Sunday, July 10, 2016

4LAKids: Sunday 10•July•2016
In This Issue:
 •  A CODA
 •  EVENTS: Coming up next week...
 •  What can YOU do?

Featured Links:
 •  ► Friends4smf :: The GoFundMe campaign
 •  Follow 4 LAKids on Twitter - or get instant updates via text message by texting
 •  4LAKids Anthology: All the Past Issues, solved, resolved and unsolved!
 •  4LAKidsNews: a compendium of recent items of interest - news stories, scurrilous rumors, links, academic papers, rants and amusing anecdotes, etc.
We have seen their names in lists.

“Funding for this program is brought to you through the generous contributions by the following foundations, corporations and individuals.”

There follows a crawl – or series of slides – with the names of the who’s who of Masters of the Universe of Corporate Philanthropy

Fords and Rockefellers and Carnegies; Gates and Waltons and Kochs and Buffetts and their ilk. MacArthurs the Silicon Valley Crowd and Hamburger Heiresses and the Wall Street Bunch - spreading their wealth and culture and education and preconceptions and philosophy and good taste.

Sometimes there are small little funds – contributed in the name of some worthy worthy of recognition.

Sometimes there is even actual government money from the National Endowment for the Humanities or the US Department of Education …funding Arts and Science and Ken Burns and NPR and PBS.

Thank God for them and viewers like me who fund this station and this after-school program at my school and for special coverage of Education News in my local newspaper.

It says that the contributors have no editorial control or say in the content …and they can’t actually write that is if isn’t true.



This issue of 4LAKids is necessarily brief; it takes more energy to assemble this puppy than I seem to possess at the current moment.

Last week Their Excellences’ the Board of Education of the City of Los Angeles in their infinite wisdom – reelected Steve Zimmer as their president.

Steve is a dear friend – and brevity has never been his strongest point. Part of the discussion around his reelection was bout starting+ending meetings in a timely and respectful manner; keeping the proceedings on agenda+schedule and the chin music to a minimum.

In the end the meeting collapsed into a deep, robust and verbose discussion about brevity.

“We have met the enemy,” the cartoon possum says. “And he is us!”

¡Onward/Adelante! - smf

by Mercedes Schneider in her blog deutsch29 |
NOTE: All Links are live at the source site!

8 July 2016 :: On April 14, 2016, the California appeals court overturned the June 2014 Vergara ruling by L.A. County Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu regarding the unconstitutionality of California statutes governing teacher retention.

Below is the part of the CA ruling that likely spells doom for similarly-styled litigation that tries to argue that teacher evaluation/retention statutes should be overturned because they advance “disparities in education opportunity”:

Plaintiffs failed to establish that the challenged statutes violate equal protection, primarily because they did not show that the statutes inevitably cause a certain group of students to receive an education inferior to the education received by other students. Although the statutes may lead to the hiring and retention of more ineffective teachers than a hypothetical alternative system would, the statutes do not address the assignment of teachers; instead, administrators—not the statutes—ultimately determine where teachers within a district are assigned to teach. Critically, plaintiffs failed to show that the statutes themselves make any certain group of students more likely to be taught by ineffective teachers than any other group of students.

With no proper showing of a constitutional violation, the court is without power to strike down the challenged statutes. The court’s job is merely to determine whether the statutes are constitutional, not if they are “a good idea.” [Emphasis added.]

On May 24, 2016, Vergara plaintiffs petitioned the California Supreme Court to consider reviewing the case. As of July 05, 2016, the California Supreme Court extended its deadline to make a decision as to whether or not it would review the case-- that such a decision would be made up "to and including ‪August 22, 2016‬‬, or the date upon which review is either granted or denied."

Meanwhile, individuals and organizations are contacting the court and offering advice ("amici curae", or, as former Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist noted, "... a phrase that literally means 'friend of the court' -- someone who is not a party to the litigation, but who believes that the court's decision may affect its interest.")

Among those "friendly" letters to the California Supreme Court is this one, dated June 13, 2016, from "amici" ("friends") John Deasy, John White, Hanna Skandera, Steve Canavero, Mark Murphy, Kevin Huffman, Cami Anderson, Jean-Claude Brizard, and Randolph Ward-- a number of whom are current members of John White-led Chiefs for Change.

