Open Letter from the 2015 Clay County Teacher of the Year

“Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.”

Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

To my colleagues, friends and neighbors in Clay County:

     Justice Louis Brandeis’ famous quote came more than a hundred years ago as the United States was in the middle of trying to clean up the effects of the Gilded Age.  The Gilded Age was a time period that saw politicians and corporations manipulate laws and secrecy to keep the American people in the dark and rake in massive amounts of public money for their own wallets.  Through reformers like Justice Brandeis, President Theodore Roosevelt and many others, sunlight and transparency was restored to our government and America built the largest middle class the world had ever seen through most of the 20^th century.

Unfortunately my friends, we are now in a new era of forced darkness as those in leadership are aiming to keep us, the working people of Clay County, in the dark so they can manipulate our tax dollars for corporate greed and personal wealth.   One of the chief organizations that they are using to accomplish their twisted plot is our elected School Board.

The putting up curtains to keep the sunlight out of Clay County started in 2012 when election rules were manipulated to ensure that nearly half of Clay County voters would effectively not have a say in their elected superintendent.  Once elected, the superintendent and those who support him continued to fight to keep Clay County teachers, parents and voters in the dark.  You can see this manipulation on several issues whether it was using tax money to support groups with radical interpretations of US history, hiring of supporters with little experience, or money for lobbyists.  Due to arbitration that keeps opposing viewpoints out of county email, the superintendent is able to Their goal is to keep the working voters of Clay County out of the process to enrich themselves and their supporters.

Why this is important to keep in mind is because this same pattern has been and is continuing to be applied to the teachers and their contract in Clay County.  As a now former Clay County Teacher of the Year, I feel that it is my obligation to speak on behalf of my friends and great people that I met throughout Clay County Schools. 

In the last 8 years, student performance and achievement has continually improved throughout Clay County Schools.  Some like to claim that public education should be more handled like the real world, and in any other industry those responsible for the increased production would be rewarded financially.  However, the teachers of Clay County have received ZERO raises over the last 8 years.  In fact, with increased contributions for decreasing health care benefits, for their success in the classroom, Clay County teachers have received a significant PAY CUT. 

At the same time this has been happening, teachers have seen county-level administrator positions increase with pay raises, thousands of dollars to educational programs and countless amounts of money kicked back to the charter school industry. Now, the district is claiming poverty and making those responsible for the achievement in Clay County schools balance the budget out of their paychecks.  Even though an appointed, impartial arbitrator agreed that small teacher raises are reasonable, the leadership of the School Board is now pushing forward to ignore those rulings. 

In the discussion about the contract with the arbitrator, it was the belief of the superintendent that my leaving Clay County for a neighboring county was anecdotal and not related to School Board policy regarding teacher contracts.  However, that is completely false.  I left Clay County because as teachers, my wife and I felt that another county did a better job of taking care of its teachers.  In my 8^th year of teaching, I will finally see my first raise as a teacher, our health care costs will be dramatically lower with a growing family and after three years of successful evaluations, I will have contract protections that I could only have dreamed about in Clay County.  These are all measures that the Clay County School Board has had the option of enacting to support their teachers, but have consistently declined.

Again, in an opportunity to keep Clay County’s working voters and teachers in the dark about what is going on, they have scheduled this meeting in the middle of a workday.  This is consistent with their way of handling questions that are in the public interest.  They want to limit questions and criticism from those who they were elected to represent and protect.

A hundred years ago reformers throughout the United States came together to shine a light on elected officials and institutions that were demonstrating values that were un American.  In their handling of the teacher contracts and other issues within the school district, the School Board and its leadership has demonstrated the same values of the Gilded Age bosses of a hundred years ago.  I hope that with my letter and the concerns of other parents and teachers in Clay County, we can begin to shine a light on these injustices, as Louis Brandeis says, disinfect our system and return to Clay County a more perfect union.

Thank you for your time.  I will always have a special place in my heart for Clay County and the great people I worked and live there with.

David W. Fields, M.Ed

2015 Clay County Teacher of the Year

Objecting to Objection

Context:  After a year of negotiations the Teachers' UNION declared IMPASSE with a school district unwilling to work with and compromise with the professionals doing the daily work in the classrooms with the children of Clay County.  A special magistrate was called upon to intercede and foster compromise.  The superintendent of Clay County, Charles Van Zant, Jr.,  refused to accept the magistrate's judgement based upon the following (excerpted from his officially issued document "Employer School  District Of Clay County's Objections to Special Magistrate's Recommendations):

1     1.       In rejection of the union's position that annual contract teachers be granted job security after three consecutive highly effective evaluations Van Zant stated  “The threshold to receive an effective rating is a 60% on the evaluation system which is an artificially low standard established by the Clay Assessment Committee of which union representatives constitute the majority." 

