In This Issue:
 |
| • |
Pretzel Logic: L.A. TIMES ENDORSEMENTS FOR SCHOOL BOARD |
|
| • |
LAUSD’S DEASY, UNION SPAR OVER TEACHER EVALUATION MEASURES |
|
| • |
EDUCATION REFORM - IT’S REALLY ABOUT POLITICS, POWER AND PROFIT |
|
| • |
THE STATE OF THE UNION: Early Childhood Ed, Career+Technical Education and STEM, Higher Ed, Gun Violence and Citizenship |
|
| • |
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T FIT: The Rest (but
not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other Sources |
|
| • |
EVENTS: Coming up next week... |
|
| • |
What can YOU do? |
|
Featured Links:
|
|
|
|
FROM THE LA TIMES: “We'll be upfront about this: We
consider Garcia a poor choice for the school board, and we always have.
In her last reelection bid, we endorsed her only because there were no
candidates running against her.
“Garcia is a divisive and sometimes careless force on the board who
lacks grace and thoughtfulness as its leader. Her positions seem less
considered than reactive. Her concerns over whether schools are
improving have not extended to underperforming charter schools, and her
response when challenged on this is simply unacceptable: She says the
district doesn't have enough money to oversee the charters properly and
she doesn't want to do more to police them. Likewise, her retort about a
serious conflict of interest involving former Supt. Ramon C. Cortines —
"I don't know what is interesting here," she said in an interview with
The Times' editorial board — reflects a dismissiveness and lack of basic
understanding that is truly disturbing.”
THAT, GENTLE READER, IS THE LA TIMES POSITIVE ENDORSEMENT OF MONICA
GARCIA! (Imagine if they didn’t like her.) And watch her campaign ads:
Endorsed by the L.A. Times!
The Times editorial board continues, spouting their typical
anti-union/pro-®eform rhetoric: “The three UTLA-backed candidates spout
typical anti-reform rhetoric and would set the district back years.”
…AND OFFERS THE FOLLOWING NON-ENDORSEMENT:
“We had hopes for Isabel Vazquez, a first-grade teacher in the district
who is backed by neither UTLA nor big-money reformers. She espouses a
more balanced and nuanced approach to improving schools and has a
refreshing ground-level perspective on how reform plays out in the
classroom. But Vazquez has made it clear that she would not vote to
extend Deasy's contract once it expires. That's too great an obstacle to
overlook. If it were clear that Deasy had enough support on the board
to protect him, Vazquez's position might be a minor issue, but his
situation is potentially precarious. The superintendent is far more
important to the schools than the quality of any single board member.”
The Times believes Superintendent Deasy is more important than:
• Garcia being a poor choice both historically and currently?
• Garcia’s divisiveness, carelessness, lack of grace and thoughtfulness?
• Her reactionary lack of consideration?
• Her championship of underperforming charter schools? (The Times
doesn’t quite go this far – but one only needs to consider the case of
Academia Semillas del Pueblo (http://lat.ms/Vs11St) and then track Academia Semillas’ financial support of her campaign. (http://bit.ly/XgkUZE)
• LAUSD doesn’t have enough money to oversee charters …but charters have enough money to support Monica’s reelection?
• Monica’s failure as a public trustee to NOT JUST RECOGNIZE THE
APPEARANCE OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST – BUT TO TOLERATE A “PROLONGED,
BLATANT AND LUCRATIVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST” in Supt. Cortines’
concurrent employment as LAUSD superintendent and a paid
member-of-the-board-and-stockholder-in a textbook publishing company
doing business with the District? http://lat.ms/XPpy1U/ http://bit.ly/Z5Sy4y
• Never mind that Monica then went on to force the naming of a school
after Cortines over the objection of the parents, students and school
community?
Quoting the Times: Garcia “reflects a dismissiveness and lack of basic
understanding that is truly disturbing.” That dismissiveness+lack of
understanding extends to district employees, teachers, parents,
students, policy and the law. She just doesn’t get it!
Fundraising and insider special interest politics-as-unusual? The care
and feeding of billionaires? Those Monica accepts and understands.
4LAKIDS NOTES THAT SUPERINTENDENT DEASY IS NOT ON THE BALLOT. But the
Times Editorial Board sets him up as “The Write-off Candidate”
Dr. Deasy’s record of failing to monitor and report child abuse is not
on the ballot. His failure to address oversight of charter schools is
not on the ballot. His reconstitution of schools that continue to fail -
and give-away of new schools - is not on the ballot. His failure to
respond to parents, school communities and his own employees in favor of
his “my way or the highway leadership” is not on the ballot. His
scheme to redirect $500+ million in construction+repair bond funds to
tablet computers is not on the ballot. His layoff of 7000 teachers last
year – increasing class size – is not on the ballot.
Dr Deasy has eliminated, decimated and/or eviscerated programs such as
Adult Education, Early Childhood Education, Arts and Music Ed, Health
Ed, Electives, After School Programs. His current policy is to make
LAUSD highly popular and respected and successful Magnet Program a
weapon to reconstitute schools. Those issues are not on the ballot.
The ®eforms that Deasy is for are: Improving test scores, Measuring
teacher performance and Firing bad teachers. Yet Deasy&Co. waffle
on what “bad teachers” even are. Are they teachers who are incompetent
and don’t know their subject matter? Are they teachers who give too
many ‘A’s? …or ‘D’s and ‘F’s? Algebraically: Do they teach in schools
where the API is less than x? …or the AYP isn’t more than y? …or the PI
status is more than z? Are they third grade teachers whose students
don’t read at grade level? Are they perverts and child molesters? Are
they identified by test scores or peer review or random visits by the
superintendent himself on the second day of school?
