It's in the Contract???

If you haven’t noticed, I haven’t written in a long time.  I took on a new job and role in my district that focuses on technology in the classroom.  I am considered a TOSA (teacher on special assignment).  My job is to teach teachers and students how to utilize technology to meet the Common Core Standards, Next Generation Science Standards, and college and career readiness.  It isn’t that I don’t get incredulous anymore over how schools and teachers are perceived by our communities and nation, especially with our new Secretary of Education, but I find myself finding what I want to say already written.  I never thought of myself as a unique voice, but one voice in many saying the same thing.  I did think, though, that I might have a different perspective as a teacher and not a journalist or administrator.  This gave a little pause to my step when I was planning on writing my next blog.  I focused on my current responsibilities and started reading blogs on Edtech.

Today I was sitting at my computer answering emails regarding a new tentative agreement with our district for our 16/17 contract*, and I realized that teachers and community members might not be aware of how contracts work.  It is weird to think that every year someone would sign a piece of paper putting them into a contract with a district and not know what that contract says… or how to read a contract.  I was incredulous.  

I think teachers need to know what is in their contract, but I also think our society doesn’t know what is in a teacher’s contract.  Society has the misconception about teachers’ unions strong arming districts into crazy agreements that allow us to NOT teach and to keep our jobs.  Teachers have a misconception that the contract gives them too many rights, or not enough, depending on the issue in which they are struggling currently.  These issues could include: Too much time demands, not enough compensation for work required, too many students in the classroom, too much time required outside of the classroom, not enough planning time, not enough support, a capricious administrator, etc.  

What is a contract?  It seems like a silly question to me, but it is clear that not everyone is sure what it means for a teacher.  A contract is an agreement between the district and the teacher about what responsibilities and time commitment the job will entail.  It is structured into Articles that address parts of the job that not only talks about the teacher’s rights, but also the district’s rights.  The contract allows removal of a teacher by the district, but it has to follow a due process that protects a teacher from an administrator that is being vindictive.  It allows a teacher to take a leave of absence (which can be a good thing), but it protects the district from having someone who leaves just to ‘try out’ another district.  The contract is full of gives and takes to make it have benefits for both sides.  In the process of the writing and editing of the contract each year, both sides compromise and try to make it workable for both sides.

Each article can be read separately to answer specific questions that may come up while teaching.  You can’t take one article's words and say that it applies to another article.  For example:

Article 5 may talk about the amount of time you are to be on campus and teaching.  Article 30 may talk about extra duties and how you are compensated for do those duties.  A teacher can’t state that they didn’t show up to coach volleyball (article 30), because they weren’t required to be on campus (Article 5).

Or

Article 6 may talk about extra paid days added on the calendar for a certain TOY position. Article 15 talk about a different TOY position gets 5% salary increase.  A teacher in the Article 6 TOY position can’t ask for the 5% salary increase, because their job has nothing to do with the Article 15 job.  

Another confusing point with contract agreements is when your compensation does not really equate to an increase in take home pay, but another benefit.  If you receive a lower class size, then that would be seen as a benefit that costs the district money, but not seen as a salary increase. Time is always equal to money, so less time required on the campus for trainings, but the same amount of money, would also be considered a pay increase.  More time required on campus, with no salary increase, then it is considered a pay cut.  So, if you have a new calendar that takes two days off, but changes nothing else, you have just received a pay increase.  An increase in benefit is another way that the district can ‘give’ something to teachers in the contract if they don’t have money to give a raise, or to receive some language that benefits them in the contract.

Over the course of time those compensations can be in all forms of agreements in the contract.  I saw ‘Waiting For Superman’, in it they talked about ‘teacher jail’.  I would assume that there was a problem in the past with teachers being falsely accused of misbehavior or not doing their job teaching very well.  These teachers could have been pushed out by an administrator that was being capricious.  The contract was probably changed to give more due process for these teachers to determine if the charges were true or false.  This would be considered a compensation benefit.  In order to receive this compensation, the teachers would probably have to give up a raise, or give the district language in the contract that took away a teacher’s rights or benefit in another area.  ‘Teacher Jail’ was presented as a waste of money by the district in the movie, but in fact was a teacher benefit placed in the contract.   Remember that the district agreed to the contract and entered into the contract willingly with the teachers.  They created the ‘Teacher Jail’ scenario and it was not solely the creation of some Union thugs.  In fact, it was created to help protect teachers against capricious behavior that could have been solved by the district by removing bad administrators. (This is just a speculation though.  We don’t have ‘teacher jail’ in my district and I am speculating on the reasons why it was created in the filmed district.)

