Those of you who work in unionized districts are probably dealing with a variety of looming changes and 'reforms' due to Arnie Duncan and President Obama's new Race to the Top Program.  In case you've been in a cave for the last month, the RTTT Program (so quaintly referred to on Twitter as "Race to the Toilet" by a colleague of mine) has created a mad dash for federal cash among the 41 states who successfully completed the application by the January 19th deadline.  With that dash has come a need for unions and districts to come to the table to discuss the language of the program's requirements to bring the federal money into the state.

My Union (Philadelphia Federation of Teachers) went to the table this month and sent out an email to its members explaining how this new program application would affect contract negotiations.  Did I mention that we had been working under an extended contract for over 2 years?  The final extension to January 15th gave the Union and the District enough time to sign the required paperwork in time for the deadline.  I don't think there was ever a question of whether the Union would sign the paperwork. With 2 years of negotiations, we had less and less ground to stand on. A sinking economy, a national health care plan in hot debate, and a new educational reform program worth millions of dollars to the winning bidders.

To make matters worse, in 2001 the State of Pennsylvania used the power of Act 46, which allows the State to take over Philadelphia schools and to complete a State takeover of the entire District. The results: an appointed School Reform Commission (SRC) instead of a School Board, the elimination of teachers' right to strike, and the limitation of the Union to negotiate basic things like staffing patterns and assignments, pupil assessment and teacher prep time.  So if we didn't come to an agreement, the SRC would make one for us. It was a no-brainer. If the Union signed the RTTT paperwork, thereby agreeing to put the needed verbiage in the contract to support the State's needs for the program application, then we would be able to maintain certain parts of the contract we wanted.

We were lucky enough to maintain 100% employer-paid benefits, receive both step (annual) raises and two bonuses over the course of the 3 year contract and avoid an extended school year and day.  That I cannot complain about. Unfortunately, in order to keep these things in the contract, there was the addition of two articles that will have a huge impact on myself and many other teachers in the district.

The first: "Value Added Compensation." In short, in 25% of schools defined as "High-Needs" (probably about 4 schools total) will receive across the board, whole-school bonuses for showing marked improvement in student achievement and 10% of schools defined as "non-High-Needs" will also receive the bonus. I am not sure how that translates into a number, but it's not many.  The best part of the language?  "....based on availability of funds."  It's obvious that the language was placed in the contract to satisfy the RTTT application requirements. According to the Executive Summary, States would have to show that they are:


(you can find the executive summary here)

The second: "Renaissance Schools."  These are schools destined for complete restructuring.  According to the new contract, should a school be designated a Renaissance School (RS), 100% of its staff will be force transferred (forced to choose a different school) or be given the option to re-apply through site-selection to work at the newly formed school.  However, only 50% of the original staff may be re-hired.  RS's are schools that have been in Corrective Action II for 6 or more years (along with other criteria).  These schools will be closed and re-opened under new management.  Organizations began applying to take over schools on January 20th. Technically, the list of RS was supposed to come out too, but in my opinion they held out until the new contract was ratified.  Should you decide to work in a RS, you will be required to work an extra hour every day, 2 Saturdays a month and up to 22 days in July (paid). Not for the weak of heart and VERY similar to the KIPP Charter School model that Duncan has lauded as a solution to closing the achievement gap for low-income, minority students (we have 2 in Philadelphia).  Side note: my school will most likely be designated as one of these schools.
Here is the wording in the Executive Summary to support the RS article in the contract:

So what's the deal with the 'pee on my leg' stuff, you ask?

I walked up to the contract ratification meeting at the Temple Liacourus Center to meet up with my friend Ann Leaness, and I already had a feeling of "it's a done deal."  As we sat, watching people file in, all I could think was how pitiful a turnout we had. It was the night before high school grades were due.  I had seen more people show up to ratify our contract extension earlier in the school year.  As some of my fellow staff members arrived and sat in the seats I had saved for them, I fingered my paper ballot, thankful for my tiny chance of being heard.  I had experienced many "aye/nay" votes in the past and was glad this vote would be (at least a little more) fair.

Union President Jerry Jordan took the podium, explaining, along with bulleted PowerPoint slides, the changes and additions to the contract.  We had all received an email around noon describing these changes in detail, and they were available in print form at the meeting.  Many of my fellow staff members had not read the changes yet. (I had read it online and took notes--I have issues.)  After reviewing the changes, as with all Union meetings, they opened up the floor to the 6 mics available for asking questions and commenting.  Each mic had a long line of people behind it. Some thanked Jerry and the negotiating team, some voiced concerns about Renaissance Schools and the scripted programs that they were being forced to teach that insulted them and stifled their creativity as professionals. From the responses that Jerry gave it was obvious that this thing was going to pass whether we wanted it to or not.

At least I had my ballot.

There was a motion to close the discussion, which passed.  Suddenly, Jerry says, "All in favor of ratifying the contract say 'aye.' Against, say 'nay.'"  Then, "The aye's have it, the contract passes."

I was shocked. Disgusted. Annoyed. Sad. Dumbfounded. Someone yelled out "This is bullsh*t!" I kind of agreed. I mean, what the hell?  Why did we have ballots?  I shook my head and walked toward the exit. As I passed the ballot box, I figured, "what the hay" and cast my ballot (I voted against it.)  I saw people tossing out their ballots or putting them empty into the boxes. "What's the point," they were saying, "It's already been passed."  I couldn't believe that around 2,000 attendees made a verbal vote to represent 16,000 teachers or that we had to vote on something that we had only had a few minutes (or hours if we were lucky) to read.