The problem with his analysis here is that the 60% percent is not an artificially low number.  It is feasible to rate ineffective teachers below this number.  In fact, union representatives have approached school administrators in the past and expressed concern regarding working conditions because of an excess of walk through observations, both informal and formal, for teachers who continually produce results, supported by test scores, classroom data, and prior evaluations.  In addition to myriad other obligations, quality teachers were feeling overburdened, undervalued, and unappreciated. They felt as if they were being watched over as a parent with a child and morale was low.  When administration was approached regarding the issue, union leaders suggested that quality teachers be observed less frequently so bad teachers could be focused on, given due process, and dismissed if necessary.  Administration response was to claim the observation document was too verbose and complicated and they didn’t know how to utilize it effectively to run bad teachers out.  In other words, it was too hard for administration to identify bad teachers and help them improve, as superintendent Van Zant claims is the purpose of the evaluation document.  Continuing with this line of thinking, it would also be even harder to establish a teacher’s faults and prove them following the protocol of due process.  Essentially, the Clay Assessment system isn’t artificially low, the ability of county hired administration isn’t capable of doing the specific job they are tasked with in this regard.  A site-based analogy for those playing at home and unfamiliar with educational terminology would be akin to teachers being unable to fail incompetent students because of the teacher's inability to identify the meaning of the diction used to formulate the content specific standards they are tasked with implementing on a daily basis. 

Secondly, to blame the weakness of the evaluation document on a committee “of which union representatives constitute the majority” is a not only a boldfaced lie but also a loaded statement with a political agenda.  The union is NOT a majority on this committee and the culpability implied by Van Zant does not lie with the union as his statements would lead one to believe.  He is intentionally distorting the truth to fit the narrative spun by his daddy and other like minds in the Florida legislature. 

 Furthermore, the teachers on this committee are likely to earn an average of about $45,000 annually and are tasked with planning, teaching, and grading daily lessons.  The majority of this committee is made up of principals who make close to six figures if not over 100,000 per year to not only supervise but also utilize said evaluation document as their main daily priority. In addition, the committee is led by the top ranking administrators in the district second only to the superintendent.  These committee members are getting paid in excess of 100,000 dollars per year and are tasked directly with the evaluation of personnel and instruction.  Essentially, their job revolves around this tool that the superintendent deems "artificially" substandard. If they can’t manage to lead a committee that creates an evaluation system that does not have “an artificially low standard” then there are some serious questions to be asked.  The logic does not follow.  The superintendent can’t have it both ways, either the document is flawed because his appointed staff is unable to do better or his refutation of the assessment system is unacceptable.  

2     2.       In rejection of the union's position that annual contract teachers be granted job security after three consecutive highly effective evaluations Van Zant stated “…each annual contract would automatically renew if the teacher receives an effective or highly effective rating for three years.  Such automatic renewals clearly go against the intent of Florida Statutes…”

This is simply not true, 27 of Florida counties already have this in place and there has been no attempt by the state to go after districts for willfully breaking the law.  Van Zant goes on to say that the legislature “deliberately removed PSC language with intent to limit teachers’ entitlement to continuous automatic employment.”  First of all, the use of the word entitlement is both insulting and intentionally provocative.  The right to have a secure job and steady means of income for those who consistently receive high evaluations and work “miracles” with groups of children most adults would flee from after only minutes in charge is not an entitlement.  It’s been earned.  Going back and noting the fallacy of  Van Zant's position on point #1, most teachers in this district are legitimately, not artificially, highly effective, and it’s not "continuous automatic employment" to keep a job that’s been earned and is consistently done with eminence and diligence.  If Clay County is an “A” district, then the teachers who have done the actual work in the trenches have earned the right to keep continual employment, not question where the next meal or mortgage payment is coming from.  Teachers don’t need to manipulate election laws to secure employment, rather they do hard work and work hard at it. 