Deasy, per his supporters, is a game changer – and he changed the game
again this week with his newest re-interpretation of the Teacher
Assessment Agreement reached with UTLA last month, (see LA Unified to
Use Test Scores to Rate Teachers - following)
Dr. Deasy is not on the ballot …but the Times Editorial Board makes
Deasy a litmus test for their endorsement. He is their indispensable man
– with a cult of personality attached - as long as having an unblinking
monomaniacal focus on Value Added Teacher Assessment and Standardized
Test Scores can be interpreted as a personality trait.
Dr. Deasy is not on the ballot. But to paraphrase President Obama: Dr. Deasy deserves a vote.
And that’s what we have.
If Monica Garcia is defeated in District 2, if Steve Zimmer is
re-elected in District 4 and a new board member is seated from District 6
Dr. Deasy’s days are numbered – July 1 probably being his last day.
4LAKids believes the electorate needs to re-write that previous
sentence: “WHEN Monica Garcia is defeated, WHEN Steve Zimmer is
re-elected and a new board member is seated from District 6 Dr. Deasy’s
days are numbered ….
____________
Please read LA Times Endorsement Editorial – which follows – in its
entirely. The pretzel logic applied in their endorsement of Monica
Garcia twists+turns to a lesser extreme in their other endorsements.
And please consider 4LAKids endorsements:
DISTRICT 2: Contrary to previous threats, I will not be a write in
candidate. 4LAKids endorsement is: Anyone but Monica! Personally I’m
voting for Isabel Vazquez – but a vote for any other of the candidates
on the ballot is a quantum improvement on the status quo for all the
reasons The Times lists. Any vote against Monica matters! [And all
seriousness aside: if you choose to vote for Monica please remember
that your special date to vote is Wednesday March 6th!]
The Times contends the candidates they oppose would set the district back years.
QUESTION: Would those be the years with smaller class sizes? Librarians
in libraries? Nurses in nurse’s offices? Counselors? Plant managers?
Arts and Music and Health Ed? Quality Early Childhood Ed? Adult Ed?
Clean restrooms? Reform is not a destination or a brand or an outcome –
it’s a process. It’s like evolution – it’s been going on forever and
will go on forever ….and would’ve gone on even if Darwin had raised
Beagles rather than sailed on one. Change is inevitable; bring it on.
DISTRICT 4: Steve Zimmer. Zimmer is the antithesis of Monica Garcia –
he’s thoughtful and careful and inclusive. He listens. He respects. When
faced with a difficult decision he agonizes. The Times criticizes him
for having been sometimes ineffectual – but in a functional/respectful
as opposed to dysfunctional/disrespectful Board of Ed his voice of
reason and classroom experience will be needed. His opponent is a
passionate supporter of Dr. Deasy, a ®ubberstamper of ®eform - a
politician with springboard aspirations – supported by special
interests, charter schools and – in case you didn’t notice: the
billionaire mayor of New York City!
DISTRICT 6: Maria Cano. Maria is a hard worker with a deep
understanding-of and commitment-to her community and quality public
education - and experience in internal LAUSD politics and how things
work at Beaudry. The Times’ favorite is an excellent teacher teaching in
a great program in a fine inner city school (in District 2). The kids
need her in that classroom! And the other candidate is a favorite of
special interests, charter schools and – in case you didn’t notice, the
billionaire mayor of New York City!
¡Onward/Adelante! - smf
Pretzel Logic: L.A. TIMES ENDORSEMENTS FOR SCHOOL BOARD
LA Times Editorial | http://lat.ms/VW4dpr
February 15, 2013 :: The teachers union once had a virtual lock on the
Los Angeles Unified school board, and the results weren't pretty. Truly
awful schools operated without accountability; the board worked harder
to please teachers than to protect students. Today, with more
reform-oriented members on the board — thanks to the support of Mayor
Antonio Villaraigosa and like-minded organizations — the situation is
very different. Schools are working harder than ever to improve. Charter
schools have been welcomed with open arms.
Yet this still isn't the school board that L.A. Unified needs and
deserves. At times, the reform movement is given to its own unproductive
extremes. As a result, the board has switched from animosity toward
charters to such a warm embrace that it fails to oversee them properly. A
decade ago, the board did nothing for those disadvantaged students who
were routinely channeled into vocational education instead of
college-preparatory classes. But the reform adopted to address that — a
policy requiring all students to pass college-prep courses with a grade
of at least C — could prove just as damaging.
Meanwhile, the close allies of United Teachers Los Angeles are as
hostile to reform as ever. The reform camp whispers that if the union's
allies gain a majority, they'll fire L.A. Unified's hard-charging
superintendent, John Deasy. That would be a terrible mistake. We
periodically disagree with Deasy and think that the board should be
looking at some of his proposals more critically, but at the same time,
his impatience with the status quo has brought welcome new energy to the
district. Much better to have a superintendent who occasionally needs
to be reined in than one who isn't striving, every day, to improve the
future for impoverished black and Latino students.
ENDORSEMENTS: Los Angeles City Elections 2013
In other words, the current board is sharply divided along ideological
lines, with members too often focused on scoring political points and
talking as though they're channeling either UTLA leadership or the most
rigid of reformers, rather than thinking independently to come up with
rational ideas that advance the cause of sound education. We would
prefer to see more candidates who fall between the two ideological
poles, but the realities of L.A. Unified politics sometimes make this
impossible.
