In This Issue:
 |
| • | VERGARA V. CALIFORNIA VERDICT: This Is Only The Beginning |
|
| • | WHILE OTHER STATES FOLD THE COMMON CORE, CALIFORNIA DOUBLES DOWN |
|
| • | UPDATE► LCFF/LCAP: LA SCHOOLS PARENT COMMITTEE BATTLING DISTRICT TO ELECT ITS OWN LEADERSHIP |
|
| • | Steve Lopez: AN L.A. UNIFIED WATCHDOG GETS PUNISHED FOR BARKING |
|
| • | 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:
| | | | An awful lot has been written about the verdict in the Vergara v. California lawsuit.
You can read about it here:
• VERGARA DECISION IS TEMPORARY/FINAL JUDGMENT MAY TAKE 30 DAYS http://bit.ly/1kiEehv
• Associated Press: CALIFORNIA TEACHER TENURE LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL http://bit.ly/1iledi1
• VERGARA v. CALIFORNIA: Damage assessment, Punditry, Gloating and Aftershocks …24 hours after (multiple stories) |http://bit.ly/1pKmlOg
• VERGARA v. CALIFORNIA: The official tentative decision |http://bit.ly/1oWmwF1
• Hiltzik: WHY THAT RULING AGAINST TEACHER TENURE WON’T HELP YOUR SCHOOLCHILDREN ANY MORE THAN DEASY’S iPADS | http://bit.ly/SCSBGQ
• PHOTO: Why is this man smiling? pic.twitter.com/chtmVtSpeV
• LAUSD’s JOHN DEASY WANTS TO HELP WRITE NEW TEACHER TENURE LAWS + smf’s 2¢ http://bit.ly/1vj5GDT
Not ALL about it mind you …much more is yet to be written, over a long time.
I’m going to leave it at this: This is not the Huge Victory for the Purveyors of ® eform that they shout – nor is it the End of World (and teachers’ unions) that they fear. What it is is irrefutable proof of the spuriousness of the claim that: “Were only in it for the Kids!” claimed by Plaintiffs, Petitioners, Superintendents, Unions and Billionaires alike.
The sky hasn’t fallen and the Great New Wonderful Tomorrow didn’t dawn this morning. Or Tuesday morning either.
GUN VIOLENCE: There has been, on the average, one school shooting per week since Newtown. It’s not funny, it’s ironic – but this from The Onion: "'No way to prevent this', says the only country where this regularly happens." |http://onion.com/1lmvhnB
THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA/LOCAL CONTROL ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN/DISTRICT BUDGET debate continues. The advice of the Parent Advisory Committee was apparently neither solicited nor desired - and there’s no appetite/time/imagination for an ideal Arts Ed - or any other ideal budget. Last Tuesday the board committed itself to equity …though it’s doubtful that the six agree on the definition of the word – and if they do whether the superintendent concurs.The superintendent published his draft overall school-by-school budget. Next Tuesday thirty community members are invited to comment on the LCFF and the budget at 2 minutes each at a special board meeting. 650,000+ students. One thousand+ schools. Thirty community members at 2 minutes each. An hour of community engagement over $6.6+ billion of spending. Sooner or later the board will weigh in.
SUNDAY’S TIMES featured Steve Lopez' column about Stuart Magruder’s challenged reappointment to the Bond Oversight Committee (“L.A. UNIFIED WATCHDOG…” follows). Back in the day when California couldn’t get out a budget on time, this blog had a companion: “A State Without a Budget, a Government Without a Clue”. Now the lege bends over backwards to get a budget out on time (Midnight tonight!) to protect (What could be more important than…?) legislators paychecks …but the cluelessness of the legislators and the public is greater than ever. Legislators actually say the only way they can complete a budget is to do it behind closed doors! The Times in “BUDGET DEALS LESS THAN OPEN” http://lat.ms/1lwD07e reports:
“The administration introduced a plan to limit the amount of money school districts can keep in their reserves, just hours before it was vetted by the joint budget committee Wednesday.
