To the Editor:
It has been interesting to watch this year’s three Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) school board races unfold. The local media has consistently reported the growing campaign expenditures and the play-by-play power struggle between the mighty teachers union, United Teachers Los Angeles, and a group of influential, wealthy individuals lead by Mayor Villaraigosa’s Coalition for School Reform.
It has been framed as the status-quo entrenched union versus the wealthy, meddling education outsiders. But I am a member of yet another very important and potentially powerful group that the media has failed to cover. I am an LAUSD parent.
With 600,000+ students, you can estimate that LAUSD has somewhere in the
area of 1 million parents and guardians. In 2009, when three of the seven LAUSD board seats were up for election, the Office of the City Clerk reports that only about 300,000 ballots were cast citywide in the primary election (when many school board seats are decided). In 2011 with four pending school board seats, voter turnout was closer to 250,000 in the primary. While I consistently find that parents want change in our school system, the challenges in getting reform-minded candidates elected suggest that parents have not brought this frustration to the polls. I understand the difficulties in turning out the parent vote, but given the overall size of this stakeholder group, even a small increase in ballots cast by LAUSD parents would ensure that changes are made and sustained in our LA public school system.
This parent has a relatively short list of wants for our public schools: solid leaders and teachers, sufficient funding, strong accountability, a variety of educational options, local decision-making, and curriculum designed for next-generation jobs and problem-solving. Most importantly, I want results. I want children to be educated and to leave schools prepared to contribute to our society.
My list is supported and promoted by our current Superintendent, Dr. John Deasy. I like this man and I like what he wants to do and can potentially do for my children and all of LA’s children. That is, if he has a school board that backs him.
Not surprising, I also like candidates who support Superintendent Deasy. Given this, I fall on the side of reform-minded candidates, including Kate Anderson in my own District 4. I wouldn’t want Mayor Villaraigosa, New York’s Mayor Bloomberg and other Coalition for School Reform supporters to be the primary decision makers in our public schools, but I do appreciate their willingness to put their reputations and personal incomes on the line on behalf of our children.
Her opponents portray Kate Anderson as pandering to big money supporters, but the reality is that if Anderson wins this election, it will be in large part because of her tireless work with parents in meeting halls and living rooms throughout District 4. Such critics fail to acknowledge that in order to launch a successful big city political campaign today, one must have money and lots of it. It isn’t evil, but instead the sad current state of American politics. UTLA, and likely its state and national partners, will also spend a tremendous amount of money backing their candidates.
It’s tough for public school parents to balance our respect and appreciation for our own teachers with our frustrations over the efforts of teachers unions to maintain a status quo that I believe most of the general public agrees is not working. I have seen evidence that many in UTLA would like to see Deasy gone and I find this unnerving. If we really want to improve things in LA, we need a strong leader (which we have in Deasy) and we need to give him enough time to do the difficult work. A shift away from reform on the school board leaves Deasy’s future, and the future of sustained change for LA’s schools, highly uncertain.
For decades, a large portion of LA’s parents were either disengaged from our public schools or focused only on their own schools. But an incredible thing has happened over the last few years, in large part because of the economic crisis. Parents are paying attention. Parent and parent-supported education reform groups are forming around the state. Parents like me who are fortunate to have strong local schools are recognizing that this is not enough. We also understand that most of the decisions that impact our local school operations are made at the district and state levels.
My neighborhood has hosted more than a half dozen meetings with Kate Anderson, lawns are peppered with her signs, and emails on her behalf are being sent and forwarded. We are engaged and we are not alone. Our group is connected with others around the district and state that are supported by parents who know that we need to do things differently. Even private school parents are coming to realize that strong public schools are imperative for the success of our city and a strong democracy. We all have a stake in the future of LA’s public schools and we also all have a vote.
In addition to being an LAUSD parent herself and having excellent qualifications
for a seat on the board, Kate Anderson supports the changes needed at LAUSD and the leader who embodies them. This does not mean that she will blindly support Superintendent Deasy, but it does mean that the two are on the same page – something that is critical for LAUSD (and any organization) to move forward.
I acknowledge that our District 4 incumbent, Steve Zimmer, cares deeply about
public education, but I disagree with his priorities. Over the last four years, he
has steadily lost the support of the reform community. He put forward a board
resolution that, if not for the public outcry, would have halted the approval of
new charter schools in LAUSD. This, while 10,000 students are on district charter school wait lists. He also worked to dilute and delay the recently approved teacher evaluation process that was championed by Deasy.
Perhaps my biggest concern with Zimmer is his philosophy regarding his board
service. In 2011, when Deasy’s original contract was approved by the board,
Zimmer abstained from the vote because he objected to the selection process.
Instead, Zimmer should have made his point and voted yes or no. A school board member’s job is to make decisions in the best interests of the public, the school district, and its students and he does this by voting. Further, there is perhaps no more important decision than the selection of your district’s superintendent - sitting this one out was just unacceptable. Zimmer also abstained from a controversial vote on the early-start school calendar change. Zimmer views not voting as being an independent voice on the board. I view it as failing to perform his duty.