A side note, but one worthy of mentioning here, is that teachers on annual contracts don’t speak up, fight back, or shout down bad ideas.  They go along.  And when you go along with a bad idea, you are doing a disservice to the students and local populace.  Job security is a must if you are to do your job well because dissent can prevent failures from occurring before they happen.  And perhaps, people who want to keep others on edge, timid, and afraid might have the sort of  intentions that they don’t want brought to light. 

3 3.      In rejection of the union's position that annual contract teachers be granted job security after three consecutive highly effective evaluations Van Zant stated "The anecdotal evidence the special magistrate referenced in support of his recommendation on this issue related to the Teacher of the Year that moved to Alachua county is arbitrary, at best.  While no one except that teacher can cite the rationale for his leaving, the School District notes that renewal in a “PSC-like” fashion as the union has proposed would effectively negate what the Florida Legislature intended in 2011.”

First of all, the teacher of the year, David Fields, has specifically stated at a school board meeting  that he feels that Alachua County can better provide job security because they offer such protections to their teachers.  When deciding between Alachua and Clay, Dave and his wife Kendra felt that Alachua was a far safer district to work than Clay with pending children on the way.  If she came to Clay, rather than him going there, they did not feel confident that she could maintain employment in a district that doesn’t value nor respect its professionals.

Secondly, to ensure future recipients of the Teacher of the Year award doesn’t prove to be a liability for the political careers of the Superintendent and certain members of the board, the process for selection and determination of the recipient has recently been changed so that certain voices lack a potential platform from which to speak harsh truths most seek to avoid and ignore. 

4   4.     Van Zant rejects the notion of teachers getting in-service credit for re-certification if they do not implement strategies from the in-service and follow up with paperwork and evidence of implementation. Van Zant states "In this regard, the School District believes that the Florida Department of Education protocols require that follow-up documentation should occur after implementation in cases in which the teacher is to use a new skill or strategy as part of the ins-service training.  It only makes sense that the effectiveness of the strategy can only be measured after it is implemented. “

Logistically, there are so many things wrong with this statement.  If it “only makes sense that the effectiveness" of anything “can only be measured after it is implemented” then all bad ideas would have to be put into practice before issuing judgement.  Telling my 11 year old son not to jump his bicycle over a pit of hungry alligators before actually attempting it is not beyond the pale.  Implementation isn’t always the path to determining impotence.    This sort of weak reasoning would preclude the existence of all management and supervisory positions. If all ideas need to be put into practice, all workers could just fling whatever they wish at the wall anytime they'd like and see what sticks.  There would be no need for planning and refining, just trial and error....always. 

Furthermore, to say teachers must implement a strategy in order to be awarded the points for re-certification (125 hours every 5 years plus a non-reimbursed fee approaching $100) is insulting and detrimental.  If a college educated, experienced, classroom professional determines that a day-long mandatory in-service training is nothing other than balderdash, they should be awarded credit for time served.  What’s the reason for making them implement a bad idea that will just subtract another day (days) from instruction? Competent people can smell manure when thrown in their ugly mugs, there’s no need to feed it to the kids to ensure it is indeed ordure. 

5  5.        In his objection to the practice of "leapfrogging" (the practice of outsiders coming into the district coming into the district with credit for all experience while veterans loyal to the district are refused full credit for experience the superintendent states "The School District …has had difficulties in recruiting individuals in hard to fill positions, such as speech.  “

This is an absurd connection.  There is one reason why speech THERAPISTS do not take jobs in the county.   Salary.  In the private sector, there is more money to be made, significantly more money.  Furthermore, occupational therapists and physical therapists in Clay County are on a separate pay scale than speech therapists.  The speech therapists are on the teachers’ pay scale (even though they also require a  70-100 credit Master's Degree along with state licensing and completing a certification of clinical competence which entails over 400 clinical hours and requires an annual renewal fee). The other therapists on the separate scale make about $25,000 per year more than speech therapists.  A speech therapist currently working IN Clay County Schools makes 70,000 a year working for a private contracting company.  Simply put, that means that the district is paying private speech therapists more than they would have to pay their own employees if they would just pay their current speech therapists on the therapist salary scale.  

The reason for the speech shortage isn’t because of “leapfrogging” but rather because Clay is lacking vision, coherence, competence, and community in its upper organization scheme. 