In March, voters will choose board members for three of the seven seats.
Elections are by district. Steve Zimmer, who is generally considered to
be more union-aligned but who does not follow a strict line one way or
the other, is trying to keep his seat in District 4; board President
Monica Garcia, the most closely allied with the mayor and the reform
movement, also is up for reelection. Nury Martinez is leaving the board
to pursue an opening on the Los Angeles City Council.
District 2: Monica Garcia
We'll be upfront about this: We consider Garcia a poor choice for the
school board, and we always have. In her last reelection bid, we
endorsed her only because there were no candidates running against her.
Now, thorn in the side of UTLA that she is, she faces four opponents,
three of them endorsed by the union. UTLA leadership is reportedly ready
to go all out to unseat Garcia, and the moneyed sources that back
school reform are waging a fierce battle to keep her. New York Mayor
Michael R. Bloomberg alone donated $1 million to help Garcia and the
other reform candidates.
To give her due credit, as board president Garcia has shortened the once
unwieldy meetings, and she is known for the long hours and dedication
she puts into her job. Her steady support for reform, though we
sometimes disagree with her, is preferable to the knee-jerk positions of
the union-allied board members who consistently block charter schools
and fight any efforts to hold teachers accountable. But Garcia is a
divisive and sometimes careless force on the board who lacks grace and
thoughtfulness as its leader. Her positions seem less considered than
reactive. Her concerns over whether schools are improving have not
extended to underperforming charter schools, and her response when
challenged on this is simply unacceptable: She says the district doesn't
have enough money to oversee the charters properly and she doesn't want
to do more to police them. Likewise, her retort about a serious
conflict of interest involving former Supt. Ramon C. Cortines — "I don't
know what is
interesting here," she said in an interview with The Times' editorial
board — reflects a dismissiveness and lack of basic understanding that
is truly
disturbing.
Yet we see no real alternative. The three UTLA-backed candidates spout
typical anti-reform rhetoric and would set the district back years. We
had hopes for Isabel Vazquez, a first-grade teacher in the district who
is backed by neither UTLA nor big-money reformers. She espouses a more
balanced and nuanced approach to improving schools and has a refreshing
ground-level perspective on how reform plays out in the classroom. But
Vazquez has made it clear that she would not vote to extend Deasy's
contract once it expires. That's too great an obstacle to overlook. If
it were clear that Deasy had enough support on the board to protect him,
Vazquez's position might be a minor issue, but his situation is
potentially precarious. The superintendent is far more important to the
schools than the quality of any single board member.
District 4: Kate Anderson
Anderson, who has worked in politics more than in education, is clearly a
reform-minded candidate. She opposes some teacher seniority rules and
supports legislation making it easier to fire abusive teachers. But she
also demonstrates the intellectual ability to form her own opinions and
articulates strong and varied positions on education that don't always
hew to the straight reform agenda. She is an attorney who works for
Children Now, a nonprofit advocacy group on children's issues, including
both health and education. She is the stronger of the two candidates in
District 4, which includes the Westside and the west San Fernando
Valley.
Her opponent, incumbent Steve Zimmer, has been a thoughtful board member
with a yearning to bridge the gap between union and reform camps, but
he has fallen short in the execution of his goals, with proposals that
smacked of trying to please union bosses. Zimmer's proposal to tighten
oversight of charter schools, for example — a reform that's badly needed
— came with a poison-pill provision establishing a moratorium on all
new charters until the district developed a new monitoring system. That
wasn't just a destructive attack on charter schools; it was almost
certainly illegal under state law. As a result, an important proposal
went down in flames.
We have some concerns about Anderson as well. In her work with Children
Now, she fought for legislation on teacher dismissals that she clearly
didn't fully understand, and, in an interview with the editorial board,
gave an inaccurate description of how it would work. She was quick to
own up to the mistake, but it's disturbing that a lawyer would lobby for
a bill without having vetted it thoroughly. If elected, she'll need to
do better.
District 6: Monica Ratliff
Ratliff, a fifth-grade teacher at an inner-city L.A. Unified school that
has steadily raised its standardized test scores, has the background,
smarts and independence of mind to become a true leader in the district.
A former lawyer for a public-interest legal organization, she switched
to teaching 12 years ago. All but one of the students at her school, San
Pedro Street Elementary, are impoverished and most are not fluent in
English, according to the state's database, yet the school's most recent
Academic Performance Index score was 814, above the state target of
800.
Obviously Ratliff knows how a successful public school operates, and she
expresses a strong belief that schools cannot cite their students'
disadvantaged backgrounds as an excuse for low achievement. She has
practical suggestions for improving teacher training and evaluation, and
she supports streamlining the procedure for firing perpetual
underperformers, but in ways that are fair to teachers as well. She also
calls for a longer time period before teachers gain tenure. Personable,
articulate and sharp, she strikes us as a candidate who would think her
positions through carefully and debate with an open mind. If only there
were more candidates like her running for the school board.
All three candidates in this district, which includes the East San
Fernando Valley, have UTLA's support. Ratliff's opponents, Antonio
Sanchez and Maria Cano, are engaging enough but come off as lightweight,
and they cannot match Ratliff's energy, thoughtfulness and thorough
grasp of district issues. Cano has trouble even answering questions
directly. Sanchez, who worked in Villaraigosa's office and then for the
L.A. Federation of Labor, has the mayor's support, but he's far from
ready for a seat on the school board. His understanding of district
issues is shallow; he tends to provide answers that are politically
expedient — trying to give both sides what they want, even when that's
not possible — rather than making the tough decisions. He offers little
in the way of new or workable ideas.