"When this news broke, it was a shock to us," said Mark Ecker, superintendent of the Fountain Valley School District. "It came out of the blue. It was totally unfair."
The esoteric proposal would take effect only if voters pass a ballot measure in November strengthening the state's rainy-day fund. Since a portion of the statewide fund would be dedicated for schools, the proposal would limit the size of school districts' individual reserves in years after deposits are made.
H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for Brown's Department of Finance, called it "a statewide mechanism that is designed to cushion dramatic drops in revenue that affect all school districts."
But school officials say that wouldn't leave enough money in the bank if revenue unexpectedly plummets.
"Who proposed this and why?" said Josephine Lucey, president of the California School Boards Assn. "There's no logic to it. It's fiscally irresponsible."
There are two editorials of note, cited below. THE KIDS CROSSING THE BORDER needs to be compare+contrasted with stories of the rather routine drowning of North African refugees in the Mediterranean. And A TEXTBOOK CASE OF MEDDLING describes why well-intentioned legislators should be kept away from mandating curriculum.
There’s more, there always is. But for now:
¡Onward/Adelante! - smf
VERGARA V. CALIFORNIA VERDICT: This Is Only The Beginning
AALA Update : Week of June 16, 2014 | http://bit.ly/1qOBcHl
June 12, 2014 :: In an eagerly anticipated decision that has reverberated around the country, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu on Tuesday, June 10, 2014, sided with the plaintiffs in the Vergara v. State of California case, stating that the evidence of the effects of incompetent teachers is “… compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience.” The case, brought by Students Matter on behalf of nine students in five school districts, charged that five statutes in the Education Code regarding tenure, seniority and dismissal procedures violated the equal protection clause of the state’s Constitution. Students Matter claimed that the statutes resulted in grossly ineffective teachers obtaining and retaining permanent employment and that these same teachers are disproportionately assigned to schools serving predominately low-income and minority students.
The five selected statutes in the Education Code are 44929.1(b), 44934, 44938(b) (1) and (2) and 44944. They require administrators to decide if a teacher should earn tenure after about 16 months in the classroom; require a costly and lengthy process before termination; and protect teachers with the most seniority from layoffs, even if they are perceived as less effective than their colleagues with fewer years of experience. The judge’s ruling means that the State Legislature must develop and pass new guidelines; however, since an appeal is expected, the ruling is stayed pending the appellate review, which could go all the way to the State Supreme Court and take years.
The sixteen-page decision makes for compelling reading as the judge cites previous case law (Brown v. Board of Education, Serrano v. Priest, Butt v. State of California) to support his position that the statutes violated the equal protection clause and the students’ fundamental rights to equality of education. His ruling states emphatically, “This Court finds that plaintiffs have met their burden of proof on all issues presented…the…statutes impose a real and appreciable impact on students’ fundamental right to equality of education and…they impose a disproportionate burden on poor and minority students.” Judge Treu acknowledged that education generates intense political debate but that it was his job to avoid the political aspects and only focus on the legal ones. He cites the testimony of Dr. Raj Chetty, a Harvard professor and proponent of value-added measures (VAM), who published a study in 2012 that teachers who raised their students’ standardized-test scores seem to have a lasting positive effect on their students’ lives outside of the classroom as well. Among its findings, the study showed that just one year of schooling under a teacher whose classes score highly on standardized tests increases a student’s lifetime earnings by an estimated $50,000.
This precedent-setting trial was initiated and largely funded by Silicon Valley entrepreneur David F. Welch through his nonprofit foundation, Students Matter, that also has ties to wealthy philanthropist Eli Broad, who is aligned with the current efforts to privatize public education. The decision is a significant defeat for teachers unions throughout the state that call it an attack on teachers and say the judge accepted the antiteacher, antiunion rhetoric of the attorneys. California Teachers Association (CTA) and California Federation of Teachers (CFT) had joined with the state as defendants in the case. The defense held that the workplace protections were critical to recruiting and retaining teachers and also accused the plaintiffs of scapegoating teachers when the true source of the achievement gap is poverty and neighborhood violence, as well as, poor management that fails to root out incompetent teachers. They also challenged the manner in which the plaintiffs determined teachers’ competencebased on their students’ test scores.
LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy testified in the case and is happy with the decision, saying that the existing laws saddle students with ineffective teachers without realistic recourse and that he looks forward to helping to develop the new laws. Dr. Deasy was present when the judge issued his verdict and is quoted as saying that LAUSD has 350 teachers who need to be dismissed.
Many perceive the ruling as an attack on tenure; however, the judge says that the two-year time frame that the statute mandates is too brief for administrators to make an informed decision regarding tenure. California is one of only five states that grant tenure in two years or less. Forty-one states require three or more years and four states have no tenure. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson released a statement on Tuesday saying, “All children deserve great teachers. Attracting, training and nurturing talented and dedicated educators are among the most important tasks facing every school district, tasks that require the right mix of tools, resources and expertise. Today’s ruling may inadvertently make this critical work even more challenging than it already is…”
Students Matter and other education reform groups are planning on bringing similar lawsuits in Connecticut, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Oregon, according to Politico.com. In fact, it appears that California is just the start of a planned effort to knock down tenure in a state-by-state campaign across the country. Those who oppose tenure have long said that the protection is an impediment to stronger U.S. education because it keeps bad teachers in the nation’s classrooms. “This is going to be the beginning of a series of these lawsuits that could fix many of the problems in education systems nationwide,” said plaintiffs’ attorney Theodore Boutrous. “We’re going to roll them out to other jurisdictions.”
Representatives of educational organizations were swift in attacking the verdict. “Let’s be clear: This lawsuit was never about helping students, but is yet another attempt by millionaires and corporate special interests to undermine the teaching profession and push their own ideological agenda on public schools and students while working to privatize public education,” Dennis Van Roekel, President of the National Education Association, said in a statement. Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, said that the lawsuit focused on the relatively small pool of grossly ineffective teachers and ignores other factors that affect the quality of education, such as funding inequities, school segregation and high poverty.
Legal analysts agree that an appeal could go either way and both sides also agree that the laws need to be revised. Many educators are questioning how this decision will affect due process rights for employees and if it will have any impact on teaching and learning? California teacher David Cohen posted an article on noted educator Dr. Diane Ravitch’s blog in which he advised, “Therefore, with years of appeals ahead, and then a legislative process to follow, I think it’s too soon for teachers or unions to begin talk of disaster.” We agree with his assessment; however, in the interim, it would be wise for the Legislature to get input from teachers and administrators and begin to rework the current statutes before being mandated to do so. Look for more articles about this closely-watched case in future issues of Update.
WHILE OTHER STATES FOLD THE COMMON CORE, CALIFORNIA DOUBLES DOWN
By Charles Taylor Kerchner | Education Week's blogs | On California | http://bit.ly/1qODsyc
June 11, 2014 1:44 PM :: One more example of what I've been calling the California Exceptionalism was exhibited last week. During a week in which two states caved to political pressure and folded the Common Core, in California the candidate for state superintendent who opposed the new standards finished third, and more than 300 organizations signed on to support it. The state essentially 'doubled down' its bet.
In Oklahoma, Gov. Mary Fallin bowed to political pressure and signed legislation requiring the state to come up with new standards that the legislature would approve essentially bypassing the state school board. In January, Fallin had praised the Common Core at a meeting of the National Governors Association, saying: "Local educators and school districts will still design the best lesson plans, will chose appropriate textbooks, and will drive classroom learning."
South Carolina also dumped the Common Core on May 30.
But in California, Lydia Gutiérrez, who would have brought opposition to the Common Core into the fall campaign for state school superintendent, was eliminated in the June 6 primary. The two remaining candidates—incumbent state superintendent Tom Torlakson and challenger Marshall Tuck—both support it and the associated Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBAC) tests.
