Thursday, October 21, 2021

Teachers and Reading Books

A Curriculum of Irrelevancy
Another ridiculous Zoom meeting with a school leader on the precipice of deciding no more classroom libraries because "some of the books might make kids question what their parents want them to know" has encouraged me to think that a Bloody Mary, made with tomato juice remember, is an important part of the food pyramid and I should partake right now. And doesn't vodka come from potatoes?
It has also made me so sad. We are so quickly moving down the path of sustaining a curriculum that is focused on the irrelevant ("Show three ways the author created tension in this short story."), as it guards white fragility and continues to deny a history that is a critical part in the country we are today.
Here is the conversation. All knew I was recording it. I promised not to mention school names, district names, size of district, or anything else thing else that could suggest a particular identity if I wrote about the conversation.
Principal: Dr. Beers, thank you for joining us. We've been asked to take a deep look at the books our high school social studies and ELA teachers have in their classrooms to make sure they present more than a single side of an issue. We had a concern raised by one parent because of a book her ninth grade daughter chose to read. This book was in her ELA classroom in a section marked "Autobiographies." Mrs. X, thank you for joining our call. Would you like to tell Dr. Beers what happened?
Mrs. X: Yes. Thank you. My ninth grade daughter is very sweet, very smart, actually an above-level reader. Her teacher has books in her classroom the students can choose to read. My daughter loves autobiographies and so she chose this book called Warriors Don't Cry. Do you know the book?
I told her I did. I refrained from saying that I met Melba Beals, the author, before I actually read Warriors Don't Cry and I sobbed while reading it. I'm no warrior. I didn't tell her I thought this autobiography of one of the Little Rock Nine to integrate their previously all white high school, should be required reading. I just said, "I have read it. Several times." She raised her eyebrows and went on.
Mrs X: Well, I didn't know she was reading it until one evening she read a part aloud to me and she was crying. She was crying! She said it made her sad to see what white people did to Black people and she wanted to know why white people were so mean and is that why when George Floyd got killed Black people were so angry. She said "it was like nothing had changed." The mother paused then went on: It was obvious that this book was making her feel bad for being white. No book should make a child feel bad for being white. Or, I guess, any other race. We didn't even discuss that George Floyd incident. It wasn't about us, so we didn't see any reason to discuss it. And here she was, thinking about it.
Principal: So, we have some new regulations here in [our state] that encourage having books that present the other side of a controversial issue in libraries, especially classroom libraries. We'd like your opinion on that.
At this point, I was wondering why I had agreed to be a part of this conversation, but I took a breath and began. "I think it is very simple. You have to define controversial. There is nothing controversial about what happened to Melba Beals and those other eight Black students. There is nothing to be controverted with her account - we know that because her account is documented by too many confirming stories and the white students who were the most consistently cruel to her have stepped forward, as adults, and recognized their abuse. There is no "good side" to the horrific year in her life and the abuses by many white people during this time of ending segregation in the South. If you want an example of a controversial subject that should show various positions, I suppose there is some controversy over whether people should eat a plant-based diet rather than a meat-based diet. In a health class I'd like to see students read about that issue from multiple doctors including heart specialists, environmentalists, farmers and ranchers, and nutritionists. But this book, this issue, these facts - I think you are asking the wrong question.
Principal: What's the right question?
Me: Mrs. X, what's your real concern?
Mrs. X: My daughter. She was upset. Books at school shouldn't upset anyone and certainly should not upset a young person just because she is white.
Me: Sounds to me as if your daughter has a huge heart.
Mrs. X: Well, yes. She does. Thank you.
Me: It's hard when our children begin to learn certain truths, isn't it? I bet your daughter cried a lot when she learned about Santa Claus.
Mrs. X (smiing): She did. And she said we could not tell her little [sibling] because she wanted that belief to continue.
Me: Yes. Sometimes we want some beliefs to continue. We don't want to know the truth. And sometimes the truth, when we learn it makes us cry. This is a far harder truth than Santa, isn't it. Learning this country's history is hard. I'm proud of her for feeling what Melba Beals was sharing. Have you started reading the book, Mrs. X? (She shakes her head no.) I think when you do - and I think you should - you will be proud of your daughter for crying and you will thank the teacher for having this book the classroom. Think of it this way: From your description, it sounds like she is smart enough to ask some really tough questions. Perhaps questions she hasn't considered before or things that haven't been discussed at home and maybe you aren't ready to discuss those issues. I don't blame you, they are hard ones.
Mrs. X (defensive): That's right. We don't sit around discussing how white people are bad. That's what you are suggesting, right? All white people are racist. Well, we don't believe that and I don't like my child, she's just in ninth grade, wondering that.
