Who will help retain teachers?
If we can keep teachers in the system teaching, there are all sorts of winners. Kids, schools, colleagues, neighborhoods — all of them benefit from the stability, continuity, experience. The new teachers themselves benefit from being not as new: the job gets easier, they do it better, less stress, of course more pay…
The UFT and its chapters can and should act, independently of the NYCDoE, to keep teachers teaching
But retaining teachers produces losers as well. Abusive administrators. The New Teacher Project. Some textbook companies. The anti-union Charter movement. And Bloomberg and his chancellor.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
When our union, the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) sits down to address retention (or recruitment, which is not a big issue today, or any of the myriad other issues that confront the schools and our teachers), the leaders say, “What can we propose to the DoE?” But we are at cross purposes with a DoE that does not want teachers to last.
The DoE does not address issues of teacher retention, because, objectively, it is not in favor of keeping teachers longer. This is not a matter, as UFT leaders sometimes seem to think, that the DoE is paying insufficient attention to retention. The DoE pays attention; their interests are different from ours and our students’.
Getting the DoE to sit down and make another recruitment (which we don’t need) or retention agreement comes with other pitfalls. The DoE routinely violates agreements they sign. Why should we invite more cheating? And in any event, they would seek to squeeze something out of us in return. Imagine that? They sign agreements with us that they violate, but they get stuff back from us. We give, they take. That’s one table we should not sit at more than we have to. (Think parking agreement. Think rubber room agreement. Think about step 2 grievances. Think about special complaints.)
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
No, teacher retention can be improved. But to do so requires us, the teachers, our union, acting independently on our own behalf. We need direction from UFT central making it a priority to keep teachers teaching. And we need chapters to work towards retention as a major goal.
What can our chapters do? I’m a Dreamer is not in NYC, but her comments include some suggestions. And Jack Israel’s comments contain important suggestions as well. We need to move this to the front burner. We need more ideas. Fast turnover is a place the DoE is kicking our butts. And we need to fight back, and fight better.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
This post is part of an intermittent series about improving teacher retention in New York City. See also
Teacher Retention: Us vs Them
This post is part of an intermittent series about improving teacher retention in New York City. See also
- Lots of winners when teachers stay. What can we do to help? and
- Advice for old teachers about new teachers (guest post by teachin’) and
- To improve teacher retention NYC should drop Teach for America
If we can keep teachers in the system teaching, there are all sorts of winners. Kids, schools, colleagues, neighborhoods — all of them benefit from the stability, continuity, experience. The new teachers themselves benefit from being not as new: the job gets easier, they do it better, less stress, of course more pay…
But retaining teachers produces losers as well. Who?
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
The New Teacher Project and similar organizations lose, at least insofar as they have fewer new slots to fill. I assume part of their compensation is per capita. And this year, TfA is out of New York City and the NYCF is down to 700, over a 50% cut? Think of what would happen to these guys if the number of new teachers making it to 7 years doubled…
State and Local governments lose, in a small financial way (though they make it up in indirect benefits to society as a whole). Teachers with more years earn more. If teachers stay, there is more deferred compensation (pension) getting paid out down the road.
Some newer principals lose, especially if they are insecure. Teachers with experience (and tenure) are more likely to ask questions, and to assert their rights against unfair or arbitrary directions. Newer teachers are far easier to cow, to boss around, to abuse. Inexperienced principals may feel threatened by teachers who know their way around the school and the classroom, and know more than the principal.
Some senior principals are in the same boat. Even harder to make excuses for them. But if they yell and scream and bully and belittle, they are generally happier (?) with teachers who won’t ask, won’t fight back… Also, as they turnover faculty at their own schools (by design or otherwise) they need a system that provides them with a pool of ready replacements. (See Do Not Apply and the associated articles for much more discussion.)
Some curriculum developers and staff developers, especially those pushing stranger programs, look for pliant, non-questioning teachers. My Math Wars Skirmish and my run in with a staff developer both showed signs of how they work around senior staff and look for beginners. There are a group of publishers, trainers, etc, who also need new teachers. But it doesn’t always work this way. There are staff developer people who work with all teachers, who aren’t there to force the pedagogy du jour down everyone’s throats. In New York I’ve encountered more who have been easy to work with, more who are positive, than the other kind. But there’s enough bad ones out there that the point must be made.
Charter schools. To the extent that these are anti-union institutions (and yes, I know that is not true of all of them), it is easier to exist as high turnover schools in a city with high teacher turnover overall. Why should anyone ask why charters don’t keep teachers long, when things look similar in the public schools?
Bloomberg and his Chancellor. High turnover weakens our union, making it easier to push all of us around. High turnover means fewer teachers are in it for the long haul, leaving our contractual rights more vulnerable to their predations. They know that it is harder for us to fight back when such a large number of teachers are brand new. High turnover bolsters their push against tenure, against senior teachers, against ATRs.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Those are them. That’s who benefits from teachers leaving after 1, 2, or 3 years.
Do you even have to ask yourself, which side are you on?
Life intervenes
Expect flurries of posts and stretches of silence.
I’ve been avoiding programming my school. Finally started, and there’s a lot to be done.