6   

   6.      The impasse led to the district absorbing the magistrate’s fees for composing this report that the superintendent has rejected.  The school board will likely vote to reject it.  The teachers will likely refuse to ratify the school board’s rejections.  That takes us back to square one, negotiating a contract for the 15-16 school year, one that is essentially already over.  Hundreds, if not thousands of man-hours wasted.  This translates to dollars because time equals money, right?    So, essentially, this year ends with absolutely no progress between management and labor at a significant cost.  Therefore, it will be the 16-17 school year before negotiations pick up steam again and at that point it will be EIGHT (8) years without any pay increase.  Not a raise, just a pay increase.  No cost of living, contracted step increase, nothing…nada.  Just an ever increasing inflation and  rising cost of health insurance…adjusted for real dollars, the people doing the work in the schools of Clay have absorbed a net loss over the past decade of work while new positions and raises have been given to those in the ivory tower.  It’s unjust at best.  It’s indescribably profane for sure. 

Why Teach?

Being interested in literature for a great majority of my life, I’ve often connected with the wisdom of great writers from the past.   One of the first literary novels I can remember reading is Oliver Twist, by Charles Dickens.  In this book he wrote that “The sun,--the bright sun, that brings back, not light alone, but new life, and hope, and freshness to man--burst upon the crowded city in clear and radiant glory. Through costly-coloured glass and paper-mended window, through cathedral dome and rotten crevice, it shed its equal ray.”  From early on in life, by reading and identifying with statements such as this, I learned that money has no real, intrinsic value and that there is much more to life.  I wasn’t sure exactly what I wanted to do with my life, but I was sure that I wasn’t going to chase dollars but rather hold value in relationships, doing solid work, and helping others.  It was these early principles that guided me down the long, winding path to become an educator. 

The first few years in teaching are more stressful, cumbersome, and fatiguing than anyone can imagine.  There is no magic formula, no advice, and no college curriculum than can serve to prepare teachers for what they are about to encounter.  At any given moment in the classroom teachers are met with apathy, hostility, despair, confusion, absurdity, and any other number of things.  The only way through is by doing.  Experience is the only path to liberation and inspiration is hard to find.   Some anecdotal evidence of such difficulties facing teachers comes from a recent interaction I had with an old friend at a holiday event.  Before becoming a teacher this year, he served as a soldier in Afghanistan and was also a ten-year veteran of the police force.  When I asked how his first year of teaching was going, he said, “Of all the things I’ve ever hated, I’ve never hated anything as much as I hate teaching.” 

Now, with over a decade of classroom experience behind me, I have found the best way to succeed in the classroom is to be genuine.  When the students see this, they perform.  When students know that you are a real person who passionately brings enthusiasm and concern to the classroom day after day, in spite of an endless barrage of disconnected and aimless reforms and mandates, they sincerely attempt to succeed.  And it is in these attempts where inspiration lies. 

Without that inspiration, I would’ve left the profession years ago, mirroring the feelings of my first year teacher friend.  It’s not the pay.  It’s not the respect.   And it’s not the opportunity for advancement that inspires teachers to grind it out in the classroom day after day.  It’s the successes of the kids we work with that inspires and drives us.

More concretely, I’m inspired by Ashley, a current senior who I taught in 11^th grade who came up to me in the hallway several weeks ago smiling and jumping up and down with joy.  “Mr. Fagan.  Do you remember how bad I did on that pre-test you gave for ACT skills last year?  Well, with all of the practice and review and work you gave us last year, I just got my results back and my composite score was a 30!  Thank you so much for all that you did to help me!”  That inspires me.

I’m inspired by the students who arrive in my speech class terrified of talking in front of a group of people.  I’ve had students cry during their first speech.  I had a student run out of the classroom and hide because she was so scared.  And every year there are others who want to make immediate guidance appointments to get their schedules changed while I reassure them that it won’t always be this hard and that at some point, they are going to have to face it.  And there isn’t a feeling that compares to seeing these same students grow, build poise, and confidence as the course develops.  By the end of the year, many of these students not only give 7-9 minute speeches, but they learn how to confidently command a room. 

I’m inspired when students in my first period make it to class 70 out of the first 90 days of school.  I’m inspired because in spite of the obstacles thrown in their way they arrive as often as they can.  They arrive when they can and work hard to succeed even when they are the sole morning care-takers of elementary aged siblings that have no other means to get to school because their mothers are working. 

I’m inspired when my honors students challenge themselves and take Advanced Placement courses in 12^th grade. 

I’m inspired when my students get accepted into the colleges of their choice.