What is sad is that only 5 of the 10 are currently superintendents-- including the lead dog, John Deasy.
In their bio sketches, this crew paint themselves as successful, dedicated *educators.* For example, Deasy omits his former Gates Foundation connection or his current Broad Center employment. And no mention of his frequent absence from Los Angeles schools at critical times or of those costly, scandalous iPads. (Read that dose of Deasy reality here.)

John White glosses right over the at-best tepid *success* of a state-run Louisiana Recovery School District (RSD) that is on its way back to local control without its ever having achieved a single A school and only a handful of B schools-- and the last ACT composite was either 15.7 or 16.6 (it depends upon which White-promoted number one chooses.) Instead, White's amici bio highlights his time in New York, where he purportedly "[led] that city's efforts to turn around failing schools."

As for Hanna Skandera: No mention of her downplayed role as surprise chair of the dangling PARCC consortium.

Then there is former Delaware ed superintendent Mark Murphy, who left that post almost a year ago, in August 2015, to "pursue other opportunities" but whose Linkedin bio reflects no "other opportunity" and still has him at the post he resigned.

Kevin Huffman is also presented as "was a superintendent"; no mention of his resigning from his position as Tennessee state ed superintendent in the face of faltering confidence from more than 50 local superintendents-- coupled with his failure to live up to the Tennessee-state-run-school goal of raising the bottom 5 percent of schools to the top 25 percent of schools in 5 years.

Not even close, as Gary Rubinstein noted in May 2016: "Four years into the five year experiment, five of the six original schools are in the bottom 2.5% while one of the six is in the bottom 7%." State-run Achievement School District (ASD) superintendent Chris Barbic resigned effective December 2015 for not remotely coming close to that top-25-percent goal. Still, in Huffman's "amici" bio, Huffman is portrayed as having "played a central role in devising on-going plans to move schools rated in the bottom 5% for performance in Tennessee to the top 25% by 2018."

Cami Anderson is another has-been whose bio begins in past tense for her time in Newark but with no mention of where she is now. Described by the New York Times as a "lightening rod," Anderson resigned from Newark over a year ago, in June 2015. According to her Linkedin bio, Anderson is "founder and managing partner of Thirdway Solutions," where she helps nonprofits and others "forge new paths" and "find new approaches."

Anderson as Thirdway founder/managing partner is not mentioned in her "amici" bio.
If the purpose of an amicus curae is to convince the court that one has a vested interest in the outcome of a case, it seems that withholding one's actual current professional employment in favor of promoting a bio featuring a has-been role is deceptive on its face.

So much for being a "friend of the court."
On to the next has-been: Jean-Claude Brizard, who was run out of Chicago almost four years ago, in October 2012 (and replaced by Barbara Byrd Bennett, who three years later, in October 2015, plead guilty to a kickback scheme and is now in prison.) In September 2015, Brizard took a job as an educational consultant with Cross & Joftus.

As for the remaining two names: Steve Canavero is a charter promoter from Nevada, and Randolph Ward, who has been San Diego superintendent for ten years, since August 2006-- and who is the only *superintendent* out of all 10 who is actually currently a California superintendent making this *friendly* appeal to a California court.

And what, exactly do these folks want?

Here is a snippet:

The Court of Appeal's decision, if permitted to stand, will hamstring the efforts of California's education leaders and practitioners to act in the best interest of students and will perpetuate the deprivation of California's low-income and minority students of their fundamental constitutional right to equal educational opportunity. The future of California's education system, which educates over 12 percent of the nation's elementary and secondary public school students, has an impact far beyond state lines.
If California educates such a large proportion of America's students, you'd think that there would be more than one current California superintendent included in the amici list.


As one of the largest in the country, California's education system-- and the laws that regulate that system-- have great influence on the policies and practices followed in other states. The outcome of this case, therefore, can be expected to have far-reaching repercussions and shape the national conversation regarding teacher effectiveness policies, including in the states in which the education leaders submitting this brief have been most active.

I must say, I like how this corporate reform cadre creatively dodges the glaring fact that half are no longer superintendents-- and not even employed with school systems.

After the amici state and restate the influence of California's policies on the rest of the nation, they state that California is only one of four states to award tenure in less than three years. So, if California is so influential, wouldn't this awarding of tenure in less than three years be actively spreading to other states?

Perhaps that is one fear of this amici. However, that is not what this lawsuit is really about. It is about whether "the statutes themselves make any certain group of students more likely to be taught by ineffective teachers than any other group of students."