My kitchen is finally unpacking (quite nicely).
But my living room needs to get boxed up (painting, stripping and refinishing floors). This is the piece that is most disruptive of all. How did all these books get here?
And, there will be assorted, mostly non-exciting, travel.
Math Teachers at Play #12
It’s a good one. (here, at the Number Warrior)
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Opens with an elementary probability puzzle (for kids).
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Teaching time. An elevator with negative numbers. Rainbows in times tables. And lots of ways to multiply.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Secret math in the doctor’s office. A special quadratic. How many spins of a circle get you back to the start? (depends on how far each spin goes). Some calculus.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Math around the house (could be kitchen table, but the name’s spoken for. And quite loudly). On line practice. Looking for a good math TV show. Programming in school?
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Something like LaTeX for blogger (it’s what let’s me type 
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
So go, run, read, click. Jason, the Number Warrior, has done a fine job.
Lightning to the west?
10:30, Friday.
I can’t see, from my apartment windows, to the west. But there have been frequent flashes (about every 5 – 10 seconds) from the west, and less frequent, more distant, to the north. And it’s been going on for at least 10 minutes. Too far to hear any thunder. In fact, since it was illuminating the cloud tops, I was confused for a moment about whether or not it really was lightning (it is, finally saw a bolt, appeared damn near horizontal).
I’ve been typing for 2 or 3 minutes, it’s still coming, still no thunder, still no rain. Can’t remember ever seeing this much…
Teaching Geometry: Reader question – which proofs?
I’m a math teacher in NYC and I have been reading your excellent blog for the past couple of years. I find I agree with many of your opinions on math content – in particular things that are important and things that aren’t.
Without boring you with details, I’m involved in planning the Geometry curriculum for my school this summer and I am asking several people I know about what they think are the top 10 (20?) proofs for high school Geometry. I’m of the Michael Serra camp that believes that it’s far more important to be able to prove general, important theorems (sum of interior angles in a triangle, measurement of an inscribed angle in a circle) from scratch than to prove two specific triangles congruent once given 75% of the information you need.
If you have time to respond (via email or perhaps as a post on your blog – I know you’re busy) about your list of top proofs, I would love to hear from you. It’s not clear to me whether you are actually teaching the new Geometry curriculum in your school, or if you’re simply watching the Geometry regents as a concerned observer, but any input you have would be appreciated.
Thanks for your time and keep up the great blogging!
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Last question first. Last year I taught the first term of geometry to students who will complete the course this Fall. I taught a fairly traditional course, with constructions (straight edge and compass) woven in from the beginning. These posts describe a theorem informing construction in one incident and construction informing a theorem in another in that class.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
There are choices with proof:
- The two specific triangles proofs (fairly standard. Look at this diagram. Prove something specific about the given situation)
- Required proofs. Here’s a list of 8 or 24 or 47 proofs that you must be able to rattle off. Good luck studying/memorizing!
The first case, as Serra points out, is fairly artificial. And, it’s not what we do when we do math later on.
The second case is usually rote. Look, memorizing proofs has value, you learn how things fit together. But there is no sense of creation in repeating a proof you’ve read.
You could also ask them for an important proof without telling them in advance. But I’m not sure what you’d be testing.
You could also ask them to prove a known theorem that they’ve just worked on. There is a huge danger there, which is, the kid will produce a proof that relies on corollaries of the thing they are proving. It is very easy to fall into circular reasoning (begging the question). I learned this the hard way (sorry Ryan, Hyatt, Alec, Mychaela, Tova, Veronica, Hiroshi, Valerie, Yenyu, Afsana, Mike, Sara, Sangeetha, Stephanie….)
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
I have become attached to a third option. Ask the kids to prove things that look like theorems or corollaries. Let them be general (not category 1, above). Let them not be real theorems, or at least not major enough to be mentioned in a book. And let the kids prove. There is creation. It is not a test of rote memorization. No other theorem depends upon this, so there is no danger of circular reasoning.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Prove, in a trapezoid the altitude is perpendicular to both bases.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Prove, in triangle ABC with AB = BC, AXB, AYC, if XY || BC, then XY = YC.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Prove, the figure formed by joining the consecutive midpoints of a rectangle is a rhombus.
(this is a fairly standard coordinate proof, but can be used as a novel proof before coordinates are introduced. In fact, a significant number of standard coordinate proofs can be used here, eg, prove that the figure formed by joining consecutive midpoints of an arbitrary quadrilateral form a parallelogram.)
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
So readers, what’s your reaction?
Another education audit in NYC
Round 2 goes to the bad guys.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Thompson’s audit of graduation controls released two days ago pissed off Bloomberg.
On the narrow question of “graduation rate” the number was calculated correctly – leading to much backslapping and linking to the NY Post (quick quiz – what’s the difference between the New York Post and the Weekly World News?) amongst Bloomberg’s minions.
But on the broader question of control –
- who is giving out credits?
- who is making sure graduation requirements have been met?
- is the attendance policy being ignored?
- is there something fishy about “annualization”?
Thompson scored point after point.