Change is beginning to take hold within LAUSD, in large part due to the efforts of Superintendent Deasy and the board members who share his vision. The tough work has begun with the teacher evaluation system. LAUSD parents have more school choice than ever before. And the Superintendent is transitioning the district from a one-size-fits-all command-and-control model, to one where more decisions are made at the local level to meet the individual needs of schools and their communities. All of this will be in jeopardy if reform-minded candidates are not elected to at least two of the three open board seats in this election. If parents want these efforts to continue, we must vote for candidates who will sustain them. We have a responsibility to our children and our city to get out and vote. If just 15 to 20 percent of LAUSD parents and guardians make our desire for change known at the polls, change is certain to occur.
As the single largest stakeholder group in LAUSD, we parents share heavily in the responsibility for the current state of the system. By voting for change and candidates like Kate Anderson, we also have the numbers and power to do something about it.
Rene Rodman
LAUSD Parent and Co-Founder, Parent Partnership for Public Education
District 4 of the LAUSD is comprised of Brentwood, Del Rey, East Hollywood, Encino, Hollywood, Mar Vista, Marina del Rey, Pacific Palisades, Playa Del Rey, Tarzana, Topanga, Westchester, West Hollywood, Westwood, Woodland Hills and Venice.
When a campaign is bereft of ideas the only thing left is to change the subject- in this case to Bloomberg and his tone deaf gift to the coalition. You would all have more credibility and actually a chance to change minds if you had real solutions to the problems that plague our schools.
Sorry it took me so long to get back to you, but I was out in Venice trying to overcome-- through precinct-walking---Kate's $3 million advantage over Steve. I don't know what's so amazing... yeah, Bloomberg is not the whole story in this campaign, but you have to concede it's a big part of the story. As to Steve, he's got solutions galore. Unlike Kate, who has never worked a day in her life in a school in any capacity (teacher, administrator, etc.), his 17-years as an educator and youth counselor give him a distinct edge in knowing what makes a successful school. First off, there has to be involvement from parents and a three-way collaborative relationship beteen teachers, parents, and administrators. Every successful school has this. Lower class size---from the late 90's until 2009, LAUSD had lower class sizes... thanks to Republican Governor Pete Wilson, btw... and that led to a slow-but-steady growith in academic achievement... due to the personal, one-on-one attention this affords. Granted, 20-to-1 (in K-5) is not as good as 10-to-1 like they have in private schools for the wealthy, but it was a good start. (I have taught in both.) As soon as we can access, the Prop 30 money, we must return to those ratios, and perhaps lower them more. (something Kate's corporate masters would never allow her to do). TO BE CONTINUED
Kate has been getting extensive coaching from Michelle Rhee, and you know what Rhee told TIME Magazine when questioned about the importance of such electives: "You know I hear people talk about not including creativity in our lessons... You know what? I don't give a crap!" That's right. Ex-chancellor Potty-Mouth Rhee is Kate's mentor. Scary! The wealthy corporate privatizers demand that their own chlldren have all these things, but children of middle and lower income must do without. Check out this video about how Hyatt CEO ' member of Chicago's kangaroo rubber stamp unelected Board employs this double-standard. A public school parent/attorney Matt Farmer "cross-examines" Pritzker. (When you watch it, just substitute Bloomberg or Deasy or Kate Anderson for "Penny Pritzker" and you get an idea of my point): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMUboOIQT48 You go, Matt!!! Bring that fire!!! Now, I mention Deasy because the Arts teachers have given him over a dozen invitations to watch Arts education class in action, and he has refused to attend one. MORE...
charter school corruption---1,880,000 hits OR charter school scandal---1,820,000 hits Story after story of financial scandals, physical abuse, cheating scandals, nepotism, discrimination. and on and on. There's this canard: "charter schools are public schools... they're just a different "kind" of public school." No, a significant number of them are not "accountable" to the public, not "transparent" to the public, and they don't educate "all the public"---refusing to take our most difficult-to-educate students: Special Ed., English Language Learners, behavior problems, foster home kids, etc. Whenever a scandal breaks, charter shills say, "We want this stopped & those schools closed as much as everyone else... blah-blah... " However, whenever someone wants to put safeguards or regulations in place THAT WOULD PREVENT CORRUPTION IN THE FIRST PLACE, those same slobs scream bloody murder about how they need the "freedom from bureacracy" and other nonsense. Steve's resolution was not about banning charter schools; it was about putting those safeguards and regulations in place before any more charters are approved. Well, out came the long knives for Steve. Now, Steve is not an "all-charters-are-bad" guy. He even said, to the union's dismay, "there are charters in L.A. that I would lie down on railroad tracks for." Not good enough for privatizers, who demand total orthodoxy & fealty to their agenda.