____________
They say the times are changing
but I just don't know
These things are gone forever
over a long time ago.
- Steely Dan: Pretzel Logic
LAUSD’S DEASY, UNION SPAR OVER TEACHER EVALUATION MEASURES
A HIGH-PROFILE TEACHER EVALUATION AGREEMENT WAS BUT
DAYS OLD FRIDAY WHEN LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SUPERINTENDENT JOHN DEASY AND
THE DISTRICT’S TEACHERS UNION EXPRESSED SHARP DISAGREEMENT OVER A
CONTENTIOUS PROVISION
By John Fensterwald, EdSource Today | http://bit.ly/Z678ZS
February 16th, 2013 :: United Teachers Los Angeles accused Deasy of
breaking a binding agreement by requiring that “data-driven” measures of
student achievement be given a “weight limited to 30 percent” of a
teacher’s final evaluation. Deasy referred to the figure in guidelines
he issued to principals on how to conduct evaluations. In a statement,
he said that classroom observations and other similar factors “will
remain the primary and controlling factors.”
Deasy “is free to express his opinions, but any attempt to require
principals to assign a specific weight to student test data in a
teacher’s evaluation is a violation of the protections in an agreement
between UTLA and the District,” UTLA responded in a statement.
The dispute came three days after LAUSD’s school board ratified the
evaluation agreement that the district and UTLA reached in November.
Under a court-ordered deadline, both sides agreed to include measures of
student academic progress, including the use of state standardized test
scores. UTLA members ratified the agreement last month.
That agreement did not mention specific percentages for the components
of an evaluation. It said that scores on California Standards Tests and
other non-state test measures, including district assessments and
samples of students’ work, “are to be considered an important but
clearly limited part of the overall performance evaluation process.”
They are not to be considered the “sole, primary or controlling factors”
in a final evaluation.
A maximum 30 percent weight for gauging student performance would appear
a reasonable reading of the agreement, but UTLA argues that’s for
principals, working with teachers, to determine on a site-by-site basis,
not for Deasy to dictate. Deasy, in his memo, was asserting the
authority to set a uniform standard for administrators.
Deasy had called for using a district-developed, value-added method of
interpreting a teacher’s impact on students’ test scores, taking into
account a student’s family income and ethnicity. It’s called Academic
Growth over Time, and the UTLA succeeded in keeping it out of the
agreement on individual teachers’ evaluations.
Some UTLA members wanted standardized tests scores excluded altogether,
but the union had no choice. A Los Angeles Superior Court judge ruled
last fall that current state law on teacher evaluations, known as the
Stull Act, requires that students’ state standardized test results be
used in evaluating teachers. Judge James Chalfant left it to UTLA and
the district to negotiate details.
What happens next may be determined in the school board elections on
March 5, with candidates supporting Deasy and those backed by UTLA
competing for three open seats. A handful of wealthy donors, led by New
York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s $1 million contribution, have given more
than $2.5 million to pro-Deasy candidates.
Meanwhile, the Sacramento-based non-profit that brought the suit dealing
with the Stull Act issued a cautious statement on Deasy’s guidelines to
principals. “The key question is whether or not the actual progress of
pupils toward grade level expectations is included as part of the job
performance evaluation. If indeed it is, it’s a historic day for
LAUSD,” wrote Bill Lucia, CEO of EdVoice. EdVoice has reserved the right
to return to court if the agreement falters.
Deasy said in his statement that all principals will be trained in using
a multi-measure evaluation system by the start of 2013-14. “I look
forward to working with the teachers’ union and principals in
successfully implementing this system.”
LAUSD STATEMENT:
►Superintendent Issues Doe V. Deasy Guidelines
DATA ON PUPIL PROGRESS NOW A FACTOR IN TEACHER EVALUATION
http://bit.ly/ZiErNa
February 15, 2013 LOS ANGELES – Los Angeles Unified School District
(LAUSD) Superintendent John Deasy today issued guidelines to all
principals in the District to take steps to comply with the Doe v Deasy
court ruling. Effective immediately, LAUSD administrators must
explicitly include and consider data of pupil progress during the
initial goal-setting phase with teachers and used when determining the
overall performance in the final evaluation.
In the released guidance to principals, the assessment of student
progress and other student data-driven results will carry a weight
limited to 30% of the total evaluation determination. Observed classroom
performance and other similar factors will remain the primary and
controlling factors.
“These guidelines are a vital step in our continuing effort to provide
students with the highest-performing teachers,” said Deasy. “I look
forward to working with the teacher’s union and principals in
successfully implementing this system.”
This directive is a result of the Supplement Agreement ratified by
members of UTLA on January 19, 2013 and adopted by the LAUSD Board of
Education on February 12, 2013. The Supplemental Agreement was reached
in response to the Doe v. Deasy Court Order enforcing the requirements
of the Stull Act, which compel the District to evaluate teacher
performance as it reasonably relates to student growth and progress
toward District standards and State standards for pupil achievement, as
measured by State-adopted criterion-referenced student testing results
under the California State Testing program (the “CSTs”).
The District has consistently maintained that measures of student
achievement should not be used as the sole means of measuring quality or
effectiveness of instruction.