Thompson missed looking at “credit recovery” – but that requires a different level of investigation. Still, one should assume that Tweed was pleased not to have the issue brought forward.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
The report was full of transcript issues, NYS Education Law issues, documentation issues. They are (for just one more year) a pretty big part of what I do. It was, for me, easy to separate the big issues from the little, the bullshit from the difficult, but real response.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Thompson’s audit of testing controls for Math and ELA was released yesterday. I read the Bloomberg response (about 20 pages) but not the audit. I can’t properly download Thompson’s pdf. But between the response and Thompson’s own summary, I get a fairly good idea. I don’t think there’s much there.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Erasure analysis is fun. Once upon a time (I didn’t know they had stopped) auditors would look at patterns of erasures on tests. If all the erasures moved wrong answers to correct answers, they would conclude cheating had occurred. (that teachers, after the exam, moved a kid’s paper to passing). A widely repeated bit of teacher-lore held that changing one correct answer to incorrect would flummox the dull-witted investigators. I wouldn’t know.
Thompson wants score analytics back. I would like to see the report to see if he only means erasure analysis. If so, eh, nah. Bloomberg’s right.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Other suggestions involved controls, where there are gaps in process, but no allegations of wrongdoing. They don’t excite me. But they are not wrong.
Principals are encouraged to behave poorly, in at least three ways.
- Progress Report scores (relying on test scores) can lead to bonuses, or deny them.
- Progress Reports (relying on test scores) can draw positive, or negative, attention to schools.
- And principals do not have tenure, and Bloomberg has fired a few (not many, but a few).
Under those circumstances, there is incentive to cheat. Tightening controls (or dumping the damned Progress Reports) makes sense.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Thompson missed the big stuff. Credit recovery? Grade changing in high school. Scrubbing Regents Exams
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Credit recovery has gotten mountains of press, and deserves tons more. Read Eduwonkette. Edwize. Complete the NY State survey.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Grade changing in high school sort of comes up in the audit. But what happens when an administrator changes grades wholesale, and is caught? In this system recently, nothing. In some cases the culprit is rewarded with a promotion. This is exactly what happened at JFK a few years back. And reports show up from time to time, but only where teachers feel secure enough to make them. Which means we barely see just the tip of the iceberg.
This kind of Bloomberg-encouraged cheating is screaming out for a careful, impartial investigation. Close attention should be paid not only of the administrators involved, but more importantly of Bloomberg’s direct employees who wink at misconduct and create an environment where it is encouraged.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
NY State gives high stakes high school level exams: Regents. The ones that really count are Integrated Algebra, Global History, US History, English, and one of several science exams. A kid needs to pass all five to graduate in a normal way.
The grading of these high stakes exams happens in the school where the exam was given, by the teachers who teach the subject. In the old days, large committees would meet in each school before scoring began, set guidelines, and then the department would grade. There were internally enforced quality controls, plus a State hotline.
With the new, standards-based regents, the scoring rules got weird and the hotlines broke down.
But with the emergence of small schools in NYC, and the systematic trend towards less experienced teachers, and the increase in untenured teachers, and the pressure of the progress reports…
When a test paper just misses passing, the State mandates that it be reread. This is the vortex. This is where Albany and Tweed have conspired to create incredible pressure for cheating.
Look here, next. There’s major ugliness occurring. But can the auditors grade tests?
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Answer to quick quiz (above) The Weekly World News is published weekly.
Thompson audits Bloomberg’s graduation numbers
It’s a preview of the race for Mayor? My caucus (New Action/UFT) already endorsed Thompson, so I guess I’m rooting for the auditor, not the auditee…
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Who reads 73 pages of this crap? Me.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
As programmer at a small school, I do tranupdates. I also do multiple credit checks for seniors (in August at programming time, again in January, and finally in June), sometimes on my own, sometimes in conjunction with the principal (or less often, a counselor). All of this stuff is familiar.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Bloomberg wins lots of individual battles. The paper records are believable. The nonsense with odd summer school codes is real; sometimes a repeated code really does represent different course. The college course missing shouldn’t have happened, but it could…
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Bloomberg gets some details wrong. Looks like he redefined “middle school” to get some accelerated credits counted (though hard to tell without seeing the records). He quotes Part 100 of the State education law freely, counting on no one else being able to read it. Ha ha, someone did. Next time Mikey, tell your staff to be more careful about making up section numbers. (What did they mean by 100.5.7.iv ?)
For those of you brave enough to try here’s Part 100. Section 5 is what you are looking for, graduation requirements. Take notes.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Thompson and Bloomberg jointly get one broad stroke wrong. Standardizing codes answers no problems, but causes many. Schools with special programs will have special codes. Neither side was sure of what some codes meant until they asked the schools. Schools should be required to keep accurate code decks. But one size fits all? Egads, disaster. There is no way they can meet the needs of literally hundreds of high schools, many with special programs that require special codes.
Speaking of codes, it is unkind but clearly not unfair to ask why Gotham Schools doesn’t know what New York City codes look like. English 101? Maybe someone who’s been to a high school in NYC can give them a hand.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Thompson gets many broad strokes right.
There is no oversight; principals can certify graduation with little thought of anyone ever looking over their shoulder.
