OP/ED from Betsy Combier:
Here we go again. In July, the Bloomberg/Klein/media machine empowered Steven Brill, (a well-known pusher of "you must pay for your information" - see his new venture Journalism Online) to misinform the public on the subject of the worst teachers of NYC sitting in "rubber rooms." I believe that Brill's goal was to support Mike Bloomberg and Joel Klein in their battle to end tenure for teachers. I am referring, of course, to the Brill article published in the August 29, 2009 New Yorker magazine. This article is an extreme example of issue advertising and is not good journalism, in my opinion - this is an op/ed on my blog, after all.
Steven Brill actually did me a favor by writing about teachers who I know, and whose stories of how and why they were thrown into a rubber room I am familiar with. I wrote a response to his article - The NYC Teacher Re-Assignment Rooms, Called "Rubber Rooms", and The Ambush of 'The Gotcha Squad'. Mr. Goldberg and Mr. Brill are leading the public down a very dangerous path indeed, if we are to believe that all New York City rubber rooms are filled with lousy teachers, "dead wood", who harm children by being in a classroom. This is baloney. How does Steve Brill know that all the people stuffed into dingy rooms and trailers are the 'worst' teachers, and must be summarily fired as soon as a principal says "Get out of my school". It was only 70 years ago that people got off of cattle cars in various locations in Germany, and were told to go to the right or the left, as determined by a commandant given the power of god to say who lives or dies. We do not need to repeat history, we need to learn from it and learn about it.
The question that remains unanswered is, "what are the characteristics of a 'good' teacher?" Mr. Brill, can you answer that question? Or, when you looked at Lucienne Mohammed's file without her approval or knowledge and saw one "U" rating, and you neglected to mention in your article that Lucienne had filed special complaints and grievances against her Principal at PS 65, Ms. Daysi Garcia, (pictured at left) for harassment, you "knew" that Ms. Mohammad was lousy at her job of teaching?
The Baltimore Sun picked up on Brill's theme of how tenure harms the public by paying incompetent teachers to sit in rubber rooms doing nothing (see article below)...therefore, end tenure and these worthless educators can simply be fired outright, just like everyone else in the labor market. The end of tenure would be, therefore, the beginning of efficiency and streamlining public finance so that only "good" teachers would be paid and remain in our nation's public schools. Mr. Jonah Goldberg in the article below calls Steven Brill's "worst teachers" article a blockbuster, and then repeats the same misinformation. Sadly, read the Baltimore Sun anti-tenure propaganda:
Easiest fix for schools: Get rid of teacher tenure
Jonah Goldberg, The Baltimore Sun, September 10, 2009
LINK
Brandi Scheiner believes she is a political prisoner. Held against her will in what is euphemistically dubbed a "rubber room," Ms. Scheiner, 56, likens her two-year captivity to being imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Alas, it's unlikely the Red Cross will hear her case.
She's a New York City public school teacher who, like about 600 fellow NYC teachers, has been removed from the classroom; allegations against those removed range from incompetence to charges that include being drunk in the classroom or molesting students.
Ms. Scheiner, who makes more than $100,000 per year, nonetheless insists she is a prisoner of conscience forced to spend her workdays in the rubber room - at full pay - until the system can adjudicate her case. She cannot be fired, at least not without the school district spending gobs on legal fees, because she has tenure and her union, the United Federation of Teachers, would rather protect 1,000 lousy teachers than let one good teacher be fired unfairly.
So Ms. Scheiner and her rubber-roomies report for duty every school day and do nothing. They all get the usual vacations, including the entire summer off. This is all according to Steven Brill in a blockbuster article in the Aug. 31 New Yorker about New York City's efforts to reform the public school system.
Ms. Scheiner says that before New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and schools chief Joel Klein came along, "everyone knew that an incompetent teacher would realize it and leave on their own."
That's not how the unions see it. A principal of a Queens public school told Mr. Brill that Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, "would protect a dead body in the classroom. That's her job."
This is just a small illustration of a much larger mess. America's large school systems are a disaster.
Yes, this disaster has many authors. Schools are expected to fix larger social problems that are best dealt with by parents. Good teachers aren't paid nearly enough, and bad teachers are kept around, draining budgets. Education bureaucracies siphon off vast resources better spent on classrooms. For example, in 2007, the Washington, D.C., school district ranked third in overall spending among the 100 largest school districts in the nation (about $13,000 per student) but last in terms of money spent on teachers and instruction. More than half of every education dollar went to administrators. President Barack Obama might be a hypocritical liberal for sending his kids to private school, but he's a good parent for it.