Me: Again, I'm deeply impressed with the questions your daughter was asking. I wonder if she'd be interested in reading more about racism and discovering what others have to say about systemic racism in the country. You know, Mrs. X, having compassion for what someone else experienced and trying to see how patterns of behavior have continued is important if we want those patterns to be interrupted. And this isn't about what I think or don't think. It is about the wonderful daughter you have who is thinking. You wouldn't want to discourage that.
Mrs. X: No, of course not. But she just doesn't need to be thinking about that. My word, that was in the previous century. My daughter is not a racist. I am not a racist. And I don't think we need our students reading things that make them feel bad for being who they are.
Me: Yes. I think a lot of people would agree. You know, for the longest time, no children's books had divorced parents in them. None. I wonder if the kids who sat in classrooms with divorced parents felt left out, unseen? I wonder if they felt bad. And for a long time, no books, or almost no books, featured children or teens who were any color other than white. I wonder how those kids felt? And for a long time, in books and on TV, the Indiginous People of this nation were portrayed as savages or simple minded or alcoholics. I wonder how those children felt. Books ought to make us feel something, and sometimes that feeling is regret; other times it is horror; others times it is courage; other times it is relief at finding someone who looks like we look. Your daughter found one of those books - a book that showed her someone, at her grade, living a very different ninth grade year, a horrific ninth grade year. And that hurt her heart. And that led to her questioning if we're treating one other justly now. And that's a great thing. I think you should be proud of her and should be thanking the teacher.
Mrs. X didn't say thank you, but she didn't say I was wrong. She said that she wasn't sure she had made her point exactly right but did see what I was saying. She said she would "certainly" be reading the book. I honestly don't know if that will make things better or not.
And then she left Zoom. And the principal said to me that this is happening almost daily now. "I don't know. Maybe the only way we can get covered what we need to teach for [our state] test is to take out books like this. I just don't know." I liked this principal. He was conflicted and willing to sit in that for a moment before rushing to a bad decision.
So, I'm mailing him a copy of Forged by Reading, which he has promised to read. I've sticky-noted the section I've pasted below which begins on page 30 of the book. I want him to seriously consider what happens when we begin removing books from shelves. What do we remove next? Who - or what - do we become?
From Forged by Reading (Beers and Probst)
Sailing into tomorrow may require us to rethink assumptions
and values so that we act differently in the future. There will
be implications and consequences for considering the new and
reconsidering what we have long thought. The only way to avoid the discomfort is to avoid the issues. If we can avoid talking about and reading about problematic matters, issues that might require us to rethink values and assumptions, then we won’t feel the discomfort that such difficult thought might entail.
If we banish from our minds, our libraries, and our classrooms any examination of politics, religion, race, environment, sex, justice, and the like, we might protect ourselves from the possible discomfort we might experience. All we have to do is trivialize the curriculum to the point that few will be bothered by anything.
If we can make instruction completely insignificant, utterly irrelevant to anyone’s emotional and intellectual life, then absolutely no one should rise up to protest the threat we pose to treasured beliefs, valued affiliations, or well-established habits of thought and action. We can teach kids how viruses are different from bacteria but avoid discussing why the health care system better serves the wealthy than the poor. We can teach what events led up to World War II and which countries fought on which sides and the horrors of the Nazi concentration camps but fail to mention our own concentration camps for American citizens of Japanese ancestry or consider why the 761st Tank Battalion or the 555th Parachute Battalion consisted solely of African American soldiers. We can give the facts of Brown v. Board of Education but never read what happened to the Little Rock Nine, never discuss how the integration of schools caused thousands of well-qualified Black teachers to lose their jobs because white parents refused to let their children be taught by a Black teacher.
We can teach the definitions of “preposition” and “conjunction.”
That will raise few hackles. “Onomatopoeia” and “zeugma” are
unlikely to drive marchers into the streets, even if we require
students to learn both definition and spelling. Better yet, we
can teach penmanship—that will threaten the values of neither
the conservatives nor the progressives, neither Republicans nor
Democrats, neither those drilling for oil nor the sailors on one of the Greenpeace ships.
Total irrelevancy, absolute insignificance, and unwavering stasis are effective strategies for avoiding the discomfort of thought and change.
***
We cannot, dear teachers, ever give in to the demands of irrelevancy. So, Mr. Principal, you must be brave. You must steer the ship into tomorrow. Your teachers will be there with you. And students, they may shudder at past injustices - long past and recent past - and I hope they do. If they don't, we are in more trouble than I thought.
I wish you all bravery. Stamina. And the knowledge that your hard work is the good work; the best work; the needed work. We need you.