It is troubling that individual schools set individual annualization policies (effectively annualization is socially acceptable credit recovery). It is troubling that there are no citywide standards for independent study. “Demonstrates mastery of the course material” sounds more than a little vague. And no, the State regs do not anticipate annualization.
Record-keeping is likely shoddy in many schools. Thompson’s wrong that they should all be on HSST, but Bloomberg’s wronger, with a don’t ask, don’t tell policy about school records.
Thompson points out, news to me, that the City has a 90% attendance requirement for graduation. Better drop that…
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
Bloomberg wins where Thompson flinched: there’s no direct mention of credit recovery.
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
The best part is not the audit. It is the Bloomberg’s reaction to learning what got audited. He expected Thompson to check his math.
Bloomberg said 80,482 kids were ninth graders in 2003, he claims to have legally subtracted 18,624, he claims to have legally added 8,481, giving a grand total of 70,439. Of those, 43,651 graduated, or 62%.
Bloomberg expected Thompson to check those four numbers. Thompson instead looked at whether or not individual kids had earned the credits to graduate. Outrageous! says Bloomberg. Man, did I laugh.
Look, I’m going to audit the working cars on your used-car lot. Do you think that means I am going to just count them? Or maybe I’m going to look under a hood or two?
– – — — —– ——– ————- ——– —– — — – –
A millionaire used-car salesman throwing a fit. That’s who we need to toss out this fall…
To improve teacher retention, NYC should drop Teach for America
This post is part of an intermittent series about improving teacher retention in New York City. See also
- Lots of winners when teachers stay. What can we do to help? and
- Advice for old teachers about new teachers (guest post by teachin’)
For years now, the New York City Teaching Fellows and Teach for America have supplied large numbers of untrained teachers to the New York City public schools.
What would you say if someone offered you a stream of untrained teachers who promised to destabilize the system?
But now we have budget problems. There will be fewer new teachers. And this summer the Teaching Fellows have a greatly reduced program, and Teach for America is sending its recruits elsewhere.
Teach for America vs the New York City Teaching Fellows
Teach for America and the Teaching Fellows are both new teacher recruitment programs. They both provide minimal training to put bodies in classrooms. Teachers in either program end up with a Masters. But the differences are greater than the similarities.
NYC Teaching Fellows recruit a mix of younger people and career-changers. Teach for America draws largely from top universities, including many from Ivies. TfAers come from around the country. Teaching Fellows are far more likely to be from New York or the greater metropolitan area.
The NYCTF gets its participants Masters degrees in 2 years (sometimes slips to 3). Not enough Teaching Fellows stay in teaching past their masters. But many of them do. And it is possible to convince more to stay.
Teach for America looks for a two year commitment to teaching. Two years and out is the rule. TfA discourages its members from staying in teaching past 2 years [update: discouragement may be implicit, not explicit]. It is training leaders, not teachers, giving them a ground-level view of the system they are being trained to run. In their own words:
We believe that the best hope for ending educational inequity is to build a massive force of leaders in all fields who have the perspective and conviction that come from teaching successfully in low-income communities.
…Beyond these two years, Teach For America alumni bring strong leadership to all levels of the school system and every professional sector, addressing the extra challenges facing children growing up in low-income communities, building the capacity of schools and districts, and changing the prevailing ideology through their examples and advocacy.
It’s like the once upon a time story of the rich guy sending his kid to work a year in the factory before running it; or the British Lord sending his son to India for a few years before managing the family fortune.
Now, some TfAers do stay in teaching. [But they are actively discouraged from doing so – may not be accurate] . And those that stay are fairly likely to bounce around, to move to charters, etc. Once they are in, it is worth trying to convince them to stay. But it is far harder than with Teaching Fellows, as they remain part of an organization that pushes them to be leaders, not teachers.
— — — — —
Why is this bad?
In New York City, we have enough applicants for teaching positions. But keeping teachers is tough. Retention is a far greater challenge than recruitment. Getting a few hundred TfA bodies into schools in September is a help, but not a huge help. However, having a few hundred TfAers leave each June is a drag on the system.
Teach for America works to increase teacher turnover, to keep the poorest kids in classes run by the least experienced teachers, to deny neighborhoods a small piece of attainable stability. It increases training costs to the system, and decreases collegiality. It also, incidentally, decreases the chance that students are taught by Black or Hispanic teachers, and decreases the chance that they are taught by New Yorkers.
The amount of resource that goes into training new teachers is huge. It is not only university classes (in fact, they are a small part), but administrator time, effort from colleagues, etc. The cost of high turnover is real, and should not be ignored.
Poor communities pay a higher cost. Schools can offer some stability, some continuity in the lives of children. But Teach for America actively denies them that stability by trickling in temporary teachers, teachers who will not develop relationships or bonds that will last past two school years. When a parent returns to school with their second kid, shouldn’t they already know the school personnel?
And how can school culture grow positively and be transmitted with high staff turnover? It is a constant struggle in bad schools. Should we make it worse by hiring teachers we know in advance will not last? An advantage of small schools is that a group of adults really gets to know a group of kids. TfA destroys that. There are internal relationships, shared habits, that grow as a team works together. TfA disrupts them.