But of all the myriad problems with public schools, the most identifiable and solvable is the ludicrous policy of tenure for teachers. University tenure is problematic enough, but at least there's a serious argument for giving professors the freedom to offer unpopular views. Tenure for kindergarten teachers is just crazy.
Tenure's defenders point to horror stories from half a century ago, as if getting rid of tenure would automatically subject teachers to political witch hunts and sexual discrimination. We now have civil rights laws and other employee protections.
Also, to listen to teachers unions, you'd think incompetent teachers are mythical creatures. No wonder that from 1990 to 1999, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the second largest in the country with 30,000 tenured teachers, fired exactly one teacher.
The best argument for giving K-12 teachers tenure is that lifetime job security is a form of compensation for low pay. No doubt that's true, putting aside the fact that $100,000 a year with ample vacation is not exactly chattel slavery. And while most teachers don't make that much (the national average is about half that), the good ones could certainly make more if the dead weight were cleared away and rigid, seniority-based formulas were replaced with merit pay.
Oh, and kids would get better teachers.
Democratic politicians, mostly at the local level, are responsible for letting the unions protect their members at the expense of children and in exchange for campaign donations and other political support. And, to be fair, many Democrats (including Education Secretary Arne Duncan) are aware of the problem. What remains to be seen is whether they can do what needs to be done.
Jonah Goldberg is a syndicated columnist. His e-mail is jonahscolumn@aol.com.
Here is another article from the same syndicate:
Opinion
Unions protecting many bad teachers
Opinion by Jonah GoldbergTribune Media Services
Tucson, Arizona, Published: 09.10.2009
LINK
Brandi Scheiner believes she is a political prisoner. Held against her will in what is euphemistically dubbed a "rubber room," Scheiner, 56, likens her two-year captivity to being imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Alas, it's unlikely the Red Cross will hear her case.
She's a New York City public school teacher who, like about 600 fellow NYC teachers, has been removed from the classroom for alleged incompetence or other charges that include being drunk in the classroom or molesting students.
Scheiner, who makes more than $100,000 per year, nonetheless insists she is a prisoner of conscience forced to spend her workdays in the rubber room — at full pay — until the system can adjudicate her case. She cannot be fired, at least not without the school district spending gobs on legal fees, because she has tenure and her union, the United Federation of Teachers, would rather protect 1,000 lousy teachers than let one good teacher be fired unfairly.
So Scheiner and her rubber-roomies report for duty every school day and do nothing. They all get the usual vacations, including the entire summer off.
This is all according to Steven Brill in a blockbuster article in the Aug. 31 New Yorker about New York City's efforts to reform the public school system. Brill adds: "Because two percent of her salary is added to her pension for each year of seniority, a three-year stay in the Rubber Room will cost not only three hundred thousand dollars in salary but at least six thousand dollars a year in additional lifetime pension benefits."
Ever the martyr, Scheiner says she's "entitled to every penny of it."
She says that before New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and schools chief Joel Klein came along, "everyone knew that an incompetent teacher would realize it and leave on their own."
This is just a small illustration of a much larger mess.
Yes, this disaster has many authors. Schools are expected to fix larger social problems that are best dealt with by parents. Good teachers aren't paid nearly enough, and bad teachers are kept around, draining budgets. Education bureaucracies siphon off vast resources better spent on classrooms. For example, in 2007, the Washington, D.C., school district ranked third in overall spending among the 100 largest school districts in the nation (about $13,000 per student) but last in terms of money spent on teachers and instruction. More than half of every education dollar went to administrators.
President Obama might be a hypocritical liberal for sending his kids to private school, but he's a good parent for it.
Of all the myriad problems with public schools, the most identifiable and solvable is the ludicrous policy of tenure for teachers. University tenure is problematic enough, but at least there's a serious argument for giving professors the freedom to offer unpopular views. Tenure for kindergarten teachers is crazy.
Tenure's defenders point to horror stories from half a century ago, as if getting rid of tenure would automatically subject teachers to political witch hunts and sexual discrimination. We now have civil rights laws and other em-ployee protections.
Also, to listen to teachers unions, you'd think incompetent teachers are mythical creatures, less likely to be encountered than Bigfoot and unicorns. No wonder that from 1990 to 1999, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the second largest in the country with 30,000 tenured teachers, fired exactly one teacher.