In addition, Children Now, a health and education policy advocate, released a statement signed by hundreds of individuals and organizations representing a wide swath of policy leadership in the state including civil rights organizations, prominent school superintendents, several United Way organizations, and the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. Even the Half Moon Bay Brewing Company signed on.
What is essentially a stay-the-course message was crafted during the pilot testing of the SBAC tests this spring. Children Now anticipated a bumpy ride and possible catastrophic failure during the pilot testing. "Fortunately that didn't happen," said Debra Brown, Associate Director of education policy at Children Now, "but we decided to go ahead."
In April, Assemblyman Tim Donnelly had predicted a wave of opposition was about to rise in California. Donnelly, who ran a strong second in last week's Republican primary election for governor, had introduced an unsuccessful bill to abandon the Common Core. Despite the bill's defeat, Brown said that we wanted to, "show nationally and in the state, so that there is strong push back against opposition."
So, why does California not look like Oklahoma? Business and educator support for the new standards there were overridden by political opposition, as U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan remarked on Monday.
The state's Democratic tilt didn't hurt. "It helps when there isn't a reflexive opposition," said Ted Lempert, president of Children Now. "But the conversation got off on the right foot here; it was generally understood that the old standards were a problem, so 'let's update them.'"
"There's a lot that people disagree on, but the Common Core isn't one of those things. Both the business and the civil rights community are behind it and so are the various education reformers," he said.
Does that mean California's adoption faces a smooth road. Not by a long shot. Knowledge about the Common Core is not widespread in California, and next year the SBAC tests will yield published grades. The shock of new, lower, grades for schools and students has led to massive opposition from parents, teachers, and politicians in other strong adopter states, such as New York.
Children Now has a Common Core education program, but it, and the work of others, isn't high profile enough. California will face an implementation backlash; that's part of the process of starting complex projects. To be successful, the state's educators need to successfully communicate the utility and benefits of the new standards to parents and students. (More about the politics of implementation in a future post.)
But so far the predicted tsunami of opposition hasn't arrived.
UPDATE► LCFF/LCAP: LA SCHOOLS PARENT COMMITTEE BATTLING DISTRICT TO ELECT ITS OWN LEADERSHIP
ANNIE GILBERTSON| PASS / FAIL | 89.3 KPCC HTTP://BIT.LY/1OJ2SXG
June 11th, 2014, 4:21pm :: The Los Angeles Unified School District has warned members of two parent committees if they organize their own leadership, as they would like, they'll be breaking the law.
●●see 4LAKids: UPDATE: LAUSD RESPONDS TO REQUEST FOR “AUTHENTIC PARENT ENGAGEMENT THROUGHOUT THE LCAP PROCESS” BY THREATENING CRIMINAL PENALTIES+CIVIL ACTION, SUPERINTENDENT ISSUES NEW DRAFT LCAP |http://bit.ly/1j8tUsM
LAUSD’S LCFF PARENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE WRITES A LETTER TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION: seeks “authentic parent engagement throughout the LCAP process” |http://bit.ly/1pOy94m
&
LAUSD’S LCFF PARENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TREATED LIKE KINDERGARTNERS*: Given minutes to make million dollar decision | http://bit.ly/1oDQSvE
Under new state funding rules, all school districts in California are required to involve parents in budgeting decisions. L.A. Unified did so by creating two committees of about 50 parents each to represent all parents in the district.
In a letter addressed to school district leadership Thursday, 23 parents complained they are not permitted to run their own meetings: they can't set an agenda, don't have their own officers and district staff control which limited transcripts of meetings and committee recommendations are sent to administrators.
"This process, which should have been collaborative and inquiring, was instead divisive and simplistic," said the parent letter. Friday is their next meeting with the district, and parents would like to pass bylaws and elect leaders by the end of the month.
District officials responded with their own letter, telling the parents they were breaking the law.