By the start of the 2013/14 school year, all principals will be trained
to implement a full multiple-measure system, which includes the pupil
progress factor (or Contributions to Student Outcomes), comprised of
both individual classroom level and school-wide assessment of pupil
progress. Details about the other measures include in the full
multiple-measure system will be released throughout the remainder of the
school year, as discussions with the District’s labor partners
progress, and as policy and implementation decisions are finalized.
“It is critical that we not only learn from the classrooms and schools
where exceptional teaching and learning is taking place, but that we
provide an organized opportunity for teachers to receive useful feedback
about their practice and provide meaningful pathways.
UTLA RESPONSE:
►NO PERCENTAGES IN TEACHER EVALUATIONS
http://www.utla.net/node/3982
UTLA issued the following statement on the teacher evaluation implementation process.
Feb 15, 2013- Superintendent John Deasy may not unilaterally impose
percentages into the teacher evaluation process. He is free to express
his opinions, but any attempt to require principals to assign a specific
weight to student test data in a teacher’s evaluation is a violation of
the protections in an agreement between UTLA and the District.
The Evaluation Procedures Supplement agreement reached in November
complies with the Doe v Deasy court order, while not setting any
percentages. Our members ratified that agreement in January and UTLA is
adamant that the Superintendent live up to the terms and spirit of that
agreement.
UTLA President Warren Fletcher said, “The Superintendent doesn’t get to
sign binding agreements and then pretend they are not binding.” Deasy
wanted 30% of a teacher’s evaluation to be based solely on student test
scores. UTLA pushed back during negotiations and the Superintendent
took that off the table. To see this percentage now being floated again
is unacceptable.
We believe principals and teachers are in the best position to determine
how student test data should be considered in each teacher’s individual
evaluation process.
Our negotiating team bargained in good faith to bring back an agreement
to our members that included multiple measures of student progress and
did not include the use of individual AGT (Academic Growth Over Time)
scores as part of a teacher’s final evaluation. The agreement has been
seen as a model for other school districts in the nation. We do not wish
to see the evaluation process set back by the Superintendent’s personal
agenda.
►Additional coverage:
Deasy wants 30% of teacher evaluations based on test scores
Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/VXrPde
LAUSD issues guidelines on teacher evaluations, sparking new controversy
89.3 KPCC (blog) | http://bit.ly/XFNX6t
LAUSD to count student test scores as 30 percent of teachers' evaluation
Contra Costa Times/LA Daily News | http://bit.ly/UslHbs
EDUCATION REFORM - IT’S REALLY ABOUT POLITICS, POWER AND PROFIT
EDUCATION REFORM - IT’S REALLY ABOUT POLITICS, POWER AND PROFIT
Associated Administrators of Los Angeles Weekly Update | Week of February 18, 2013 | http://bit.ly/XPSQ0w
14 February 2013 :: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg donated $1
million to the Coalition for School Reform, which, according to its
website, is “a group of parents, educators and business and nonprofit
leaders dedicated to reforming and improving public schools in the LA
Unified School District.”
The reality is that the Coalition is controlled by a few very wealthy
donors who are campaigning for three specific candidates in the upcoming
race for seats on the Board of Education: Mónica García, Kate Anderson
and Antonio Sanchez.
Prior to the donation from Mayor Bloomberg, in a deal brokered by Los
Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the Coalition’s largest donors were
Eli Broad, philanthropist, and Jerry Perenchio, former head of
Univision. Each of them contributed a mere $250,000.
A total of more than $2.5 million has been raised by a small cadre to
influence the outcome of this Board race. The Los Angeles Times
(February 13, 2013) said that the group “is seeking … to protect
Superintendent John Deasy’s policies…” By
(1) ensuring the defeat of Steve Zimmer, whom AALA supports;
(2) eliminating the chance of a run-off between Ms. Garcia and AALA endorsees, Robert Skeels or Isabel Vázquez; and
(3) preventing the election of either Monica Ratliff or Maria Cano, both
of whom AALA has endorsed, the Coalition will guarantee that Dr. Deasy
receives little Board opposition to his initiatives.
According to the Los Angeles Ethics Office, additional donors to the Coalition for School Reform include:
• Jamie Alter Lynton, wife of the CEO of Sony Pictures, board member of L.A. Fund, $100,000
• Elizabeth Alter, $100,000
• Meg Chernin, CEO of L.A. Fund, wife of former president of News Corp. (owned by Rupert Murdoch), $100,000
• Andrew Hauptman, board member of L.A. Fund and BSN SPORTS, the largest
manufacturer, marketer and distributor of sporting goods products
directly to the institutional and team sports marketplace, $50,000
• John Kissick, board member of L.A.’s Promise (“manages” West Adams and Manual Arts high schools and John Muir MS), $50,000
• Emerson Education Fund, Walnut Creek, $100,000
• David Fisher, CEO of The Capital Group, $37,500; Marianna J. Fisher, $12,500
• Jane and Marc Nathanson, Chairman of Mapleton Investments, $100,000
• Frank Marshall, board member of L.A.’s Promise, Hollywood producer, husband of Kathleen Kennedy, $100,000
• Jeffrey Katzenberg, CEO of DreamWorks Animation, $50,000
According to KPCC, Southern California public radio station, Mrs.
Chernin has solicited and received significant individual financial
support for Mónica García from Hollywood players, such as Kathleen
Kennedy, Jeffrey Katzenberg, Wes Craven, David Geffen and others. Joel
Klein, former NYC Schools Chancellor and current head of Rupert
Murdoch’s education division, Amplify, has donated to the Coalition.