When society wants to vilify teachers, they take the benefits that were given to us in our contract and say that it is unreasonable for teachers to have them.  They don’t realize what was given to the district, our employer, so that we could have that benefit, or the salary that didn’t increase to receive that benefit.    If the district is financially in trouble, teachers often give up benefits or even salary to make sure they can continue to work.  The teachers did this in 2008 - 10, during the great recession.   In return, when the district receives more money than the previous, we expect our salary or benefits to be increased by the percent of increase the district is now receiving.  

*Yep we are working under last year’s contract still.  It is really silly that we work all year under an old contract and just when we have an opportunity to finalize the current contract it is the next year and we are behind again.  This should be a blog in the future. :)

Changing Education Practice

Education is a never ending landscape of different concepts vying for control of your professional focus. *list of our recent district adopted programs below* It can be overwhelming.  I have left work and indulged in a marathon session of computer gaming, much to my lovely wife’s chagrin, to escape from the crashing wave of bettering education.  

According to the talking heads and ‘education reformers’, I shouldn’t care.  I should just be going in everyday, opening up my binder to Day 146 and reciting the same lessons I have done for the past 22 years.  I should have ‘checked out’ on making education better the instant I received my tenure.  

Fortunately, and yes it is fortunate, teachers rarely fall into this category.  We are seekers.  We want to reach all the students we teach.  The students change every year, and we struggle to find the best way to change with them.  When we change with them, we still want to keep high standards and improve our practice. As new things come in, more programs and ideas offer better approaches.  If one program works, it is hard for a teacher to drop it, so they just pick up the new one to meld it into what they are already doing.  

Unfortunately, teachers often have quite a long list of programs they are in the middle of getting melded into their classrooms and then they are told they have to implement more.  A teacher has the preferred ideas/programs and then the dictated ones. This is not a complaint, just the way it has been in my 22 years of experience. I think this is why the average teacher lasts on average 5 years in the profession. If a teacher makes it past 7 years, they are almost certainly going to be a lifelong teacher.

How did I do it? Lots of video games. Also, realizing that teaching is a process. Every year, find excitement what has been dictated, do what excites you too, listen and watch the students for what excites them, and keep telling yourself that next year you will be better.

According to research, how do you improve instructional practice?  One thing at a time.  Take one thing and make it work with consistency, and then add the next thing.   This is something that does not happen in education, because it is a tidal wave that we are surfing upon.  It is not a soft wave that pushes us forward, but a torrent that threatens to bash us to bits if we fall.  If we succeed the wave may push us higher than we can ever go, but it is a long fall… so don’t look down.

Performance task building 

Math Ninjas Committee work

Data Team Pilots

    Westside Writing training

    ELA Adoption committee

    Teal Pilots

   Tech Gurus committee work

Science Olympiad

     Dancing Feet

     Sport programs

     ELLT

    Safari Montage Team

    Smarter Balanced Site Coordinators (Interim and Summative)

     Middle school math articulation with AVUHSD

    After school tutoring

     TEAL

SAMR

     Support Providers for New teachers

Association (union work)

     AVID certification

    Boys Town

    New ELA curriculum

   Math Curriculum 2nd year implementation

    CCSS

Number Talks

     Chromebooks

     Smart Notebook lessons

     Google tools

     NGSS shift

      STEM

Project Lead The Way

     BYOD management

     Digital citizenship

     Special Ed (GATE, EL, RSP, 504, SST)

     Illuminate

     New grading system

     Fast ForWord

     Understanding the LCAP goals+

Responder tools

    Assessment tools

    LMS systems

    Websites

    On-line Math Homework curriculum

     ALEKs

    Big Brainz

    Front Row Math/ELA

New Math?

     Can I weigh in on the Common Core standards?  They are a return to some of the methods that found success about 15 - 20 years ago.  They are really not new ideas or methods.  They create students that can think and problem solve.  They are more difficult to teach and for the student to build up into the confidence and ability.  Once they can do it, they will find their ability to do higher level problems easier to learn because they have the concepts of numbers. 