"We are concerned that any concerted actions of the committee members listed in the letter may have violated the Ralph M. Brown Act," Sung Yon Lee, assistant general counsel for L.A. Unified wrote, referring to state laws governing open meetings for elected bodies. "Brown Act violations could subject individual PAC [Parent Advisory Committee] members to criminal penalties."
It's the group's second attempt to organize.
When the parent committees convened publicly a few weeks ago to review Superintendent John Deasy's budget, one parent motioned to elect leadership. District organizers did not permit the motion to move to a vote, citing the Brown Act, which requires elected bodies to post agenda items at least 72 hours ahead of a meeting.
It's unclear whether the parent committees are subject to the Brown Act at all. The law covers publicly elected bodies and some of their committees.
Peter Scheer of the First Amendment Coalition said the group should follow the rules, whether or not the law requires it. But he said the act isn't meant to stop them from electing leadership.
"They've been given a complete ‘Catch 22" by L.A. Unified officials, Scheer said. "If they can't put something on agenda, they don't even have the power to take the first step."
●●smf’s UPDATE: I attended the special meeting of the LCFF Parent Advisory Committee on Friday, June 13 where the committee was to review the newest draft revision of the superintendent’s plan. There was not a quorum present at that meeting …or at the similar briefing Thursday of the District English Learner Advisory Committee (DELAC). The lack of quorum (probably caused by last minute notification of the meetings …though Friday the 13th and a full moon didn’t help!) will not prevent staff from compiling comments from the two committees. District staff apologized for the threatening tone of a letter from Office of Legal Counsel (see http://bit.ly/1j8tUsM)and committee members were assured there is no legal action pending against committee members. Time constraints did not allow a complete review of the draft plan by the committee. There was a good faith effort from the Parent Community Branch to facilitate establishment of committee bylaws and governance structure over the summer to alleviate the Catch 22.
●●●4LAKids reader 'Faithmight' comments: "This is why I have long believed and held the position that this LCAP PAC should be the District Advisory Council (DAC). The DAC already has bylaws and is self-governing. It meets regularly and has been in the business of drafting, editing, reviewing, and monitoring school/district plans and budgets for years (in some capacity as it probably varies district to district). Districts should be using the DAC as the 2nd PAC and not creating ad hoc groups that they control and call parent engagement. What is going on now is a guise. What is the LAUSD DAC position in all this?" ●●smf: Not to beat up on Faithmight - but to establish how deep this goes: Superintendent Deasy disbanded the DAC in 2011.
Steve Lopez: AN L.A. UNIFIED WATCHDOG GETS PUNISHED FOR BARKING
By Steve Lopez, Los Angeles Times | http://lat.ms/1y16y2o
June 14, 2014, 12 PM :: If Stuart Magruder knew how to play the game, he might still have his volunteer watchdog job today.
But he just had to speak up. The arrogance, the temerity, the insolence. How dare he challenge the leadership of the Los Angeles Unified School District?
Exactly what sins did Magruder commit to get bounced last month from the district's Bond Oversight Committee, and will rabbit-eared school board members reverse the decision at their Tuesday meeting?
Before I answer, let's revisit the 1990s, when L.A. Unified officials wanted to raise bond money for new construction and building repairs but wisely suspected that nobody trusted them. Polling suggested voters would have a little more faith if independent citizens could keep an eye on things, and thus was born the Bond Oversight Committee.
Technology doesn't solve problems unless humans and teachers use it well- Stuart Magruder
Since 1997, voters have approved multiple bond measures totaling roughly $20 billion, about two-thirds of which has been invested in building new schools and shoring up old ones. Now a little more than $7 billion — most of it from voter-approved Proposition Q — remains to be spent.
Supt. John Deasy and the Board of Education have been salivating over the chance to get their hands on some of that money to buy a digital tablet for every student, teacher and administrator. Last year, they began purchasing tablets for classrooms, and now they would like to tap about $1 billion in bond money to finish the job.