The best argument for giving K-12 teachers tenure is that lifetime job security is a form of compensation for low pay. No doubt that's true, putting aside the fact that $100,000 a year with ample vacation is not exactly chattel slavery. And while most teachers don't make that much (the national average is about half that), the good ones could certainly make more if the dead weight were cleared away and rigid, seniority-based formulas were replaced with merit pay.
Michelle RheeDemocratic politicians, mostly at the local level, are responsible for letting the unions protect their members at the expense of children and in exchange for campaign donations and other political support. And, to be fair, many Democrats (including Education Secretary Arne Duncan, Klein in New York and D.C.'s Michelle Rhee) are aware of the problem. What remains to be seen is whether they can do what needs to be done.
Write to Jonah Goldberg at JonahsColumn@aol.com
If you read the comments of the article above, you can see that readers assume that Mr. Goldberg's premise is true: 'bad' teachers are put into "rubber rooms".
Comments on this Story
Unions protecting many bad teachers
Brandi Scheiner believes she is a political prisoner. Held against her will in what is euphemistically dubbed a "rubber room," Scheiner, 56, likens her two-year captivity to being imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Alas, it's unlikely the Red Cross will hear her case.
LINK
1. Comment by Mark S. (Mark S) — September 10,2009 @ 4:42AMRatings: -5 +25
Does Goldberg get paid to rehash articles from the (liberal) New Yorker? Pretty good if you can get paid for someone else's work.
Read the original article. It is truly appalling what the unions have accomplished in NYC. The amount of money spent on do-nothing and unsuccessful teachers is astounding.
Report this comment
2. Comment by A c. (621ads) — September 10,2009 @ 4:57AM
Ratings: -9 +26
First, ELIMINATE TENURE then do like the construction unions do.
If you don't do a proper job or violate company rules you are FIRED with no appeal.
K.I.S.S.
Report this comment
3. Comment by Phillip D. (pdavid) — September 10,2009 @ 5:58AM
Ratings: -17 +18
The dynamic in public education is that superintendents last less than 7 years in a school district -- they all come in with some little marketing slogan, and everybody is sick of them a few years later. In each individual school building, same dynamic happens with principals. It's rare that one has what it takes to make it work for longer than a few years.
So, this dynamic puts the one steady factor in the whole equation - teachers- in a precarious situation. Teachers who have the balls to speak truth to power will get fired by insecure principals who have career goals in mind rather than what works best for kids and parents.
The teachers' unions help protect teachers from this sort of invidious treatment.
Report this comment
4. Comment by Bob H. (Daedalus) — September 10,2009 @ 6:08AM
Ratings: -17 +24
Just remember that our President is bed with the unions. He wants Card Check, and all the fun and games that it will bring. He has changed the reporting laws so unions don't have to show how they spend union dues. Unions are nothing more than self serving blood sucking parasites.
Report this comment
5. Comment by Randi L. (RandiL4746) — September 10,2009 @ 6:22AM
Ratings: -17 +27
Unions have outlived their usefulness.
Report this comment
6. Comment by sandra f. (azrabbit) — September 10,2009 @ 6:46AM
Ratings: -15 +19
Public employee unions were once illegal, and should be again.
Report this comment
7. Comment by rob c. (chicagorufus) — September 10,2009 @ 6:52AM
Ratings: -3 +25
Keep the teachers unions, ditch the tenure. If you suck, you get fired, simple.
How does a crappy teacher make 100 G's???
Report this comment
8. Comment by Jeffrey H. (flibber) — September 10,2009 @ 6:57AM
Ratings: -9 +20
The function of unions is to protect its members, the public and the institution employing its members be damned. Union inefficiency has destroyed much of our industry and now seems to be firmly embedded in government where it can do the most harm.
Report this comment
9. Comment by wit w. (Wit) — September 10,2009 @ 6:57AM
Ratings: -8 +20
Unions have always protected bad workers. By preventing competition between workers, the quality of the work force goes down. Then the ability of employers to compete with others is lost, reducing the quality of products. The ability of a country with unions to compete in a global economy is the next loss.
Doesn't anyone question why the standard of living in the U.S. continuously slips ?
Report this comment
10. Comment by Steve H. (1559) — September 10,2009 @ 7:35AM
Ratings: -2 +25
Having been trained as a union president, and having been in one of the local teachers' "associations" here in Tucson, what is being said in the article and previous comments is true.
Firing poor teachers is a nightmare for administrators, too. The documentation, remediation, attempts at additional training, observations, notification periods, and meetings all end up with a bad teacher being placed in a different school, with more difficult students. However, with those student populations, there is little parent concern.