    There is also a lot of writing to describe how they thought through a problem in all subjects.  Math seems to be one that most people are getting upset about though, because students need to not only solve the problem correctly, but explain their thought process they used to get there.  As they learn different methods to solve problems, parents and students are frustrated that they can't just revert back to the non-thinking methods of an algorithm.  Memorize the 'facts' put things into a column by pace value, or use 'long division' to get the answer.  Be correct every time and you know Math, right?

     I can tell you from personal experience that students can not problem solve in real world situations unless you tell them which operation that they need to use.  They really don't know math, but they can do an algorithm correctly.  In fact they will get the answer every time, but may not be able to tell you why that answer works.   Then they can just set up the algorithm and 'solve' the problem.  They actually didn't use logic to figure out what they needed to do, they didn't think, they just wrote the numbers with the operation and did what their teacher told them to do.  'Word Problems' were probably your worse aspect in Math, and that trend has continued forward to today.  It is not about how fast the train has traveled, it is about how you think.  I know for sure that I would want my daughter to be able to reason and think through her problems in life.  She may never see or experience the problems that she sees in a Math book, but long as she learned methods of problem solving,  thinking through a problem, and persevering until she got an answer, then she will be successful in any field she chooses. 

    To give you an idea of what I am talking about:  Ask a student to subtract 299 from 300 and they will tell you it is impossible because the 299 was mentioned first, or give you an integer as an answer if they are in a higher level math course.  If you tell them that they need to write 300 - 299 and find the answer they will start borrowing from the '3' (no understanding that it is 300), then borrow from the new 10 created (not understanding that they made it into a 100), making it a '9', then finally subtracting from the new '10' they just created, and find that 10 - 9 = 1.  Shouldn't they know that 299 is only 1 away from 300 and so the answer is 1?  Shouldn't they understand simple problem solving and methods of thinking about numbers? 

     I have seen the comments regarding the Math portion of the standards and the frustrations from parents that don't see the algorithm that they think of as sacred.  How can students learn to add/subtract/multiply/divide without setting up the problem the way I learned to do it?  How can a student understand Math if they can't just do a problem by rote method? 

    I also understand these frustrations, because education has been known to throw out the baby with the bath water.  It is typical for the politicians/education reformers to get a bee in their bonnets and then make policies that change education.  When this happens it comes down stream to the class room where teachers are told that they need to teach that way and don't ever teach the other way.  Then 5 or 6 years pass and then a new thing comes down and they tell us to stop teaching that way and teach the "new" way.  It gets frustrating.  Believe it or not, teachers are not in control of most of the curriculum taught in the class.  It is given to them by the administrators, school board, reformers, and politicians.  Teachers take what they are given and try to teach the best they can using what they are given. 
 
    Most teachers do not want to throw away methods that work.  We squirrel them away and hold on to them to bring them out when needed.  I know most teachers will not stop teaching the algorithm in math if they can help it.  They will teach students EVERY possible way to make them successful students.   The longevity of a teacher increases the number of tricks up their sleeve they have to use.  You should see my bag of tricks. 

   

Donations to Schools

I was reading my California Educator newsletter (CTA) and saw a question regarding donations to schools.  Is it fair to expect parents to donate money to schools? (pg22)  They had a proponent as well as a an opponent for donating money to schools.  Please read the article here:  California Educator on-line.

How would this make me incredulous?

One reason I'm incredulous is that schools NEED to ask for donations to provide great experiences for students.  The opponent is correct.  We do pay taxes and are expected to teach rigorous standards.  These standards (now with the Common Core) require computer hardware and software updates, new trainings, program development, brave teachers, and full buy in from students and parents.  These things require money and time.   There goes our budget; even the new improved budget for under privileged districts from prop 30.   This might be one reason we are lacking in funding to make a well balanced student with field trips, performing arts, and hands-on experiences. 