But there have been questions about the legality and efficacy of using the bond money for portable tablets with an estimated three-year life span in a district with an estimated $50 billion or so in needed repairs and upgrades. And even more questions about whether the district has a well-considered plan, or a get-out-of-the-way compulsion to plow ahead as quickly as possible, with Deasy leading the charge.
Nobody expressed more concerns than Magruder, an architect who was appointed to the oversight committee two years ago. He thought the district's legal justification for buying tablets was flimsy, and that was just part of his objection.
"My primary concern was that there clearly was no strong pedagogical idea behind this program, and they were literally throwing all this technology and money at teachers and students, expecting great things to happen with no proper preparation," Magruder said.
There's not enough space here to itemize all the issues raised at various times by Magruder and other committee members, along with members of the media.
But to name several:
Why iPads versus other, possibly less expensive tablets or laptops?
Why did the need for detached keyboards, at a cost of millions, seem to be such an afterthought?
Why did the district buy software sight unseen and only partially developed?
Why had there been so little teacher training and preparation?
Why so little consideration of who would be responsible for lost and damaged tablets?
And how useful could the tablets be if, by one legal interpretation, students wouldn't be allowed to take them home each night?
"I'm invested in this," said Magruder, who has two kids in L.A. Unified and got a first-hand look at the problems when his daughter's school was included in an early phase of the iPad rollout.
Magruder didn't find the programming engaging, compelling or linked to a larger curriculum strategy in a way that had been explained to teachers, parents or students.
"Technology doesn't solve problems unless humans and teachers use it well," said Magruder, who noted that the software company did manage to neatly promote itself to students with a logo on its programs.
"Not an 'M' for math or an 'E' for English, but a big 'P' for Pearson," he said.
Scott Folsom, another member of the oversight committee, and Tom Rubin, the committee's consultant, both told me they thought Magruder and others consistently raised important questions in a fair, thoughtful and constructive way, forcing the district to slow down and rethink some of its plans.
But that was Magruder's downfall. In raising inconvenient truths, he exposed and embarrassed district officials. Three weeks ago, the petulant school board threw a little tantrum and refused to reappoint him to the committee, a move that's being challenged by Magruder, the oversight committee and the architect association that nominated him to the board.
School board member Tamar Galatzan, one of the biggest proponents of the tablet program, has given several reasons for blocking Magruder's reappointment. She told me she thinks the committee has done too little oversight on construction projects and too much on technology, and she argued that Magruder crossed a line on technology, questioning not just purchases but policy and curriculum.
I didn't find any of her justifications remotely compelling.
Deasy, meanwhile, told The Times that he wasn't taking sides. Why would he, when he's got plenty of loyal board members to do his dirty work for him?
Voting by the oversight committee on school projects, by the way, has no binding authority on district officials. This is simply a group of 15 volunteers whose role is to represent taxpayers by keeping an eye on how their money is spent.
Getting rid of a good watchdog wasn't just petty. Spotlighting Magruder for asking the tough questions the board should have been asking was a political blunder too. And the only way to save face, if the matter comes up for reconsideration as expected Tuesday, is to apologize to Magruder and invite him back for another term.
As Magruder reminded me, it's an oversight committee. It doesn't look good when those being overseen try to control who's doing the watching.