Murdoch also owns Wireless Generation, part of Amplify, a leading
provider of innovative education software, data systems, and assessment
tools. Maybe that is why Rupert Murdoch says, “Public education is a
$500 billion market waiting desperately to be transformed.”
Why is the mayor of New York so interested in LAUSD? Why are other
wealthy, politically connected entrepreneurs who have no children in the
District trying to buy an election? How did Michael Bloomberg become,
according to Mayor Villaraigosa, “the most important voice in education
reform today”? How did these people, who have not been in a school,
since college, get to be education reformers? The answers are complex
and unsettling and speak to the increased privatization of public
education.
In light of the relationships cited above, and being aware that Los
Angeles is not the only city in which this is occurring, it is no
surprise that many of these education reformers influence policies and
regulations that have improved the bottom line of their corporate
benefactors, bringing the culture and values of the corporate world into
school districts across the nation. For example, mandated testing has
become a major industry. A nonprofit resource center, In the Public
Interest, recently released information showing how some school
reformers in Texas had urged school districts to use a company in which
some of the donors had large investments.
As a group, many of the so-called reformers advocate for charter
schools, the takeover of low-performing schools and rating teachers and
administrators based on test scores. They generally support efforts to
reduce the influence of employee unions in elections. In New York, the
mayor controls the schools and, fortunately, the L.A. mayor was
unsuccessful in his attempt to do so during his first term. Is the
Coalition for School Reform another route to the same goal?
The Los Angeles Times article had a particularly insightful quote from
Dr. Diane Ravitch, noted researcher and professor at NYU, “The prospect
that the mayor of New York City might use his vast wealth to choose the
school board for the people of Los Angeles is repugnant and an affront
to democracy.” We, at AALA, agree and find it disturbing and distasteful
that the District is trying to be bought by a handful of people who are
bent on permanently changing the face of public education to the
detriment of the very children it serves.
________________
••smf: We have followed the money. We have connected the dots. What does
this all mean? And how to we use this information For "Good”?
• The Coalition for School Reform is a SuperPAC – as identified in the infamous Citizens United Decision.
• The Coalition for School Reform (technically the Coalition for School
Reform to Support Garcia, Anderson and Sanchez for Board of Education
2013) – was the Coalition for School Reform to Support Sanchez 2011 in
the last election (Different Sanchez). In 2011 they substantially
outspent their opponent and the PAC’s that supported him in that race –
and lost. Because it isn’t about the money – it’s about the message, the
activism of the support, and the votes cast.
Karl Rove's infamous SuperPAC: American Crossroads raised and spent $105 million dollars in last November’s national election.
• No candidate they supported was elected. Success rate 0%.
• Only 1,29% of the candidates they opposed were defeated, Success rate (in the negative) 1.29%,
• Moral of the Story: If you have Hope – and you have the truth on your
side, there is Hope. Because in a democracy the majority, not the money,
rules.
THE STATE OF THE UNION: Early Childhood Ed,
Career+Technical Education and STEM, Higher Ed, Gun Violence and
Citizenship
Excerpts from Tuesday night’s State of the Union
Address by President Obama | 2013 State of the Union Address: An
annotated transcript | Marketplace.org http://bit.ly/12fSF2f
Lincoln’s Birthday, February 12, 2013
• ON EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
Study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the
better he or she does down the road. But today, fewer than 3 in 10 four
year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program. Most
middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week for private
preschool. And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of
access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their
lives.
Tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality
preschool available to every child in America. Every dollar we invest in
high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on –
by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing
violent crime. In states that make it a priority to educate our youngest
children, like Georgia or Oklahoma, studies show students grow up more
likely to read and do math at grade level, graduate high school, hold a
job, and form more stable families of their own. So let’s do what works,
and make sure none of our children start the race of life already
behind. Let’s give our kids that chance.
• ON CAREER+TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND STEM
Let’s also make sure that a high school diploma puts our kids on a
path to a good job. Right now, countries like Germany focus on
graduating their high school students with the equivalent of a technical
degree from one of our community colleges, so that they’re ready for a
job. At schools like P-Tech in Brooklyn, a collaboration between New
York Public Schools, the City University of New York, and IBM, students
will graduate with a high school diploma and an associate degree in
computers or engineering.
We need to give every American student opportunities like this. Four
years ago, we started Race to the Top – a competition that convinced
almost every state to develop smarter curricula and higher standards,
for about 1 percent of what we spend on education each year. Tonight,
I’m announcing a new challenge to redesign America’s high schools so
they better equip graduates for the demands of a high-tech economy.
We’ll reward schools that develop new partnerships with colleges and
employers, and create classes that focus on science, technology,
engineering, and math – the skills today’s employers are looking for to
fill jobs right now and in the future.
• ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Now, even with better high schools, most young people will need some
higher education. It’s a simple fact: the more education you have, the
more likely you are to have a job and work your way into the middle
class. But today, skyrocketing costs price way too many young people out
of a higher education, or saddle them with unsustainable debt.
Through tax credits, grants, and better loans, we have made college
more affordable for millions of students and families over the last few
years. But taxpayers cannot continue to subsidize the soaring cost of
higher education. Colleges must do their part to keep costs down, and
it’s our job to make sure they do. Tonight, I ask Congress to change the
Higher Education Act, so that affordability and value are included in
determining which colleges receive certain types of federal aid. And
tomorrow, my Administration will release a new “College Scorecard” that
parents and students can use to compare schools based on a simple
criteria: where you can get the most bang for your educational buck.