 Another reason I'm incredulous is the question is a loaded one.  EXPECT parents to donate money?  No, I don't think that happens in my experience.  (See the proponent's argument.)  We HOPE that the parents can help our school to do the STEM (Science Technology Engineering Math) activities, field trips, computer programs, technologies, and experiences with a donation.  Why do we hope, but not expect?  As teachers we know the meaning of a dollar.  (Answer - can't buy milk, bread, or even get to work without several of them to rub together)  We don't expect parents to donate money if it means that they can't take care of their family.  We hope that they can find the resources to help, because the students need those experiences.  In the end if the students cannot donate and the funding is not there, the teacher will try to make a way for it happen in another way.  It may even come out of our pocket and abilities to feed our family.  Why?  Teachers care.  I really don't know a teacher that doesn't care about educating students the best way they know how.  Having parents help making a positive education is what we expect, not a donation.

 Parents help make their local school what they want it to be.  Parents have spots on School Site Council to decide how the school's funding is spent.  Parents have the ability to be members of the PTA/PTO to decide how donated and fund raising is spent.  Donations do send a message... we want this to happen, or we don't want this to happen at our school.  Parents need to take ownership of their local school, because when they do their students achieve higher and have better opportunities.   If parents are not involved, then the students don't do as well, there are more discipline problems, programs are not funded, and students do not receive the extra experiences that they need.  If a parent is not involved they really can’t complain about their student missing out on opportunities, because often those opportunities can be had if the parents and teachers work together to make them happen.  If they cannot donate they can ask for donations from others, or businesses.  When schools ask for a donation to help with something, they don't expect a donation, but they expect support from the parents that should be a stakeholder in what the school provides.  It is about priorities. 

Political Spending

Recently the Supreme Court ruled against a California public workers union that used money for political reasons.  The problem was they raised the dues rate to cover the commercials and ads against the special election that the governor at the time had to determine funding and cuts to public institutions.  The use of the money to benefit the union could be argued, and I would agree with it.  The problem is:  they didn’t give the right to members to opt. out of it, which I have a problem with too.  A lawsuit was filed against this union and taken all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. 

The ruling stated that the union was wrong to use dues without notifying members and allow them to opt. out.  Then the court stated something that went over their ruling and stated that it was the opinion of the court that unions should have their members opt. in (not out) regarding any political spending.  I don’t believe that people should get something for nothing, but I agree that the union should have had a stipulation for members to opt. out of the political spending.   Because that is the right thing to do, all members feel like they have power in the union, and I know that making ends meet sometimes takes that $20 in your paycheck.  This added statement of opinion of getting all members to opt. in to a political fight seems as if that limits the organization from fighting something that comes up quickly.  Having members opt. out seems to be a better way because it allows more time for the members to be informed and action can happen at a faster rate. 

In the end, the proposals were defeated in the special election and the workers did not face the cuts that were proposed.  (On a side note: The special election cost the government 12 million to put on.  They could have paid a public worker like me 120 years on that amount.  Yet, they complain that they spend too much money on public workers?  This example sounds like they spend too much money trying not to pay public workers.)  While the court case was being pushed up the chain of courts, the union gave the money back to those members that were against the spending of their dues against the measures.  So, in the end the right thing was done, but it was too little too late.

Why do I bring up this?  This deals with a voice in politics.  There are only two voices in politics when it comes to money:  The workers and the Corporations.  OK…I am over-simplifying things to make my point; I know there are more factors than this.

Workers join together to fight for issues in which they believe.  These groups take care of an injured co-worker, protect those who are being harassed or falsely accused by superiors, fight for a living wage and health benefits to take care of their families, fight against outside powers that will minimalize their profession, fight against policies that will lay-off their members, and/or fight against policies that will worsen the work environment.  In the case of teacher unions:  Fight for the students in which we serve because contrary to popular belief we did not go through all that education and bashing for the ‘money’. In CA, a lot of these protections are found in a contract that is agreed on by both the workers and the management.  So, a contract should not be something unreasonable, but something that both sides compromise on to achieve a balance between workers’ rights and the bottom line.   I will talk about the attack on contracts later because that is a long blog in itself.