Kylene Beers 

reposted from Facebook. 

Monday, October 18, 2021

SCUSD Proposes to Freeze Teachers' Salaries

 

In spite of a $19 million dollar surplus, ( see blog post below)

News Messenger
Volume 42, No. 6 | October 15, 2021
SCUSD Rejects SCTA Olive Branch,
Demands 5-Year Wage Freeze
And Other Concessions That Would REDUCE Take-Home Pay by an Average of
$750 PER MONTH

On August 25, we presented an olive branch to the District.

There are several crises impacting the District:

  • The approximately 200 vacancies among certificated staff;
  • The massive shortage of substitutes that has resulted in an average of 54 classes per day (affecting 2000 or more students without either a regular or substitute teacher)
  • The District's failure to provide services to students with disabilities that resulted in legal action by the California Department of Education;
  • The challenges in providing a safe and healthy learning environment with the resumption of in-person instruction; during the pandemic;
  • The need to establish and staff an Independent Study program for those students unable to return to in-person instruction.

In order to work together to focus on these crises, we proposed to extend our contract with a modest salary increase (3.5%) through June 30, 2022. You can view our proposal here.

SCUSD Rejects SCTA's Olive Branch
After refusing to respond to our proposal for weeks, on Wednesday SCUSD's bargaining team formally rejected our proposal.

Unlike other school districts (including others that are in significantly worse financial shape than SCUSD) that are offering salary increases and other significant incentives to recruit and retain staff, SCUSD's demands for concessions became even more extreme. SCUSD presented its proposal as a package, meaning take it or leave it. The District reiterated it was maintaining all of its previous proposals, as well as additional or changed demands in the following areas:

  1. A 5-Year Wage Freeze; Until Wednesday, the District's unacceptable demand for wage freezes was for three years: school years 19-20. 20-21, an 21-22. On Wednesday, the District increased its demand for an additional two years--22-23 and 23-24. You can view the SCUSD proposal here. By comparison, during the same five-year period he is demanding wage freezes, Superintendent Aguilar's pay will increase by 17.5%.
  2. Concessions in Health Insurance that Would Result in $750 PER MONTH Reductions in Take-Home Pay. In addition, to the new 5-year wage freeze demand, the District re-proposed its demand for significant cuts in health insurance, including the right to change insurance at any time to any plan the District determines is "appropriate" and increasing costs to employees that would reduce the take-home pay by an average of $750 per month per employee. Some employees would see their health insurance costs increase by $17,500 or more per year. You can view the SCUSD proposal on benefits here.
  3. Increased Work Time for Staff, Without Additional Compensation: If a 5-year wage freeze and enormous reductions in take-home pay through health insurance concessions weren't enough, SCUSD re-proposed significant changes to the employees' work day, including eliminating pay for educators who work through their prep periods and other unnecessary changes.
  4. Off-Salary Schedule Bonuses: As part of its take it or leave it proposal, the District offered three one-time bonuses of $1000 per year (before taxes) for 21-22, 22-23, 23-24. The bonuses which, according to the District, are "to address additional costs and duties related to COVID-19, less any and all applicable taxes and withholdings." The District specifically excludes substitutes from receiving the "bonus." For the average regular staff member, the "bonus" would only offset approximately 15% of the $750 per month reduction in take-home pay and no one would be eligible for the "bonus" unless we agreed to every other concession the District is demanding--including the 5-year wage freeze.

Thursday, October 14, 2021

California Schools to Require Ethnic Studies

 


By Soumya Karlamangla

California Today, Writer

It’s Thursday. California has become the first state to require high school students to take an ethnic studies course to graduate. 

A group of people wearing masks

Description automatically generated with low confidence

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a bill that requires public high school students to take an ethnic studies course before graduating.Allison Zaucha for The New York Times

The hundreds of new laws that Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed over the past several weeks include plenty of “firsts.”

California has become the first state to force the garment industry to pay workers by the hour, instead of per item. The first to ban the sale of gas-powered lawn mowers. The first to target Amazon production quotas. The first to outlaw removing a condom without permission during sex.

Of these landmark bills, perhaps the most controversial is one requiring all public high school students to take an ethnic studies course to graduate.

Under the new law, high schoolers will be taught about the struggles and contributions of African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, Native Americans and other ethnic groups, “which have often been untold in U.S. history courses,” according to the state’s model ethnic studies curriculum.

California’s student population is highly diverse — less than a quarter of public K-12 students are white. Through ethnic studies courses, students can learn their own stories as well as those of their classmates, Newsom said.

“America is shaped by our shared history, much of it painful and etched with woeful injustice,” Newsom wrote in his signing message. “Students deserve to see themselves in their studies, and they must understand our nation’s full history if we expect them to one day build a more just society.”

What’s the new law exactly?

Assembly Bill 101 adds one semester of ethnic studies to the state’s high school graduation requirements.

This will introduce high schoolers to concepts that have typically been reserved for the collegiate level.

Not only was ethnic studies born on a Bay Area college campus, but it’s also already a graduation requisite at California community colleges, the California State University system and some University of California campuses.

The specifics of what will be taught in high schools are up to local districts.

The nearly 900-page model curriculum approved by the California Department of Education this year includes dozens of sample lessons, such as “#BlackLivesMatter and Social Change,” “Chinese Railroad Workers” and “U.S. Housing Inequality: Redlining and Racial Housing Covenants.”


Whom does this affect?

The first high schoolers subject to the new mandate are those graduating in the 2029-30 academic year. Schools don’t have to begin offering ethnic studies courses until 2025.

The requirement applies to students at all California public schools, including charters. There are currently about 1.7 million public high school students in the state.

A person holding a sign

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

A demonstration in front of the Los Alamitos Unified School District building against the teaching of critical race theory.Etienne Laurent/EPA, via Shutterstock

Is anyone else doing this?

Several districts in California have already added ethnic studies to their high school graduation requirements, including San Diego, San Francisco, Fresnoand Los Angeles Unified school districts.


In 2017, Oregon passed a law ordering that ethnic studies concepts be integrated into existing social studies courses for K-12 students. The rule differs from California’s in that it doesn’t create a distinct course focused on ethnic studies.

Who opposes the law?