Teachers improve with experience. Poor schools should not be saddled with a program designed to deny them experienced teachers.
Stop Recruiting TfA
This year New York City did not need recruit through TfA. We should not next year, either. Between the New York City Teaching Fellows and traditionally trained teachers there are enough new teachers to meet our needs. Also, recall that there are teachers already in the system who may need placement.
We should work hard on keeping Fellows teaching past their initial commitment. What about TfAers who are already in the system? Of course we should work hard on keeping them teaching past their two-year commitment as well.
Stability, shared culture, relationships, experience
We all benefit — children, schools, colleagues, parents, neighborhoods — when schools are stable, familiar places. And experienced teachers are better teachers. Improving teacher retention is good for all involved.
Are Charters pushing out kids in NYC? Yes
An article in the Daily News reports on instances in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
In Brooklyn, lower-performing kids were transferred from a charter school to a public school just in time for the state tests.
And in Manhattan the parent of a kid with special needs tells of pressure to move the child to a public school when the charter school learned that a paraprofessional would be required.
Read the original story by clicking here
(also reprinted beneath the fold) Read more…
Complete survey on proposed credit recovery regs
New York State Education Department is soliciting comments on its proposed regulations to govern credit recovery.
I am a fan of credit recovery, on a student by student basis, where substantial progress was made in a course, the course credit for that particular course is crucial, and there are one or two specific areas to be made up, remediated, or retaught. I am no fan of mass-produced credit recovery, which rapidly degenerates into seat-time, as in summer school, but with many many fewer hours.
A kid who fails largely due to attendance issues should repeat the course. A kid who mastered no aspect of the course should repeat the course.
In general, the teacher’s professional judgment in grading should be respected. And offering credits outside of the class wholesale does not do that.
In general, kids should learn course material. Granting credit to kids who failed badly, based on a “packet” or a bit of seat time does not do that.
Good credit recovery would respect teachers’ professional judgment, and move kids forward for actual learning.
Bad (NYC-style) credit recovery does neither.
Advice for old teachers about new teachers (guest post)
Guest post by Teachin’ (from the new teacher blog: I’m a Dreamer)
I invited responses to “Lots of winners when new teachers stay; What can we do to help?” – here is the first. The author’s an elementary a middle school teacher, new, different part of the country. Please, read, comment, think about contributing a guest post on improving retention of new teachers. — jd
I love teaching. I love it, love it, love it a ridiculous, disgusting, slobby amount. But it’s not an easy job, and so of course turnover is high. I’m two years in and I’m already seeing some of my colleagues leave the profession. Why? I’ve thought a lot about that. While the following list isn’t comprehensive by any means, it’s a place to start.
Give us something, but not everything.
My first year, I was handed my district’s curriculum pacing chart and told, “Go!” Turns out, that’s not all that helpful. I built everything myself – every unit, every lesson, every assignment, every assessment, everything. Could I have gotten help if I’d asked for it? Possibly. I did ask once; nothing happened. After that, and as a generally independent person, I wasn’t going to ask for what wasn’t being given. I would have loved to have been provided with some materials to use while still having the freedom to incorporate my own ideas into my planning.
Remember that we have ideas too.
This is true in lessons, of course, but also in the rest of school business. During my first year, I was never shy about sharing my opinions, but not everyone feels comfortable presenting their thoughts to those who are far more experienced. And while experience is great, those of us who have just finished our certifications might have a deeper knowledge of some of the new research and understandings about learning that we could share with our colleagues. Not every new idea is good, but not all of them are bad, either. And when one of our ideas works, acknowledge it and compliment us! Everyone likes praise.
Continues below the fold Read more…
CUNY employees stand against Tier V
The president of the Professional Staff Congress (AFT Local 2338, representing professors and many other job titles at CUNY) sent out the following letter earlier today:
July 16, 2009
Dear Colleague:
I hope your summer is going well. I want to bring you up to date on Governor Paterson’s proposal to create a new, inferior pension tier for future public employees in New York State and on the position the PSC has taken in response. Now that the State Senate has ended its stalemate and begun passing legislation, we can expect increased pressure to enact a lower pension tier.
It is a myth that Tier 5 is the answer to the current budget shortfall.
The PSC leadership is strongly opposed to the creation of an inferior pension tier—Tier 5—and to the inclusion of CUNY faculty and staff represented by the PSC in such a tier, should one be enacted. On June 18, the union’s Delegate Assembly unanimously passed a resolution taking that position and calling on the legislature to stand with the PSC and our statewide affiliate, NYSUT, against the proposal. If you haven’t seen the resolution yet, I urge you to read it, because it gives a good summary of what’s at stake in the pension battle.
A lower pension tier would not add one penny to this year’s budget because the money it generates is not realized for ten years.
continues below the fold –-> Read more…
Lots of winners when teachers stay. What can we do to help?
When I see a new teacher, or even a pre-service teacher, I think, the odds are that this person is in for a short period of time. And it is a shame.
- Teachers get better with time. Kids, colleagues, schools, the system, all benefit.
- Classroom control goes up; discipline issues decline. Schools, kids, colleagues, all benefit.
- Personal security goes up (over time, in general, yes, and after three years with tenure, of course); teachers are more likely to speak – about curriculum, about conditions in the school, about practices.
