. In fact, most praise the work of individual teachers. I understand that school funding, language barriers, special education laws, and educrats are all factors that negatively impact public education. And while social conditions are a significant, if not the most significant, factor that causes our public schools to fail, I realize this is the most difficult factor to change. Decades of time, effort, and money have not made families more stable, have not decreased poverty or teen pregnancy, and have not helped to maintain the nuclear family that can provide the best foundation for children. Such social conditions will not change overnight, but we must do what is best to educate the kids in our schools right now.

I do not solely blame teachers for the failings at Central Falls High in particular, or in public education in general. Those who regularly read my opinions should know I believe many are to blame, including administrators, bureaucrats, unions, and the society at large.

The situation in CF has not been about blaming teachers. Dr. Gallo pointed to the failings at CFHS and explained to teachers that the kids needed more from them. The teachers, on the advice of their union, refused. The city’s leadership is now looking for teachers who are willing to provide more. The kids in Central Falls, more than more, deserve it.

This is irritating. From Arlene Violet’s Valley Breeze column on Thursday:

Last year I was on a panel on RIPBS’ Lively Experiment with Robert Walsh, executive director of the National Education Association Rhode Island. Following the program he told me that Caprio had been in that very day seeking his union’s backing. Walsh nixed the idea on the basis that Caprio was not a consistent friend of the unions. He mentioned that Marcia Reback of the American Federation of Teachers union happened coincidentally to be at the meeting also and they opined that they would support Attorney General Patrick Lynch and, if he lost, then Lincoln Chafee.

Do Mr. Walsh and Ms. Reback have sole discretion as to whom the unions will endorse? Representing thousands of teachers, one might think the leaders would need to consult local representatives. Even better, a poll of the union members might be in order. Teachers do, in fact, make up UNIONS.

Instead Ms. Reback has already determined the candidates RIFT will support right through to the general election in November. Arlene Violet is right; the early announcement leaves Frank Caprio free to appeal to independents and conservatives. If Caprio is elected governor, a real possibility, there’ll be no incentive for him to open his office door to union leaders when he considers pension reform.

For unions, there seems little benefit to revealing their political cards so early in the game.