California has been working for years on developing a model ethnic studies curriculum, but early drafts faced heavy pushback from many quarters. Amid these concerns, Newsom last year vetoed a nearly identical version of the bill.

Previous drafts of the state’s teaching guide were criticized as too left-leaning, filled with jargon and promoting “critical race theory,” an academic concept that argues racism is ingrained in American laws and government institutions.

There was also condemnation from Jewish groups, who felt the curriculum emphasized Palestinian oppression while barely mentioning the Holocaust, as well as other ethnic groups that felt excluded.

The final version of the state’s curriculum, approved this March, deleted references that offended Jewish groups while adding lessons about the experiences of Jews, Arabs and Sikhs in America, The Los Angeles Times reports. It also struck terms such as “cisheteropatriarchy” and “hxrstory,” as well as language connecting capitalism with oppression.

Yet critics remain. Some supporters of the original guidelines feel the scope should not have been expanded beyond the four ethnic groups that lived in America before Europeans arrived.

Others find the current version too radical still. Williamson M. Evers, a former assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Education, told The Los Angeles Times that the model curriculum was “permeated” with content that made it “racially divisive and burdened by faddish ideology.”

As districts across the state figure out how to put into place this new mandate, the debate will undoubtedly continue.

Want to share The New York Times with your friends and family? Invite them to enjoy unlimited digital access to our journalism with this special offer.

 

Saturday, October 02, 2021

Sacramento Citry USD has a $19 Million Surplus AND $313 in Covid Funds

 

SCUSD's Structural Surplus
$103.7 Unrestricted Reserve Fund Highest in History
Does Not Include $313 Million in Covid Funds
For the ninth time in ten years, SCUSD ended 2020-21 with a surplus: a surplus of $19 million–after Mr. Aguilar and the third CBO during his tenure along with a fiscal advisor from SCOE–submitted a 2020-21 original budget that projected a $75 million deficit. Aguilar and his team were off by $95 million in their projections for 2020-21.

The repeated surplus (which includes every year since SCUSD’s budget was rejected for the first time and Superintendent Aguilar and SCOE’s Dave Gordon stated SCUSD was only months from going insolvent) can accurately be described as a “structural surplus.”

The District’s surpluses have been consistent. Unfortunately, so too have been the wildly inaccurate financial projections of the Aguilar administration since he became Superintendent in 2017. To repeat, Aguilar’s original 2020-21 budget projected a DEFICIT of $75 million, meaning the District’s projections were off by an astonishing $95 million.

The result of such abysmal financial management not only continues to damage the already low credibility of Aguilar and his finance team, but more importantly it means that students are deprived resources that should be spent in classrooms.

This spring, for example, Aguilar again issued unnecessary layoff notices to over one hundred SCUSD certificated and classified staff, exacerbating the staffing crisis that continues to plague the District. Currently the District has 143.8 vacant certificated positions, not including the approximately 50 new positions at Cap City or the additional 40 Academic Intervention Teachers that have been approved since May but not posted because the District has not been able to create a new job description.

Today, the District’s unrestricted reserve fund sits at $103.7 million, the highest in SCUSD history. The SCUSD reserve fund is approximately the same as the reserve fund at Elk Grove Unified ($110 million), a school district that is 1.5 times larger than SCUSD. 

This does not include the $313 million the District received in additional COVID funding from the state and federal government.

Since the Local Control Funding Formula was introduced in California in 2012-13, the SCUSD has ended nine out ten years with A SURPLUS.

Below is the end of the year performance of the District, according to the official reports SCUSD filed with the State of California. Each of these documents can be found on the District’s website, under the section related to Budgets and Financial Reports. We have scanned the relevant page from each year’s report, with the unrestricted fund surplus circled. The exception is 2017-18, the single year in the last ten that SCUSD actually ended the year with an unrestricted fund operating deficit.

In 2012-13 it was $185 thousand surplus. Click here.

In 2013-14 it was $17 million surplus. Click here.