- The teacher’s investment in the school goes up. The teacher is more likely to meaningfully participate in shared decision-making. In long term planning.
- The teacher becomes more forward-looking. The teachers is more likely to seek to modify problems, abuses, weaknesses in the school. Colleagues are more likely to draw together to fix problems, less likely to leave their heads in the sand.
- The teacher becomes part of the fabric of the school, which can function as part of the fabric of the neighborhood. Colleagues benefit from the stability. Kids benefit from the stability. Parents benefit, as the relationships they formed with their first kid’s teachers carry forward to their next kid, and the one after that.
I think I am right. Everyone in the building wins when a teacher stays past their second, their third, their fourth year. What do you think?
In New York City, we get lots of new teachers with potential. Recruitment does not seem to be the weak link.
And yet, not nearly enough teachers stay. Why? What can we do?
—- —- —-
Over the next week or so, I am giving this blog over to this question. What can we do to get more new teachers to stay in teaching. I am looking for comments, ideas, thoughts. I will be soliciting guest posts (something I have not done before)
Leave your comments attached to any post. Or submit a short essay to me at [This blog name] [at] [gmail] [dot] [you know].
I think this is a discussion worth starting.
Posts from last summer about new teachers
Just a list of posts:
What Kind of Recruitment for NYC Public School Teachers?
What to do about Teaching Fellows?
Teaching Fellows or the Teaching Fellows?
Am I a Fellow?
Teaching Fellows are new teachers
Using Fellows for what they weren’t intended
Organizing Teaching Fellows as teachers
Does signing a card make you a UFT member?
What issues matter to new teachers?
Do Not Apply
Reorganization? Or reshuffling the poor?
The New York City Department of Education closes down bad schools (they often exaggerate or distort the problems) and opens new schools, often smaller, in their place. For example, this year they are beginning to shut down MS399 in the Bronx, below Fordham, and replace it with 3 smaller middle schools. (actually, I think 399 itself is a reorganized school – the building had a different number back when it was Elizabeth Barrett Browning…)
Did Bloomberg and his Chancellor do this on purpose, to harm kids? Or was it by accident?
That’s the picture, and it happens a lot. Shut, shuffle, reopen. They say they are making the schools better.
We say they don’t look at how needy the population is. We say that they often ignore real gains that have been made.
And me, I say that they do this intentionally. They add chaos and disorganization; they break continuity; they add insecurity; they create ATRs; they disrupt education – specifically for those schools, neighborhoods, teachers, families and especially children who most need consistency, continuity, stability.
Daily News exposes something: lies? or just incompetence?
Who’s right? Today’s Daily News has part of the answer. Read it, and ask yourself, “Did the DoE do this on purpose, to harm kids? Or was it just gross incompetence?”
Four schools in bottom 10 in state tests were newly opened
They closed schools making gains (MS399’s scores were rising), and opened some, ahem, that aren’t performing particularly well. The complete article is below the fold: Read more…
Puzzle – half way around a sector
I was looking at a MathNotations puzzle, really a borrowing from Totally Clueless, over here. And I thought, what else could we do with arcs and radii? And I came up with a series that all require some uglyish algebra, starting with the first at the level of a challenge problem in algebra 1.
- Puzzle version 1: Consider a quarter circle AOB with center O. Starting at point A, what is the halfway point around the perimeter?
Now, that looks fairly algebraic to me. Take the perimeter, divide it in half, be careful with a little subtraction. Does the radius fall out?
- Puzzle version 2: Consider a sector of a circle CND with central ∠N. Find N if the paths from C to D are equidistant.
Still fairly algebraic. Maybe even a little easier, though we could get some challenge back, just a bit, for asking for the answer in degrees.
- Puzzle version 3: Consider a sector of a circle EMF, with central ∠M. Find the point on the perimeter at the greatest distance from E in terms of M and the radius.
Of course we expect the radius to drop out, and we’re left with some annoying algebra, and two cases, depending on M. Annoying, but not too tricky. Try it though.
New set.
- Puzzle B, version 1: Consider a quarter circle GLH with center L. Consider a segment with one endpoint at G that divides the sector into two pieces of equal area. Where is the other endpoint of this segment?
Ooh, something to think about before you start calculating…
- Puzzle B, version 2: Consider a sector IKJ, with central ∠K. Consider a segment with one endpoint at K that divides the sector into two pieces of equal area. Where is the other endpoint of this segment? Are there conditions under which this puzzle does not have a solution?
That last might be too hard for me! Try to avoid leaving comments on questions that are too easy for you. Thanks.
Final challenge – can you pull out something that would be a fair challenge for an advanced middle school class? That’s the harder stuff to write…
Mike Bloomberg – not comfortable in a public school
A blogger in a different part of the NYC blogging universe looked at Bloomberg’s education campaign literature.
It is glossy.
It has bulleted points.
It has Catholic school kids dressed up to look like public school kids.
What? Bloomberg’s not comfortable with real public school kids?
Maybe it was, hmm, an unusual circumstance? A misunderstanding?
Nope. They brought Catholic School girls into an all-boys Catholic School. They told them to bring street clothes and change out of their uniforms for the shoot.