The next morning I found out that the ballots HAD been counted.  The count had been 1,831 to 885 according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.

But did we ever really have a choice? How many people threw away their ballots or didn't vote? What about the 14,000 people who didn't attend or couldn't attend because they were busy putting in grades?  I pay Union dues, but what am I really getting out of it?  Hence the title of this post.

This is a really scary time to be an educator. Perhaps, even, to be a student. Imagine finding out that all of the teachers in your school have been let go, that the school you've been attending for the last 4 or 5 years will no longer exist as it has.  This could be scarier than NCLB ever was.

Grab your umbrellas everyone!


Arne Duncan photo courtesy of Dept. of Education
Baby crying photo courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/mccord/ / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

As Obama's inauguration approaches, I have been hearing more and more about how racism in the US has ended, is on its way out, or is no longer an issue. This unprecedented event has me thinking a few different thoughts, but not one of them includes the idea that racism is 'dead.'

The election of a black president to what many consider the most powerful position in the world has inspired many African Americans and I have heard many in the 'black community' even stating that 'we now have no excuses.' The idea that this election has eradicated racism is a dangerous exaggeration. While racism as we once knew it has disappeared --separate water fountains, black face, denial of rights like voting and education--it has, instead, taken a new form. The racism I see nowadays is systemic. It is not based on individuals mistreating other individuals. It is not spoken out loud.

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, racism is:
1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination.

The belief described in the first definition often comes from a lack of knowledge. Most often, people form stereotypes and believe these stereotypes to be true when they have little knowledge of the actual person being stereotyped. This is what scares me about racism today. Stereotypes occur across racial lines, and are not always based on race (i.e. I am from New York originally. When I tell people this, they raise an eyebrow and say, "Oh, you're a New Yorker, huh?"). It is natural for humans to create false conceptions about people they don't know or have never met. Think of the stereotype Americans have abroad, or the stereotypes that Irish or Italians have in this country.

So what does all of this have to do with racism and the inauguration?

While Obama's presidency is proof that we as a country have evolved and moved forward substantially over the last 50 years, it is not the 'end of racism.' The racism I see today is in a system that continually overlooks the underprivileged and under-represented people. As a teacher, the system with which I am most familiar is, of course the education system. The photos I put in this blog are part of a larger problem. These kinds of conditions would be considered an outrage in a different socio-economic neighborhood. In that case, race is not an issue, but rather economics. However, it just so happens that my school is 99% African American. In that case, race becomes an issue. I have not yet decided whether it is or is not racism, but it is a sign of the "racial discrimination" described in the definition above.

Now here is where segregation comes in. On November 14, 1960 Ruby Bridges walked through the doors of an all-white elementary school and made history. No longer would black students be forced to attend black-only schools. No longer would white students be kept apart from their black peers. Rather, they would have to learn to accept them, whether or not they respected them. I assume that many of these white students did not have any black friends, nor did they associated with black people in general. Neighborhoods were segregated, too. In this way, each 'side' created their own image of each other based on appearances, impressions and stereotypes. The only way to break down the hatred was to give each 'side' a chance to interact with one another.

Desegregation did not end racism. However, it did open up avenues for change.

What has happened in the last decade or so has frightened me. I have seen the end of mandatory bussing (a system set up to aid in desegregating schools), the re-segregation of neighborhoods, and the re-segregation of schools. As a result, schools in poor communities tend to be neglected and receive little support because the community in which they live is also neglected and receives little support. With poor performing schools, how can students in poor neighborhoods 'make it?' It puts them immediately at a disadvantage. Were schools to be intentionally desegregated, it would increase the range of influence of a school across racial and economic lines and create, perhaps, more equal opportunities. I'm not sure if bussing is the answer, but what is happening in many neighborhoods in Philadelphia reminds me of how neighborhoods were set up during segregation. It's almost like we're moving backwards again. This racial segregation and discrimination through poor education is where racism lies today.

In addition, as I mentioned above, my students go to a school that is 99% African American because they live in a neighborhood that is 99% African American. For many them, their teachers are the only white or non-black people with whom they interact. For that reason, they have many false stereotypes about white people and white culture based on what they see on television, in movies and on what they hear from others. On the other hand, there are schools elsewhere (many of them also in poor neighborhoods) in which students never come across a person of color, and therefore have their own stereotypes as well. This is how hatred and racism start. Through sheer ignorance. This effect is easy to see when I show my students a picture of children who are from another state (Eeww! They're ugly!) or another country (Hah hah! Look what they're wearing!) who do not look like my students. It's frightening. While our world gets smaller and smaller, it is important that these future adult citizens accept others and be able to respect those who do not resemble them in culture, color or language.

I'm not sure what the solution is to these issues, and I don't pretend to have any. However, I hope that Obama's presidency will serve as a catalyst for young African Americans to dream big, put down guns and pick up books. This cannot happen, however, without a focus on the problems surrounding our failing schools and a failing education system. Without education, many poor children are left empty-handed and turn to guns, violence and crime. The decrepit and dysfunctional schools that exist in poor communities is a form of systemic racism as well as fuel for the fires of hatred, ignorance and misunderstanding.