I’m inspired on graduation night when I arrive for my assigned duty and see my students in their caps and gowns.  They run over to me.  They hug me.  They take pictures with me.  They let me know how much what we did together means to them.  And that means everything to me. 

I’m inspired when former students reach out to let me know that they are doing great things now. 

I’m inspired when I get a call from a former student now serving in Afghanistan while home on leave, asking to make plans to meet up before the holidays. 

I’m inspired when former students become teachers and say that they’ve chosen that path because of the influence I’ve had on them (and I’m also terrified by their career choices as I see what the future of our profession holds in store for them). 

I’m inspired when I’m invited to the weddings of former students. 

I’m inspired when I receive baby pictures of their children.

I’m inspired when I receive Christmas cards in the mail from them. 

I’m inspired by my colleagues who come into work on a daily basis and do the work that matters in the face of adversity, animosity, disrespect, and an ever-changing environment because they too, know what it’s all about. 

In a profession when teacher voices are so often devalued and unheeded, there is so often very little to uplift and inspire.  The pay surely doesn’t inspire.  The rising costs of benefits, deductibles, and copays doesn’t inspire.   The lack of respect and autonomy doesn’t inspire.  The intentional debilitation of public schools and the invaluable services they provide does not inspire.

 If it weren’t for the kids and the daily interactions, laughs, tears, learning experiences, and small victories we experience together, there’d be no reason to teach at all. 

The GLAMorous World of Educational Reform

Currently, American public education may be in the beginning throes of extinction as it experiences unprecedented and calamitous reforms in regard to testing, teacher accountability, and curriculum reform.  Teachers are overburdened to the point of becoming incapable of doing not just all that is asked, but anything that is asked.  I imagine there was a time in education when teachers could plan, teach, assess, and interact with students.  Those days are long gone and beyond the reaches of memory for most teachers working today.

Testing has gotten so far out of control that a school district can have some sort of assessment going on just about any given day.  In Miami-Dade County the district uses 154 of the 180 days of student attendance for some sort of testing.  Even though any individual student may only be testing for a total of 8 hours on any state-mandated test in any given year, that student will also be given an assortment of district-issued assessments in order to address legislation that mandates interventions to get students up to speed.  Tests are not the exception, they are the norm. They occur continually and interfere with instruction to the point instruction becomes almost impossible at times.  

For example, during the first weeks of school a district typically has students take diagnostic tests in order to determine baseline scores and benchmarks in most core subjects.  As the year progresses, these students are then called back to test each quarter to gather data to identify areas of need and to see if progress toward mastery is being made.  In ed-speak this is called “progress-monitoring.”    In English classes, for example, districts mandate writing tests in addition to reading tests so students can be given some sort of mandated test more than 3 times in any given quarter, for a single core subject.   As the legislature lowered the penalties for the class size amendment, districts are cutting teacher positions and are filling classes to the brim with students.  Core classes are being reported to contain student counts over 30 and electives as big as 40.  Computer labs are not large enough to accommodate classes of such size so testing for any given class may be broken up over the course of two or three days.  What this ultimately means is that instruction can be impeded for up to 3 days while testing occurs, and a teacher cannot teach a class fully when at least a third of that class is not present.  If this happens three times per quarter, instruction is basically lost for up to 9 days per quarter, which amounts to more than 20 percent of instructional time.  This is not to mention the other resources lost to testing.  Usually it is the guidance counselors who end up administering these tests, so students are also losing essential guidance in addition to classroom instruction.  In short, schools are not providing the basic services they were designed to do.  They are intentionally being set up to fail (https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3286777759911046485#editor/target=post;postID=7551337420457621865;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=1;src=postname

Besides dealing with the interminable testing (not to mention having a portion of salary based upon student tests even if that teacher doesn’t teach a subject in which his/her students are being tested) teachers are also being forced to collaborate at unprecedented levels.  Many districts are forcing teachers to collaborate in Professional Learning Communities which meet for at least one hour per week.  Apparently management felt that teachers weren’t already doing this and therefore mandated it.  These PLCs occur in addition to faculty meetings, department meetings, district meetings, parent conferences, and weekly academy meetings.  The inherent problem with such excessive meeting is twofold: first, teachers are unavailable after school for tutoring and providing extra-help and second, teachers now have less time to plan and grade.  Between testing and meeting, teachers have very little time on the job to actually do the job, but ironically are held more personally accountable than ever before by holding a portion of the paycheck ransom to test scores. It’s a veritable educational catch 22 if you will.