Mike Bloomberg thinks we’re too dumb to know when rich people lie to us.
Click for the article on the O’Dwyer PR blog. The staged, faked image is above and to the right, and the entire text of the article follows immediately, in red, below the fold.
Math Teachers at Play #11
…over at Math Mama Writes… 15 solid links (including back here!)
Summertime, teachers get quiet, but the math carnivals roll forward…
Go see Food, Inc
I’m not a big fan of preachy documentaries, but here’s an exception.
Food, Inc peels away some of the secrecy about what’s going on with food production in the United States.
Monopolization: Beef, Pork, markets monopolized by just 4 producers. Chicken, I think 3. Corn? 4. And soybeans? Monsanto patented a gene, stuck it in, and now controls over 90% of soybean production in the US.
Farms: Not like what you see in the pictures. Chicken houses with tens of thousands of birds – that never see daylight – that fall over because the hormones that fatten mature them too fast don’t keep the rest of their growth on par. Consolidated feeding operations (CAFOs?) for cows and pigs where they are nearly force-fed corn…
Supermarkets: 50,000 items on the shelf, most containing some engineered rearrangement of corn or soy.
Contamination; Lawyers keeping farmers from talking; Victimizing immigrant workers; Food conglomerate employees in government agencies…
I wish they’d treated it more as a global phenomenon, not just US, but that takes away nothing from the strengths of the film.
In New York it’s playing at Film Forum, but also at a handful of other theaters.
You probably want to see this. You probably don’t want to be eating popcorn when the credits roll.
UFT Negotiating Committee – First Meeting
The first meeting of the expanded (about 300) UFT Negotiating Committee will start in about an hour. (I’ll be there)
We’ll have to see what framework is established. But at the moment that we start to set priorities, I have two in mind:
- No givebacks on current conditions/rules/rights
- Regain some aspect of control of the transfer process
Open Market transfers are really transfers without rules – and our most vulnerable members – senior teachers, especially ATRs, and beginning teachers – are getting slammed by this system. I know that rolling things back to seniority transfers will not happen. But some sort of union control/oversight needs to be re-established.
5 logic puzzles – how can we use these?
Over the last week I posted five logic puzzles that push the solver to adopt multiple points of view: Hats – Green-eyed guru – Perfectly logical pirates – Prisoners with Hats – Leprechauns. I also posted a solutions page.
So what do you do with these, how, why?
Of course if you are here, you will probably try your hand at solving them on your own. You are mathematically curious.
But with a class?
I am not a fan of tossing the kids the puzzle and letting them try it on their own if they interested. I am a fan of occasionally making time in class to do something completely different…
Format: I like grouping kids (or adults) up. That way even those who don’t hit the big insights can feel like they are part of what’s happening. I also like the forced communication. Can you explain why you claim X?
Understand the problem:
I handle this whole-class. Read it. Ask questions. Then when they all claim to understand, force them to ask more. And if they don’t, I will. Can they mime the words green or blue? Can they peek? Can the gold pieces be divided? What happens if there is a tie? Anticipate the clarifying questions that should arise, and ask them if the kids don’t.
Planning:
As the groups begin to work, come around with lots of questions along the lines of “Why…” “Is that enough…? “How do you know…” and the ever so leading “and what is everyone else thinking?”
Let them struggle. Do not rush to give them an answer, or even to point them on the right track. You get a chance to struggle on problems, right? You gain insight through bad attempts, blind paths. They should have that experience.
At some point (but let time pass first!), get groups to report on progress. They can share insights, beginnings of approaches. I usually ask for things that did not work first (What did you try? Why did you think it might get you somewhere? How did you discover you were in a dead end?) So no one gets shut out because they don’t have a final answer. And then the partial approaches let them listen to each other, and change angle of attack mid-problem. Changing the approach is a big deal, kids are not used to that, and it is good that they learn to let go. And then those who are lost get a chance to work productively again.
If a group is truly dead in the water, handing them a key insight may be necessary. You also might ask them to assign roles, and act the problem (or a small version) out. This really works, but needs some supervision (in general).
Carry out the plan
When a group grabs the key insight for a problem, I have them share it out, without a complete solution, but just a start. Tell us about pirates C, D, and E. Or about what happens with 4, or 5, or 6, or 7 or 8 leperchauns. Or if there are only 3 people on the island. Then all groups can work on the mechanics.
Looking Back:
Finally, as they arrive at the answer, let them celebrate their cleverness for a moment. And then make them consider the process they went through. What made this hard? What were the key insights? What were they tempted to do first, and why was that not productive? I try to get a kid to say that it was important to look at the problem from everyone’s point of view at once… but it can be hard to come up with. When they don’t, I suggest it.
— — —
These are fun. They are surprising. And with some theatrics, they can become incredibly engaging. The idea of adopting multiple points of view is valuable. Letting kids bang their heads for a bit against something that seems intractable also has value. And they are forced to communicate unusual ideas clearly, with you, with their group, and then with their class. I love being able to give up a day or half a day once a month or so to do this kind of thing. Winners all around.