________________________
●● Boardmemeber Kayser's resolution to reappoint Stuart Magruder to the Bond Oversight Committee will be heard at the special meeting of the Board of Education on Tuesday June 17th at 2PM
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T FIT: The Rest (but not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other Sources
THE KIDS CROSSING THE BORDER The new crisis: undocumented and unaccompanied minorshttp://bit.ly/1kDlo4T
Retweet/must read from Leonie Haimson[Class Size Matters]: DON’T TAMPER W/TEACHER TENURE UNLESS YOU WANT TO SEE SCHOOLS POLITICALLY ENTANGLED AS PORT AUTHORITYhttp://go.shr.lc/TZ4ok5
Dorie Turner Nolt @EDPressSec from Secretary ArneDuncan: DRAWING THE RIGHT LESSONS FROM VERGARAhttp://ow.ly/y38HO
A TEXTBOOK CASE OF MEDDLING IN CALIFORNIAhttp://bit.ly/1p4QPuR
LAUSD’s JOHN DEASY WANTS TO HELP WRITE NEW TEACHER TENURE LAWS + smf’s 2¢ http://bit.ly/1vj5GDT
Steve Lopez: WHEN THE L.A. UNIFIED WATCHDOG WATCHES TOO CLOSELY http://bit.ly/TWOzul
LAUSD SUPERINTENDENTS DRAFT $4.58 BILLION SCHOOL-BY-SCHOOL 2014-14 BUDGET–not covered is $2B+ in administrative costs http://bit.ly/1lf2hhL
UPDATE► LCFF/LCAP: LA Schools Parent Committee Battling District to Elect Its Own Leadership http://bit.ly/1kRZAYh+Catch 22 LAUSD style!
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE LCFF PARENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE: Friday, June 13 – 9AM to Noonhttp://bit.ly/1isayyW
PHOTO: Why is this man smiling? pic.twitter.com/chtmVtSpeV
Hiltzik: WHY THAT RULING AGAINST TEACHER TENURE WON’T HELP YOUR SCHOOLCHILDREN ANY MORE THAN DEASY’S iPADS | http://bit.ly/SCSBGQ
Howard Blume @howardblume • Jun 12
There's now an interesting face-off between unions, w largest non-teachers union, Local 99 of SEIU, going for Alex Johnson.
Howard Blume @howardblume • Jun 12
The L.A. teachers union, United Teachers Los Angeles, has endorsed George McKenna for the Board of Education, a needed win for him.
#GunViolence: "'No way to prevent this', says the only country where this regularly happens." - The Onion
RORY PULLENS CONFRONTS TO CHALLENGES OF ART, MONEY AND LAUSD + smf’s 2¢ | http://bit.ly/1mKFL1x
VERGARA v. CALIFORNIA: The official tentative decision |http://bit.ly/1oWmwF1
VERGARA v. CALIFORNIA: Damage assessment, Punditry, Gloating and Aftershocks …24 hours after (multiple stories) |http://bit.ly/1pKmlOg
Associated Press: CALIFORNIA TEACHER TENURE LAW UNCONSTITUTIONAL http://bit.ly/1iledi1
DIANE RAVITCH ON BILL GATES’ COMMON CORE COUP: “It’s time for Congress to Investigate.” http://bit.ly/1kY59VW
Bought+Paid-for: HOW BILL GATES PULLED OFF THE SWIFT COMMON CORE REVOLUTION | http://bit.ly/1jitOPz
Vergara Decision is temporary/final judgment may take 30 days http://bit.ly/1kiEehv
Total win 4 Vergara plaintiffs. Victory on all counts. Judge stays changes 2 law, pending appeal. more>>
From @StephanieSimon_ #Vergara judge put impact on hold, letting statutes stand while appeals go forward, CA Fed Teachers tells POLITICO
Judge rules in favor of plaintiffs in #Vergara trial. California teacher tenure laws unconstitutional. Appeal is inevitable.
EVENTS: Coming up next week...
Budget, Facilities, and Audit Committee - CANCELLED
Start: 06/17/2014 10:00 am
SPECIAL BOARD MEETING I - June 17, 2014 - 2:00 p.m.
Agenda: http://bit.ly/1utzfAg
Committee of the Whole - CANCELLED
Start: 06/17/2014 3:00 pm
SPECIAL BOARD MEETING II (LCAP) - June 17, 2014 - 3:00 p.m.
Agenda: http://bit.ly/1kVsXbX
● 30 public comment speakers will be allowed for the District's Final Budget and the Local Control Accountability Plan.
● Each speaker will be able to make a 2 minute presentation
*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
Liaison Sylvia.Rousseau@lausd.net • 213-241-6382
Monica.Ratliff@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!.
|