Seemingly the rationale behind PLCs seems to be only that someone in upper-management had an all-expenses paid trip to observe a model-school and needs an end product to justify the expense or it’s that someone just simply read about a district in Singapore that has high test scores and figured “what the hell, let’s try this.”  The truth is upper administration really seems to have no real reason other than it seems to work in some other places.  “Let’s try it,” they say and if you question the merits of any new initiative you’re labeled out of touch, old-fashioned, and unwilling to change with the times.  In district level meetings they set the agendas and the “norms” of the meetings, keeping negative criticisms and any real thorough analysis of the new ideas at bay.   The new idea in education is always the best idea if you are in middle or upper management.   

But the problem with adopting such practices is that American districts don’t adhere to a full and complete adoption of foreign practices.  For instance, in Singapore and Shanghai, teachers spend 10 to 18 hours per week with students.  In America teachers spend 25 to 32 hours on average with students.   And by adopting the PLC collaboration model but not doing a single thing to lessen other burdens, management only creates more hindrances upon the teachers.    They don’t initiate real, substantive change.  They don’t really care about making real change because if they really wanted to it wouldn’t be done in such a half-assed manner.  They fling shit at the wall to see what sticks.  They piggyback on precursors by plagiarizing and imitating.  There is no actual concern about these ideas actually working because those who initiate will have moved on by the time they fail and the next movement comes along.  And even worse, recent research has shown that there IS ABSOLUTELY NO BENEFIT FROM DISTRICT MANDATED TEACHER TRAINING.  (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/study-billions-of-dollars-in-annual-teacher-training-is-largely-a-waste/2015/08/03/c4e1f322-39ff-11e5-9c2d-ed991d848c48_story.html)

To an outsider, this issue is far more complicated than this verbose explication can ever clarify and address so perhaps a simple analogy might be more apropos.   Sometimes the new shiny thing isn’t always the best thing and my point can probably be clarified most simply with some images related to American popular music.  They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Sometimes, images can leave you speechless.  Somewhere back in the late 1980s a few rock and roll bands involved in the West Coast music scene began garnering attention and filling clubs. The full clubs soon translated to records sales and the dollars began flowing into the record labels.  Soon record label management signed everyone and everything they could market and exploit.  Established, credible acts with reputations built upon artistic merit and tenure in the industry were even forced by management to move in the direction of the new, alluring tide.  Veterans of the industry KISS, Ozzy Osbourne and Alice Cooper were not immune.

It doesn’t take too much to get the point. Grown men in bands, some with previous artistic integrity, had been forced by the free market and executive desire to exploit the next, new, fresh idea.  Looking at these pictures should illustrate just how asinine this is.  And doing the same in education should be looked upon in just the same fashion.  You can’t hide behind a bad idea and use children as your shield.  I cannot count the times I’ve heard management say that each new directive and initiative is for the children.  And if you resist a new idea because you realize it’s not going to be effective you’re labeled as being selfish and uncaring.  But it’s not about the children; it’s about politics, career advancement, and money.  Teaching isn’t a mystery and it doesn’t take any modern miracle or reform to help.  We need some common sense, some latitude, and some funding.  It’s a very simple formula. And if you REALLY want to reform education, you address poverty in America because that’s the number one factor when looking to the cause of student failures.  You can’t put a turd of an idea in a shiny jacket and make it glamorous.  Some people prefer the lipstick on a pig idiom but I think calling these ideas turds is more suitable since they are all stinkers.  PLCS, Merit Pay, Wall to Wall Academies, technology in the classroom, Florida’s Best and Brightest Scholarship, word walls, Race to the Top, No Child Left Behind, FCAT parties and carnivals, classroom libraries, Marquez, Marzano, Criss, and Foundations….all of it is just simply plain crap with no substance to it, pure drivel without intent…. but dressed up in a glitzy jacket with hair that will set your pants on fire.   

Charter School Plan Begins Public School Dismantling

Recently the Florida House passed HB 7037, a bill to increase funding for the construction of charter schools and to decrease the penalties for not adhering to the class size amendment.  If this bill becomes law, there will be devastating consequences for public schools. 