Credit: I don’t know where the problems came from originally (except the Leprechauns I stole from Blinkdagger, and the Pirates are in a SciAm article), but the idea of grouping some of these together came from Jim Matthews, a math ed professor at Siena.
Can we still say “Do not apply” ?
One of the best things this blog has done is to promote a “Do Not Apply” list of schools, mostly Bronx high schools, in NYC.
The list started last June, as a useful piece of information for new teachers, especially Fellows, who were getting sucked into the worst hellholes.
Over time it grew. Tips came in from activists, from anonymous teachers, from union folks. In one case, members of New Action, Unity, TJC and unafilliated individuals collaborated to create an accurate listing.
Did it work?
Yes, in several ways.
- I know a few Fellows who successfully avoided schools on the list. There must have been many more.
- The list also created an outlet for teachers unable to speak up at work, or who had left a horrible school, still angry over the mistreatment and abuse. In a sense, it played part of the role the Grapevine was intended to.
- Do Not Apply shone a light on some of the more abusive principals, in places where teachers were not yet ready to fight back, or where they were unable to fightback.
And this year? Can we afford “Not to Apply?”
Because of the economy, and because of the ATR agreement, and because of the hiring freeze (that will eventually be lifted), and because the DoE is happy with running miserable schools, the jobs in all schools, including the jobs in Do Not Apply schools, will be filled, and will be filled largely with new teachers, with a few unlucky ATRs thrown in.
The specific advice “do not apply” may in some cases not be realistic. Maybe instead:
- Do Not Apply, or
- Apply With Caution, and
- If You End Up There, Be Mindful of Self-Preservation,
- Stay Out of Harm’s Way, and
- Look for the Nearest Exit, while
- Avoid Too Much Attention, or
- Generating Trouble for Yourself.
I’ll keep calling them Do Not Apply schools, for short. But the above is, for now, a fuller, better explanation.
I was once in a math war skirmish… Aftermath… We win… and lose
In the late 1990s the Math Wars, ignited in California, were spreading across the country. I was a witness (participant?) in a skirmish in the Bronx.
Part 1: Curriculum Imposed
Part 2: Math Teachers organize
Part 3: Teaching Math Connections
Summary of Part 1: In 1999 our superintendent forced schools to pilot a choice between IMP and Math Connections. My school went for MC, as did about two thirds of the Bronx. The following year we faced full adoption, without seriously examining how the pilots ran. The first group of teachers involved got jobs with the publisher, and became (in many instances) unpleasant enforcers of the publisher’s will. All the MC classes went to newer teachers (with, generally, poorer classroom management) Training was lousy (trainers focused on constructivism; teachers needed content.)
Summary of Part 2: Senior teachers started to become concerned in 2000, and they helped set up a union response. A handful of us met over the course of a school year, and filed a request for professional conciliation. A skilled District Rep (a science teacher) pushed us with tough questions. We knew what we were against. We found it harder to identify what we were for. But we had enough together for a hearing in June 2001.
Summary of Part 3: While we waited for a decision, I was assigned to teach Math Connections Year 3. I had to do it right. Anything less than full effort would be seen as sabotage. Plus, I thought that there was something intriguing about the different approach, even as I was certain that on the whole it was not the right way to run.
But after two years, the class had been winnowed to 16 of the original 50, selected by niceness, attendance, and ability to solve first degree equations — not ability to attack 3rd year high school mathematics. I taught one term, realized what I was up against, and receiving neither permission to stop nor injunction against, put the books away just 4 months after starting.
Aftermath
The hearing in June 2001 went well. Herbert H Lehman HS library. Dave, our District Rep, and a group of teachers on our side. The Bronx HS Superintendant and one of his deputies on the other. We had a little audience. And maybe the supe had some extra people, as well. Dave opened, and teachers presented. The Deputy Superintendant presented as well, ISTR. And then we added comments and answered some of the Supe’s questions. And it was over.
The next Fall we received the decision. Read more…
Logic Puzzles from multiple points of view 5/5
Over the last few days I posted a group of five puzzles, related by a “multiple points of view” theme.
None of these puzzles belong to me. And this is the only one that I know who to extend credit to. The rest, I think they’ve just sort of existed, forever. This one was a contest problem, posted by Quan Quach at Blinkdagger, as the second ever Monday Math Madness prize puzzle. Look here.
Leprechauns
There are 1000 Logical Leprechauns, who, one February 29th, receive news that there is an abnormally large pot of gold at the end of the rainbow near China. All of the Leprechauns rush to the end of the rainbow and arrive simultaneously. In this situation, according to Leprechaun Lore, the treasure is to be divided by the following manner:
Every day, starting that same day, the Leprechauns will vote to either
1) send the youngest Leprechaun back to Ireland, or
2) split the pot of gold up among the remaining Leprechauns.
If 50% or more of the Leprechauns vote to split the pot of gold, the treasure gets split among the remaining Leprechauns. Otherwise, the youngest Leprechaun is sent back to Ireland. Assume that each Leprechaun know the ages of all Leprechauns, and none of the Leprechaun’s are the same age. The process is repeated until the gold is split.
When will the gold be split?
Place questions/clarifications below. To submit proposed solutions, click here.
JD2718 