This crew wants the California Supreme Court to "grant review in the above-entitled case and protect the students in our country's most populous state from the dire, long-lasting, and ultimately avoidable consequences of unequal access to the foundation of a quality education: effective teachers."

Again, the problem is that these predominately-used-to-be superintendents do not address the issue raised by the Court of Appeals: That the statutes they want overturned do not address the assignment of teachers. (See bolded text at outset of this post.)

They want the California Supreme Court to throw out statutes that they do not like, and they want the Court to require "influential" California to replace their teacher tenure laws with laws that resemble those in other states.

Not enough of those "grossly ineffective" California teachers are dismissed, and they end up teaching in schools that are predominately populated with students of color.

But the statutes themselves do not cause this to happen. Administrators evaluate teachers, and administrators assign teachers to schools.

These guys miss it even as they try to argue that they are right. In the statement below, watch the "and." The amici assume that the "and" is directly attributable to the statutes, but it is not:

All evidence points to the fact that it is California's uniquely quality-blind and prescriptive teacher tenure, dismissal and layoff statutes that result in the statewide retention of grossly ineffective teachers and in the cumulative concentration of those teachers in schools serving low-income and minority students. [Emphasis added.]

In Vergara vs. California, it does not matter whether California is overrun by "grossly ineffective teachers." (I know CA isn't overrun by grossly ineffective teachers, but bear with me.) What matters is that any distribution of those teachers is not legislatively mandated nor is it the direct result of application of California's teacher tenure, dismissal, or layoff statutes.

●●smf: This came in last week; as nasty a recent week as there has been in terms of bad news.

Thank you Alan - smf

It’s good to know that the first rule of organizing is memorialized/confirmed by Gloria Steinem in her latest book, My Life on the Road (page 177) :

I took a course in geology because I thought it was the easiest way of fulfilling a science requirement. One day the professor took us out into the Connecticut River Valley to show us the ”meander curves” of an old-age river.

I was paying no attention because I had walked up a dirt path and found a big turtle, a giant mud turtle about two feet across, on the muddy embankment of an asphalt road. I was sure it was going to crawl onto the road and be crushed by a car.

So with a lot of difficulty, I picked up this huge snapping turtle and slowly carried it down the road to the river,

Just as I had slipped it into the water and was watching it swim away, my geology professor came up behind me.

“You know,” he said quietly, “that turtle has probably spent a month crawling up the dirt path to lay its eggs in the mud on the side of the road — you have just put it back in the river.”

I felt terrible. I couldn’t believe what I had done, but it was too late.

It took me many more years to realize this parable had taught me the first rule of organizing,

“Always ask the turtle.”

EVENTS: Coming up next week...

*Dates and times subject to change. ________________________________________
Phone: 213-241-5183
Phone: 213-241.8700


What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member: • 213-241-8333 • 213-241-6180 • 213-241-5555 • 213-241-6382 • 213-241-6388 • 213-241-6385 • 213-241-6387
...or the Superintendent: • 213-241-7000
...or your city councilperson, mayor, county supervisor, state legislator, 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: • There are 26 mayors and five county supervisors representing jurisdictions within LAUSD, the mayor of LA can be reached at • 213.978.0600
• Call or e-mail Governor Brown: 213-897-0322 e-mail:
• 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. Volunteer in the classroom. Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child - and ultimately: For all children.
• If you are eligible to become a citizen, BECOME ONE.
• If you a a citizen, REGISTER TO VOTE at

Who are your elected federal & state representatives? How do you contact them?

Scott Folsom is a parent leader in LAUSD and was Parent/Volunteer of the Year for 2010-11 for Los Angeles County. • He is Past President of Los Angeles Tenth District PTSA and has represented PTA on the LAUSD Construction Bond Citizen's Oversight Committee for over 13 years. He currently serves as Vice President for Health, is a Legislation Action Committee member and a member of the Board of Directors of the California State PTA. He serves on numerous school district advisory and policy committees and has served as a PTA officer and governance council member at three LAUSD schools. He is the recipient of the UTLA/AFT "WHO" Gold Award and the ACSA Regional Ferd Kiesel Memorial Distinguished Service Award - honors he hopes to someday deserve. • In this forum his opinions are his own and your opinions and feedback are invited. Quoted and/or cited content copyright © the original author and/or publisher. All other material copyright © 4LAKids.
• FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. 4LAKids makes such material available in an effort to advance understanding of education issues vital to parents, teachers, students and community members in a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.