To grow our middle class, our citizens must have access to the
education and training that today’s jobs require. But we also have to
make sure that America remains a place where everyone who’s willing to
work hard has the chance to get ahead.
Of course, what I’ve said tonight matters little if we don’t come
together to protect our most precious resource – our children.
• ON GUN VIOLENCE
It has been two months since Newtown. I know this is not the first
time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time
is different. Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who
believe in the 2nd Amendment – have come together around commonsense
reform – like background checks that will make it harder for criminals
to get their hands on a gun. Senators of both parties are working
together on tough new laws to prevent anyone from buying guns for resale
to criminals. Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war
and massive ammunition magazines off our streets, because they are tired
of being outgunned.
Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to
vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because
in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays,
graduations, and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a
bullet from a gun.
One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She
was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a
majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were
her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with
her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a
week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just
a mile away from my house.
Hadiya’s parents, Nate and Cleo, are in this chamber tonight, along
with more than two dozen Americans whose lives have been torn apart by
gun violence. They deserve a vote.
Gabby Giffords deserves a vote.
The families of Newtown deserve a vote.
The families of Aurora deserve a vote.
The families of Oak Creek, and Tucson, and Blacksburg, and the
countless other communities ripped open by gun violence – they deserve a
simple vote.
Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this
country. Indeed, no laws, no initiatives, no administrative acts will
perfectly solve all the challenges I’ve outlined tonight. But we were
never sent here to be perfect. We were sent here to make what difference
we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity, and uphold our
ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary
work of self-government.
We were sent here to look out for our fellow Americans the same way
they look out for one another, every single day, usually without
fanfare, all across this country.
• ON CITIZENSHIP
We may do different jobs, and wear different uniforms, and hold
different views than the person beside us. But as Americans, we all
share the same proud title:
We are citizens.
It’s a word that doesn’t just describe our nationality or legal
status. It describes the way we’re made. It describes what we believe.
It captures the enduring idea that this country only works when we
accept certain obligations to one another and to future generations;
that our rights are wrapped up in the rights of others; and that well
into our third century as a nation, it remains the task of us all, as
citizens of these United States, to be the authors of the next great
chapter in our American story.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T
FIT: The Rest (but not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other
Sources
FEATURED:
First, Protect the Children: REPORT EXCORIATES L.A. COUNTY AGENCY IN CHILD DEATHS
Thirteen recent child deaths might not have happened if Department of
Children and Family Services social workers had taken basic steps to
assess the risks, an investigation finds.
By Jason Song and Garrett Therolf, Los Angeles Times | http://bit.ly/Uvdt2m
____________________
GPA CAN BE CONTAGIOUS AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS, STUDY
FINDS
By Karen Kaplan, L.A. Times | http://bit.ly/Zkv5kd
UTLA WINS RIGHT TO
REPRESENT VALLEY CHARTER SCHOOL: -- Howard Blume - http://latimes.com http://lat.ms/VnYjee ... http://bit.ly/XhHEIR |
OBAMA URGES BIG
PRESCHOOL PUSH IN STATE OF THE UNION + WHITE HOUSE OUTLINES PRESCHOOL PLAN:
Obama Urges Big Pres... http://bit.ly/WALOLG
CALIFORNIA DROPS
OUT OF ELL ASSESSMENT CONSORTIUM: By Lesli A. Maxwell - Learning the Language -
Education Week ... http://bit.ly/XhvX4V
HARASSMENT SUIT
AGAINST EX-LAUSD HEAD DISMISSED: The Associated Press | Times-Standard Online
http://bit.ly/XGb ... http://bit.ly/XhtO9l
API REWRITE
GETTING FAST TRACKED, GRAD RATES COME FIRST: By Kimberly Beltran SI&A
Cabinet Report – News & Resour... http://bit.ly/12vDwKn
BROWN’S BUDGET
PLAN TAKES ANOTHER SHOT AT ELIMINATING BIP MANDATE FOR SPECIAL ED
STUDENTS: By Lee Funk | SI...
http://bit.ly/VtjUVb
HOLDING STATES AND
SCHOOLS ACCOUNTABLE: Debate Over Federal Role in Public School Policy: News
Analysis By MOTOK... http://bit.ly/12TS81F
LAUSD PETITIONS
FOR SWEEPING RELIEF FROM QEIA CLASS SIZE REQUIREMENTS + smf’s 2¢: By Tom Chorneau | SI&A Ca...
http://bit.ly/VtfGNr
LA Times: “We'll
be upfront about this: We consider Garcia a poor choice for the school board…”
but we’re endor... http://bit.ly/XL8wlN
SCHOOL BOARD
CANDIDATES DEBATE BLOOMBERG’S $1 MILLION DONATION: -- Howard Blume /LA Times/LA
Now | http://... http://bit.ly/XbTdBp
The Spin, The
Spin!: LAUSD, DEASY FIND SOLUTION TO SAVE 200+ JOBS + smf’s 2¢: http://abc7.com http://bit.... http://bit.ly/XbTfZZ
IS OKLAHOMA THE
RIGHT MODEL FROR UNIVERSAL PRE-K?: Posted by Suzy Khimm , Washington Post
WonkBlog | http://wap...
http://bit.ly/Wr31Hp
L.A. UNIFIED
SCHOOL BOARD RACE COULD BREAK FUNDRAISING RECORDS THIS ELECTION: Adolfo
Guzman-Lopez | Pass / Fail ... http://bit.ly/UjrQ9C
#MikeBloomberg
trying to buy the #LAUSD Board of Ed election: "If parents don't like the
way I run the schools they can boo me in parades!"