In 2014-15 it was $9.9 million surplus. Click here.

In 2015-16 it was $28 million surplus. Click here.

In 2016-17 it was $4.7 million surplus. Click here.

In 2017-18, the District actually had a deficit, but only because Superintendent Aguilar cashed out $6 million in vacation pay for top administrators, added administrator positions that were unbudgeted, and other unbudgeted expenses. The relevant page can be found here.

In 2018-19, when Superintendent Aguilar claimed the District was months away from fiscal insolvency the District ran a surplus of $857 thousand. Click here.

In 2019-20, again another surplus, this time, $23.5 million. Click here.
Having a surplus in nine of the last ten years, with a net increase of $83.3 million to the SCUSD unrestricted reserve fund (an average of $8.33 million per year) contradicts the claim that SCUSD has a “structural deficit.” To have a structural deficit, an entity must have an ongoing, recurrent deficit. SCUSD has not.

In fact, SCUSD h

Monday, September 20, 2021

Improve the Schools- Build Back Better


We’re on the precipice of charting a bold new course for our country with the Build Back Better Act. With historic investments in school infrastructure, expanding access to high-quality healthcare, boosting our economy, expanding and making permanent the child tax credit, establishing universal pre-K, making college more affordable and accessible, supporting hospital and health center infrastructure, and more, we have an opportunity to set future generations up for success.

Now we all must do what it takes to help this important bill get passed. Click here to send a letter to your lawmakers and tell them to pass the Build Back Better Act.

The Build Back Better Act uses what we know, to fund what we need. We know that “building back better” is not only essential—it’s possible. We know that by asking everyone to pay their fair share, including the wealthiest earners and big corporations, we’ll have the resources we need to improve life for all working families. We know that scrapping the state and local tax deduction cap will help middle-class families and fund the local services we all depend on. And we know that investing in school infrastructure will create safe, welcoming environments for students to learn and thrive—not to mention creating more than a million well-paying jobs to make those upgrades.

The Build Back Better plan will help families, children, students, working Americans and communities by:

  • Investing $82 billion in rebuilding and modernizing schools and $4 billion to support internet access and distance learning.
  • Providing up to 12 weeks of universal paid family and medical leave for all U.S. workers.
  • Lowering the cost of child care for all families, regardless of income, and making it easier for families to find available child care slots.
  • Expanding access to healthcare for 4 million more Americans, reducing Affordable Care Act premiums by 7 percent, providing vision, hearing and dental benefits to seniors on Medicare, and improving elder and community-based care.
  • Providing all 3- and 4-year-olds with access to high-quality, free universal pre-K classes, which will be inclusive for children with disabilities.
  • Prioritizing paying child care workers and pre-K teachers a worthy, livable wage.
  • Addressing the teacher shortage by funding “grow your own” programs, teacher residencies and teacher preparation grants.
  • Securing better-paying jobs for workers with additional access to job-training programs.
  • Giving 9 million more children access to free school meals, and expanding effective child nutrition programs.
  • Making college more affordable for all students by reversing disinvestment in public higher education, increasing investments in historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions, and making two years of community college free.
  • Replacing lead pipes to provide safer drinking water for communities.
  • Reducing gun violence.
  • Providing loan forgiveness for nurses working in communities with staffing shortages.
  • Raising the corporate tax rate, and closing Trump-era loopholes to ensure the IRS has the resources it needs to make the ultra-wealthy and tax-dodging corporations pay their fair share.
  • Addressing the climate crisis through developing an electric vehicle infrastructure, reducing pollution and toxins around schools, funding environmental justice initiatives and investing billions of dollars in incentives for clean energy.

We know what we need. We need to pass the Build Back Better Act. Write to your lawmakers here and tell them to pass it.

We have a plan. We know what works. And with everyone paying their fair share, we know how to pay for it. Contact your lawmakers today.

In unity,
Randi Weingarten

AFT President   

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.