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.

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.

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”.

Education Commissioner Deborah Gist is a teacher at heart, and so she showers the legislative leaders with praise for passing a funding formula this year. Her opinion piece in today’s Journal specifically names the leaders and committee chairs of both houses of the General Assembly, and all legislators in general.

Gist congratulates the assembly for its foresight, leadership, and pioneering efforts in taking “a historic step” to develop this “transparent, consistent education-funding formula”.

Gist is smart to use the old behavior modification strategy, heaping praise on the generally misbehaving legislators. But she shouldn’t expect the General Assembly to suddenly start working for the benefit of everyone. This is Rhode Island, after all.

Teachers unions, meanwhile, also miscalculated on charters. They largely got away with opposing NCLB by positioning themselves against business interests and a Republican president. Fighting the heroic personae of the Dave Levins and Mike Feinbergs of the world was much harder, because it meant being against the great charter schools that people knew in their bones were making the world a better place. The parallel rise of mayoral reform efforts in heavily Democratic cities like New York and D.C. meant the unions had to engage simultaneously on two rhetorical and policy fronts. Over time, the mayoral control people and the New Schools people got to know one another and figured out that even if their respective approaches to education reform sat at opposite ends of the centralized / decentralized spectrum, they had many common convictions–and enemies. It was only a matter of time before, in the form of people like Michelle Rhee, the two groups would converge.

From an AP article:

Provincetown School Board Chairman Peter Grosso says because there is no set age when sexual activity starts, the committee decided not to set an age for condom availability.

And there lies the problem. Sexual activity doesn’t just “start”. Those who engage in sexual activity make the choice to do so. And as responsible adults — parents, teachers, nurses, counselors — we need to be black and white when guiding students toward making the right choices. And for tweens and early teens, some choices are the right choices. They shouldn’t smoke, drink, use drugs, eat too much junk food, drive a car, swim without a lifeguard, or stay up too late. And they shouldn’t have sex.

Providing these kids with condoms is shameful. Doing so without telling parents should be criminal.

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.

Classroom teachers will tell you they are supportive but cautious of such programs, and for good reason. We should make every effort to educate kids in their neighborhood schools, and as federal law requires, do so in least restrictive environments. But we cannot succeed without significant special education support.

Budget cuts have left districts looking for new ways to save money. “Mainstreaming” of children with special needs has at times been instituted to cut costs. Placing children with special needs in regular classrooms with minimal support will save plenty of money, but is a disservice to all children in the classroom. Without the support of special education professionals, special needs students will require a significant amount of the classroom teacher’s time, depriving other students of the attention they need.

Most classroom teachers would champion an integrated program with the proper support to ensure all students succeed. When full-time co-teaching becomes part-time, or when districts replace special education teachers with instructional assistants, the mainstream model becomes one of cost savings rather than providing what is best for kids.

The Bradley partnership in East Providence sounds good. A significant number of professionals, both from Bradley Hospital and the district, are included in the model. Parents and classroom teachers should be vigilant in ensuring the district maintains the full-time support needed.

Nowhere in Pina’s long article did we learn the opinions of any East Providence classroom teachers. Because of this, we should remain cautious.

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.