UTLA TO EXPAND
TEACHER TRAINING CAMP FOR MANAGING SCHOOLS: ●●smf: Who will train parents in the shared-managemen...
http://bit.ly/12l1F6d
CORTINES CLAIMS
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS HAS EXPIRED ON ALLEGED HARASSMENT: Judge may dismiss sex
lawsuit against ... http://bit.ly/12kFBZB
MONICA GARCIA +
L.A. FUND FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION REMOVE OFFENSIVE, ILLEGITIMATE, UNETHICAL &
SELF–SERVING BILLBOAR... http://bit.ly/12C3dnV
@MikeBloomberg:
The 2013 State of the City address will be at noon Thurs 2/14 at the
@barclayscenter. Q:How well is that LAUSD buyout going?
"It's not
fair, ' K?" - Video: Kindergartener asks board not to close his school
http://bit.ly/12LKMSj [See
http://bit.ly/11Gpo1l ]
POTUS: "Every
$1 we invest in ECE can save more than $7 later on by boosting grad
rates/reducing teen pregnancy/even reducing violent crime"
THE STATE OF THE
UNION: Early Childhood Ed, Career+Technical Education and STEM, Higher Ed, Gun
Violence and Cit... http://bit.ly/XAiFSe
The schools of
L.A. for sale to the highest bidder?: N.Y. MAYOR GIVES $1 MILLION TO BACK L.A.
SCHOOL BOARD SLATE... http://bit.ly/V9nALO
Ravitch: The prospect
that the NYC mayor might use his vast wealth to choose the school board for LA
is repugnant & an affront to democracy.
Tamar Galatzan:
L.A. SCHOOLS NEED TECHNOLOGY, BUT HOW SHOULD WE PAY FOR IT? + smf’s 2¢: Op-Ed
By Tamar Galatzan ... http://bit.ly/12eiVKu
PARENT TRIGGER
PETITION PASSES LAUSD SCHOOL BOARD: By Beau Yarbrough - San Bernardino County
Sun | http://... http://bit.ly/Uc3sa4
Mayor Mike picks
up where Mayor Tony leaves off(ice): NEW YORK CITY MAYOR BLOOMBERG POURS $1
MILLION INTO LAUSD ... http://bit.ly/XxBNAj
On a wing and a
prayer: $100K GIFT KEEPS LAUSD AVIATION MECHANICS SCHOOL IN VAN NUYS
ALOFT: L.A. Unified avia...
http://bit.ly/XxBNAe
Deasy+Monica
Blink/Nuri absent: LAUSD Supe & Board of Ed has pulled the 208 proposed
RIFs. School psychs, social workers, librarians saved!
LAUSD SCHOOL BOARD
TO CONSIDER LAYING OFF NEARLY 200: smf: When I do the math 208 is more than
200! Vanessa Rom... http://bit.ly/WZ3QY5
School Board on
School Mental Health: “DON’T BELIEVE WHAT WE DO …BELIEVE WHAT WE BELIEVE!”:
“Everybody has to be... http://bit.ly/12sDLkI
SCHOOL BOARD
EXPECTED TO VOTE TOMORROW TO CUT MORE THAN 200 POSITIONS: psychiatric social
workers, school psycho... http://bit.ly/12oVo4Z
BAD NEWS FROM
SACRAMENTO: By dianerav @ the Diane Ravitch blog | http://bit.ly/XDAttB February 10, 2013 :: A
... http://bit.ly/U7eUUm
OUTSIDE GROUPS
TRYING TO INFLUENCE L.A. SCHOOL BOARD RACES. Eli Broad’s in for a
quarter-of-a-million + smf’s 2¢... http://bit.ly/U5TZkr
EVENTS: Coming up next week...
*Dates and times subject to change. ________________________________________
• SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
http://www.laschools.org/bond/
Phone: 213-241-5183
____________________________________________________
• LAUSD FACILITIES COMMUNITY OUTREACH CALENDAR:
http://www.laschools.org/happenings/
Phone: 213-241.8700
What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member:
Tamar.Galatzan@lausd.net • 213-241-6386
Monica.Garcia@lausd.net • 213-241-6180
Bennett.Kayser@lausd.net • 213-241-5555
Marguerite.LaMotte@lausd.net • 213-241-6382
Nury.Martinez@lausd.net • 213-241-6388
Richard.Vladovic@lausd.net • 213-241-6385
Steve.Zimmer@lausd.net • 213-241-6387
...or your city councilperson, mayor, the governor, member of congress,
senator - or the president. Tell them what you really think! • Find
your state legislator based on your home address. Just go to: http://bit.ly/dqFdq2 • There are 26 mayors and five county supervisors representing jurisdictions within LAUSD, the mayor of LA can be reached at mayor@lacity.org • 213.978.0600
• Call or e-mail Governor Brown: 213-897-0322 e-mail: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/
• Open the dialogue. Write a letter to the editor. Circulate these
thoughts. Talk to the principal and teachers at your local school.
• Speak with your friends, neighbors and coworkers. Stay on top of education issues. Don't take my word for it!
• Get involved at your neighborhood school. Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child.
• If you are eligible to become a citizen, BECOME ONE.
• If you a a citizen, REGISTER TO VOTE.
• If you are registered, VOTE LIKE THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT. THEY DO!.
|