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/florida-house-approves-construction-money-for-charter-schools/2223111

Charter schools are publicly funded schools run for profit.  More and more frequently, these schools use public funds to secure real estate.  The basic ploy is to open as a publicly funded charter school and operate for a few years.  The emphasis is not on providing a sound education, because educating students is not the goal.  The goal is to solicit and secure public monies in the name of education, buy real estate with those funds, and then become owners of the property when the school fails.  In the charter school business model, the goal is to fail.  

This new proposal by the Florida House earmarks 40 percent of a district’s construction funding to be diverted to the construction of new charters.  What this means for public schools is that the budgets for building and improving schools in that district will come to a screeching halt.  The school I currently work in, for example, is over 50 years old and continues to operate in spite of its condition rather than in conjunction with the environment it provides.   While all of the schools in this district will continue to age and deteriorate, the money for improvements will become less available.  Charters, however, will be pristine beacons to parents concerned about sending their kids to shoddy schools in decline.  

Furthermore, the budgets in my district are in disarray.  Taking money out to fund charters will further burden a district in distress.  Teachers haven’t seen any significant pay raise in six years and are losing incentive to stick around.  Nothing is being done to lure quality college grads to replace retiring veteran teachers with incalculable experience.   Allocations are being cut due to the monetary shortfalls and there should be no surprise that the first classes to be cut are resource and elective classes.  Students are losing their art and music teachers in the name of fiscal conservatism while charters are opening in those same neighborhoods offering performing arts curriculum.  It’s highly unlikely that this is a convenient coincidence for educational profiteers.  

As funding for teacher allocations and pay becomes increasingly enfeebled by deliberate politics, classes become overburdened and overpopulated.  The House is responding to this problem by relaxing the penalties for breaking the class-size amendment.  On one hand they cut and burden school district budgets while on the other they pretend to ease the impact of deliberately exceeding class sizes.  Again, it doesn’t take much to see that parents of kids in schools with large classes will choose to send them to charters that seemingly offer educational paradise.  

And that has to be the reality of these bills because there is nothing educationally sound in increasing class sizes.  Even the most cursory look at increasing class sizes would reveal that a teacher would have more papers to grade and would therefore be more limited in providing timely and effective feedback, especially in districts with mandatory academy and professional learning community meetings that take away two days a week of after school planning and grading time.  If a teacher can’t grade and return papers in a timely manner, there is little he/she can do to diagnose and remedy student weaknesses.  Furthermore, teachers are less able to meet with identified struggling students on a one on one basis because of the sheer numbers of kids in the classroom.  This is not to mention the higher incidences of classroom disruptions, misbehaviors, or distractions that come with more bodies in the room.  The class size adjustments have nothing to do with education and everything to do with dollars.  Not dollars for the public school district but rather dollars for the charters to build alluring new facilities, to offer smaller class sizes, and to provide the courses no longer offered by the public schools.  

 

Couple this legislation with previous mandates requiring students to take at least one online course as a graduation mandate and you technically prevent any school from having all of its students considered full-time when it comes to “FTE” (full-time equivalent) numbers.  Schools are funded based upon the number of students enrolled and when a student takes an online course that school loses out on funding.  Further that by adding computer based “grade recovery” courses and some students are only at any particular school for half a day.  There is no limit to how many courses a student can retake on the computer and with graduation rate being a major player in the determination of school grades, school administrators allow students into grade recovery courses magnanimously.  

 

Ultimately, if all of this isn’t enough to make one turn a suspicious eye toward these backwards republican polices then the bill to replace the FHSAA allowing for high school athlete “free agency” surely will.  What legitimate incentive do legislators have to allow students to choose what school they choose to play sports for?  Would a superior athlete attend a charter without a sports team?  Probably not.  Would that same athlete attend the shiny new charter school if allowed to play sports at any other school of his/her choosing?  Much more likely.  

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/story/sports/high-school/2015/03/26/proposed-house-education-committee-bill-approved-seeks-to-replace-fhsaa/70526858/

Currently, great people are doing miraculous things in spite of the obstacles thrown into their paths in countless classrooms in our district schools.  But as the obstacles continually increase in both numbers and severity, it’s becoming increasingly arduous for successes to occur in the public schools.  The students aren’t failing.  The teachers aren’t failing.  The uninformed populace is failing to elect responsible candidates who represent the people rather than the chamber of commerce.  If this trend continues there will be no more community schools with student interests at heart, there will just be real estate moguls and profiteers exploiting children in the name of profits.