Get rid of tenure and watch education improve as teachers compete for their jobs.
Report this comment
11. Comment by John D. (Blkojo) — September 10,2009 @ 7:59AM
Ratings: -1 +18
"Education" will improve when the raw materials improve.
Report this comment
12. Comment by Rat T. (rattwo) — September 10,2009 @ 9:06AM
Ratings: -2 +8
Unions wouldn't do that, would they? And why then, are they given credibility when it comes time for negotiations?
Report this comment
13. Comment by chris b. (ctb) — September 10,2009 @ 11:03AM
Ratings: -8 +6
Teachers and Unions...just on the surface it looks and sounds wrong.
Catholic and private schools have no unions but provide the best educations for about 40% less overall cost.Now how about that as an example of educational success where less money, not more, provides a better outcome....go figure.
If teachers want kids and schools to succeed thay should quit the union today and forever and just watch the bubble rise.
Ever since the union took over in the sixties and seventies our public education system has fallen like a rock.
Bust it up ,and the sooner the better.
Report this comment
14. Comment by Randy L. (Instigator) — September 10,2009 @ 11:09AM
Ratings: -7 +8
Unions used to help America. Now they are destroying it.
I wish I had a GED and a union job, I wouldn't have to train or progress or even work, the union will stick up for me and I'll even get regular raises, retirement and healthcare.
Unions have no place, anymore, in our country. Take it to China where you made our jobs go.
Report this comment
15. Comment by Cicero V. (cicero) — September 10,2009 @ 12:25PM
Ratings: -1 +11
As a teacher and a member of TEA, I can say that I am ambivalent about unions. On the one hand, a union is a very good thing to have when dealing with a district like TUSD, which has a long history of duplicity and outright lying. On the other hand, I have seen teachers who need to find a new home kept in jobs for far too long.
This is changing though. With a new teacher evaluation system put in place with the full cooperation of the union, it is now much easier to remove incompetent teachers. Teachers who are found to be not meeting the agreed upon standards are put on a plan for improvement. Everything is documented: evaluations, observations, meetings, warnings, everything. If they cannot or will not improve, they are terminated. The union does not even enter into it because the moment a teacher is put on such a plan, the lawyers and the union are informed. Thus, if a teacher fails or refuses to improve, he/she does not have a leg to stand on because it is all documented.
I am last person who wants to see anyone lose their job needlessly or unfairly but this system makes sense. If you are doing your job, it is recorded so. If you are not, it is documented and you are given a chance to mend your ways. Seems fair to me. Perhaps this sort of thing should be implemented back east.
Report this comment
16. Comment by Patricia R. (lucianvista) — September 10,2009 @ 12:26PM
Ratings: -1 +9
Private schools can kick a student out without much to go on, public school cannot. Comparing apples to oranges doesn't work.
Public schools have to educate those that they might not choose to have their, the same shouldn't be about teachers. If a teacher is substandard then they should be let go, not based on tenure.
I know the TUSD union pres, she was a substandard teacher. How can we then expect the union to encourage high quality teachers. Get rid of the union and put money back into the teacher's pockets.
Report this comment
17. Comment by Rowan D. (RowD1) — September 10,2009 @ 1:41PM
Ratings: -6 +7
re: Unions have outlived their usefulness<<
So have corporations.
Report this comment
18. Comment by don c. (lonesom) — September 10,2009 @ 3:14PM
Ratings: -1 +3
#2 First, ELIMINATE TENURE then do like the construction unions do.
If you don't do a proper job or violate company rules you are FIRED with no appeal
What the construction industry has done is hire illegals which might work since they already speak spanish and we would not have to hire special teachers as spanish could be our first language without paying for extra teachers.
By the way how many benifits have the ones saying do away with unions willing to give up since you all benefit from the backs of union workers when you receive overtime, 5 day weeks, decent wages, retirement, paid holidays, health care, vacations, safe working conditions, and since the union has outlived its usefulness as some of you are saying how many of these benefits have outlived ther usefulness and which ones do you want to give up so the bankers and CEO's can have larger bonuses
Report this comment
19. Comment by don c. (lonesom) — September 10,2009 @ 3:24PM
Ratings: -1 +5
#9 Unions have always protected bad workers. By preventing competition between workers, the quality of the work force goes down. Then the ability of employers to compete with others is lost, reducing the quality of products. The ability of a country with unions to compete in a global economy is the next loss.
Doesn't anyone question why the standard of living in the U.S. continuously slips ?