Corporations join together, or work alone because they have a total capital greater than all of the workers combined, to fight for issues in which they believe in too.  The bottom line is the biggest issue.  I don’t begrudge them for this thought process, because if I owned a corporation I would want it to be extremely profitable too.  The thing is:  The workers are the biggest cost to corporations.  So, if they can remove contract rights and/or remove unions they will have the biggest voice in politics.  Limiting ‘special interest groups’, such as teachers, will eliminate the voice behind having to pay for education/public services.  This also saves their bottom line, because they want keep as much money as they can and not pay taxes on it.   They will spend hundreds of millions on a CEO and an ad campaign against public workers, higher taxes, regulations, or a politician that will fight against these profit cutters.  (Once again:  If you think about how much they spend on a single person and ads, then you realize how much money they are saving on taxes, or the profits that they actually have.  You also realize that they can pay someone like me for 2,000 years on 200 million.  This includes all the extra costs in having an employee, because my salary is around 77,000 a year.)

Now if the Supreme Court’s opinions about opt. in, or even opt. out, is enforced in unions,  then why shouldn’t public corporations have to go their stock holders to have them opt. in/out of their political support?   I know how they will get around having to do this:  Give their CEO a bonus of 20 million and then they give it to the political campaign, but still… shouldn’t they have to tell their stock holders how they spend their money on attack ads against unions or for politicians and give them an opportunity to remove their profits from that expenditure?

Workers and Corporations need to share the voice in politics.  The corporations need to remind us that receiving profits and being successful are an important part of a healthy economy.  Workers need to remind us that they are the majority and deserve to be seen as more important than a bottom line, or that an extremely large profit is all going to a relative few at the top of the corporation structure.  To take away one of these voices would be detrimental to America.  We need to encourage debate and thinking, not create an environment that silences the opposition because they have less/more money.  The only way workers will be able to compete with the trillion dollars American corporations have right now in savings (seriously hire someone with that money, you could hire me for 10,000,000 years with that!) is to come together collectively with $20 each and a voice.  That is called a union and that is why I support them.

Public School - Flagship Enterprise

Here comes our flagship!   It is the best in the fleet!  Don’t look behind it though, because we are still using some of old beat-up ships too.  This analogy might seem a little silly when comparing it to education, but this is honestly what a lot of people do to make their point against or for public education. 

I have watched movies, TV programs, and newscasts regarding the ‘reform’ of public education.  Most of these describe a school in which public funds go to private organizations to create Public Charter schools.  They show students fully engaged in the education process:  Raising their hands, using technology, having group discussions, writing on paper, and listening intently to the teacher while they teach are all ways of showing in quick movie clip how the school is a ‘high’ achieving academic marvel.

Then they show clips of the local public school.  It is worn out and thrashed.  The kids are pushing their way from class to class.  The desks are in shambles.  It seriously looks like a nuclear disaster struck and the school is abandoned.  Finally they show concerned parents wanting to get into the awesome Charter school, but unfortunately too many people want to go there.  So, they have a lottery system that chooses who can attend.  They show parents and students crying when their number isn’t called, because they have to go back to their horrible public school. 

Maybe you have seen these exact same broadcasts? 

I have seen movies, TV programs, and newscasts celebrating the local schools.  Most of these describe a public school that has achieved great things.  Here are your average kids that create a program to help their community, or received a distinguished school award from the state.  They win a National Academic Decathlon, or their football team makes it to the National Finals.  They may surprisingly show students fully engaged in the education process:  Raising their hands, using technology, having group discussions, writing on paper, and listening intently to the teacher while they teach are all ways of showing in quick movie clip how the school is a ‘high’ achieving academic marvel.

In this paragraph, I should be describing how they then show low performing Charter schools…but unfortunately this doesn’t seem to be a balanced reporting when it comes to broadcasts.  You can read about them in a quick Google search: ‘Failing Charter Schools’  (Here is one article: http://www.news-journalonline.com/news/local/flagler/2012/07/16/failing-flagler-charter-school-may-expand.html ) 

Maybe you have seen these exact same broadcasts?

About a year ago, a new study found that Charter schools and Public schools are achieving at the same level academically.  It was reported on the mainstream Evening news too!   These results surprise me because most of the lowest scoring students, those who are special needs or EL, do not have services provided in most Charter Schools, so they can’t attend.  If you remove those students, give only students in which parents have to fill in an application to attend, and give the ability to remove a student if they are not following your program or a discipline problem, how could you do poorly?  It would seem that you have a pretty stacked deck to have a high achieving school.  The truth is:  Some schools are awesome, some are good, some are ok, and some are bad.  This is true regardless of Charter, or public.