The unions are not the problem the union had pride in its members and skills until the liberals passed laws to stop the unions from thowing out the unskilled, and making them let everyone join regardless of ability to do the job stop politicians from passing stupid laws that protect certain groups and let each person get and keep thier job on ability not race, religion or nationality
Report this comment
20. Comment by Tom B. (SBTB1) — September 10,2009 @ 3:36PM
Ratings: -3 +3
The unions destroyed the car industry and Detroit and they have done the same thing with our entire educational system. Now Obama wants to have complete unionization of the entire medical profession, including doctors. (Check out the Wall Street Journal editorial, Thursday,September 10th.) I wonder if hospitals will have rubber rooms for nurses and doctors?
Report this comment
21. Comment by Mark S. (Mark S) — September 10,2009 @ 3:48PM
Ratings: -2 +1
20 Wall Street Journal editorial page is somewhere to the right of Fox News and Limbaugh. The news portion of that media outlet is outstanding, the editorial portion is extremist garbage.
Report this comment
22. Comment by Rich K. (Rich907) — September 10,2009 @ 5:42PM
Ratings: -1 +3
Far be it from me to inject facts into this spin fest, but unions have a legal obligations to make sure all members of the bargaining unit...members and non-members alike...receive due process from their employers. This is part of federal labor law and has dated back to the 1930s.
The union will be sued by the employee if it does not insist that the employer prove the charges...incompetence, moral turpitude, criminal behavior, whatever...before a neutral third party.
If administrators cannot substantiate charges of incompetence and follow the due process rules, then that is on them. If TUSD...or any employer...wants to get rid of incompetent employees, then it needs to provide training to principals and other supervisors as to how to follow the due process and get it done.
In 39 years of teaching I worked with too many incompetent teachers who were allowed to continue failing students because the principals were every bit as incompetent as the teachers.
Report this comment
23. Comment by SAM R. (SAM11) — September 10,2009 @ 6:49PM
Ratings: -1 +1
How long should it take to fire an incompetent teacher??? or any employee for that matter, even a principal. All employees should be given a chance to improve (unless it is outright criminal action) but just how long and how many chances should they get. The average time it takse to fire a tenured teacher is 2-3 years, and that is if you dont make any mistakes in paperwork and aviod technicalities. It should take less than 3 months. If you cant improve in that time, it is time to go. If you are truly a good teacher, you will get another job...if not you wont. The only profession I know of that takes any excessive period of time is a tenured teacher.
Report this comment
24. Comment by Bruce B. (4262) — September 10,2009 @ 7:26PM
Ratings: -1 +2
I can care less on what goes on in NYC. This is a one sided story. Get a rope!
From Betsy
The news that I have for readers is this: Every teacher mentioned in Steven Brill's article should be in a classroom teaching the subject they are trained to teach because they are trained professionals and wonderful, caring individuals, but victimized by circumstances that have nothing to do with their value as competent teachers. They are all victims of the "rubberization" process that is powered by the Jack Welch theory of employment: improve performance by getting rid of 10% of your workforce every year.
When my four daughters went off to their respective public schools in New York City, and they were lucky enough to get a teacher who offered resources and respect for the learning process and for each of them as individuals, and taught them the subject matter in a way that enabled them to master tests in the subject, then I knew that they indeed had a "good" teacher, and this person needed to be protected from false claims made by Principals and administrators with an agenda that does not put my child - or any child, for that matter, first.
I have attended open and public 3020-a hearings for five years simply because I wanted to find out exactly what this process looked like. In my opinion, it is a mess, especially the hearings in which a teacher is accused of incompetence. I do not understand how anyone could believe that "competency" can be proven in a small room far away from children and a classroom. I have heard an arbitrator order that a teacher settle with the NYC BOE this way: "If you drop your New York State Supreme Court case against the NYC BOE, I will order you back to school as a full teacher, in the subject that you are certified to teach, with a clear record, no charges". When the teacher said "no", this arbitrator found guilt with the teacher taking 10 minutes too long to read a book in a class observed by the Principal (who the teacher had previously reported to investigators for violating No Child Left Behind legislation), and punished him with three months suspension without pay (@$25,000) and without medical coverage.
Please note that if the teacher had dropped his lawsuit, he would be exonerated/cleared of all charges, and immediately placed back into the classroom. His "incompetency" would have been 'cured'.
Makes you think that maybe teachers thrown into rubber rooms may not be guilty of anything after all, and it's all about money and politics, not education, learning, and children.