 It should dawn on you as to what is being reported upon.  It is the flag ship.  It is the best of the best on both sides.  They are reporting on the newest and best and bringing it out for all to see.   I just don’t understand why the local public school is getting the bad rap?  It seems as if reform is just about closing down the public school for a charter school.  Why can’t it be about the dilapidated school that needs to be fixed up?  Why can’t it be about spending the money to make the public school look like the new charter built down the street?  Why can’t money be spent on making the Public schools like the all the best schools in the country?

How did we get to blaming the school and not doing anything about it, except punishing the school?  Everyone knows that if you believe something is bad, your actions start to reflect that belief and your children start acting the same way.  If you believe your local school is bad, maybe your actions and the actions of your children are not helping the problem, but making it worse.  It is time for a positive attitude toward education.  If we are positive, our children will be positive and our schools will change around us.   

Instead of putting forth our ‘flag ship schools’ maybe we should take a look at those who need help, or those who are just good and see how we can make them excellent.  Attitude toward the school is a big part of the change, like I mentioned above, but also a realization that every individual can take part in the improvement of the local public school.  Get your fingerprints and TB test, because those who take an interest in improving things have to go there to help.  Volunteer to SKYPE from work into a classroom, so that you can get students excited about learning a trade, or receive an education to become a professional like you.  Volunteer to help a school with an afterschool activity, like a Science Fair.  Instead of complaining about something you don’t like, get involved and change it.  Sometimes when you are involved in the making of something good, you realize that there are a lot of individuals that having been working hard at it for a long time and are relieved to find that others care too. 

NEA RA

I am in Washington, DC at the National Educators Association Representative Assembly.  Annually representatives from all across the country, about 10,000, come together and vote on the direction in which our association should take.  We vote using Robert’s Rule of Order on policies, political stances, expenditures and other budgetary concerns that the NEA will implement for next year.  It is a big responsibility and one that I take seriously as a representative from a school district with a lot of varying opinions and political thoughts.   Often I need to vote ‘no’ on something that personally I agree with, but I know would be a divisive issue for my teachers association. 

One of those issues we voted on last year:  The support of President Obama for re-election.  I know that my school district would not agree on the support of Obama and some would argue against the union’s constant support of the Democratic Party.   Plus, I wasn’t so keen about Obama’s stances on education with Race to the Top.   So, I voted against the support.  The vote was 63% in favor of the support. 

Now it is a year later.  Campaign mode is in full swing.  It seems as if every other sentence is pro-Obama and how awesome he is.  A member of the California caucus came up to the mike and yelled at everyone for supporting Obama and scolding the President of CTA for not remembering Race to the Top and other education stances that we were against.  Her statements, posture, and attitude made me think about my feelings toward our support of the President.  I had to conclude that her anger toward the President of CTA was wrong.  He was fulfilling the mandate set up by his membership to support Obama for re-election.  How can you be angry with an elected official that fulfills what the majority says they want you to do?  I would have done the same thing.

I have drawn that conclusion regarding the CTA president and NEA president, but what does that mean for me?  Part of the problem in any group is that they are not unified and so they are easily taken down and defeated.  The opponents of public education seem to have the same talking points and read off the same paper.  I don’t know if they actually agree with what they are saying, but they believe in the cause.  They know that if they say it and others say the same thing, it creates a reality that everyone starts to believe and talk about. 

 It means that I need to get onboard and talk about the good things that that Obama has done for our country.  The Federal Jobs Money saved a lot of teachers’ jobs.  He set aside funds for education.  He passed into law a bill that protects women’s pay and the Health Care reform will insure many families at my school that do not currently have health insurance.  It could be a lot worse.  Considering what I am hearing Romney say about education, it might be in the future.

That is what it means to be a part of something bigger than you.  At the World War II memorial, I was totally blown away once again by the sacrifices made by those who believed in the cause.  Those back home and those overseas fighting in battles that seemed hopeless, but they prevailed against the odds because they did it together.   I don’t know if they felt like rushing up the hill from the ocean and taking those guns on the hill, but they ran forward with one purpose to make it happen, willing to sacrifice themselves for the greater good.  Supporting Obama might not be the same thing, but saving public education sure feels like that sometimes.

http://dennis2delegates.com/uploads/files/x/000/080/68e/NEACandidateComparison060712.pdf?1339528790