Call up the office of Jose Cole-Guttierez, LAUSD's Director on Charters, and you will find that this number is a total fiction or fabrication. The number is in the hundreds, as many of the waiting lists have the same names listed as applicants. Check out this story about Green Dot's Animo Justice school. Green Dot claims that one of the key reasons for closing the school---again without any input from or prior notification to---the students and parents.... LOW ENROLLMENT: http://www.neontommy.com/2010/03/two-south-la-high-schools-unit Wait, I thought there were hordes of students clamoring to get in... or at least that's what the L.A. Times and others keep blathering. Instead of having money diverted to privately-run and unaccountable charters, parents want the traditional public schools fully-funded and resourced first. It seems like the traditional schools are being systematically starved of funding, and this scenario---with accompanying lower class sizes---leads to lower academic achievement. The privatizers then seize on this "failure"---that they themselves caused by the initial "starving"---as justification for closing or reconstituting schools, or opening charters nearby, when again, the solution is to fund the traditional public schools.
Now, what would you think of a new owner / general manager of an NFL team who---immediately after that team won the Super Bowl---did not praise the team, but instead publicly said that the season /Super Bowl victory was irrelevant, that the players suck, and are part of "a wretched system" and need to be replaced---just so he adheres to some sinister agenda his masters demand he follow? Another loaded question, I know, but bear with me. Well, a couple years back, New Jersey---with a significantly high-poverty population---scored Number One out of all fifty states in academic achievement. Amazing! However, the "players" were---and are---UNIONIZED public school teachers, and the privatizers' playbook mandates that no good word must ever be spoken of them. Goebells himself said Rule 1 of propaganda: never say anything remotely complimentary about "your enemy". Now check this out: Chris Christie's newly-appointed New Jersey Ed. Commissioner Bret Schundler said that New Jersey's No. 1 NAEP ranking was irrelevant and meaningless, should be ignored, and that the teachers were actually "wretched". He had to; "No sense reforming something that works." It's true, folks: http://blog.nj.com/njv_bob_braun/2010/05/us_education_tests_ranks_nj_at.html http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2010/05/if-you-can-hide-facts-that-dont-fit.html
No, seriously, a major development in the campaign. Education activist and writer Jonathan Kozol has just endorsed Steve Zimmer: http://dianeravitch.net/2013/03/04/jonathan-kozol-endorses-steve-zimmer-for-altos-angeles-school-board/ Who is Kozol? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Kozol On the next post is the text of his endorsement letter:
"Dear Mr. Zimmer, "March 3, 2013 "I’ve been one of your strong admirers in the education world for a good while now. I’m writing to tell you and my many friends in Los Angeles that I think your voice is terribly important in defense of public education at a time when it is under fierce and irrational attack from those who would replace it, as much as they can, with charter schools and other private or semi-private institutions. "This issue is all the more important in light of the fact that many, if not most, charter schools are incapable or serving children with special needs — or, in order to boost their test-scores artificially, refuse to serve these children. "I’m also glad you’ve courageously resisted the political demand to judge the value of our teachers according to their students’ grades on standardized exams — a practice, as many members of the U.S. Senate have belatedly observed, simply drives beleaguered teachers to drill their students for the tests instead of giving them a rich and broad curriculum that incorporates those aspects of our culture that can never be reduced to numbers. "For these and other reasons, I thank you for your loyalty to children. I whole-heartedly support you. "Sincere Regards, "Jonathan Kozol" - - - - This is major.
Thanks for noticing our little corner of the world, Mr Kozol -- we agree with you: STEVE ZIMMER IS BEST FOR LAUSD4!!
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_22701724/marlene-canter-and-yolie-flores-lausd-board-race?IADID=Search-www.dailynews.com-www.dailynews.com Really, those who are so afraid of changes to our system need to find another angle.
- - - - Martha Infante · Top Commenter · Los Angeles, California "The teachers union is not the Borg. We are tens of thousands of men and women who have chosen to dedicate our lives to serving our youth. "We are your husbands, wives, brothers and sisters. We are your children, cousins, nephews an nieces. We are people. "What Flores and Canter choose to overlook is that the will of Los Angeles residents should not be subverted by any ONE wealthy individual from across the country. Unlike teachers, Mike Bloomberg does not live in our city, pay our taxes. or work in our classrooms. "Teachers make meager contributions to school board candidates they feel will protect the interests of students and teachers alike. After all, we share a classroom for 8 hours a day. We are in it together. TO BE CONTINUED
"I cannot afford to make a million dollar contribution. But I can participate in my union, join the House of Representatives, and demonstrate the best that democracy has to offer: debating ideas, electing sound leaders, and participating in elections by phone banking and precinct walking when necessary. Isn't this how a democracy should function? One person, one vote? "It is shocking then, to see two former school board members flaunt their contempt of democracy by aligning themselves to billionaires who are intent on dismantling public education and privatizing it. What a conflict of interest. Ms. Flores herself pushed hard to destabilize schools with the Public School Choice plan and was reviled in the very community she grew up in, Huntington Park, when she ceded part of the local high school to charter companies. Then, she was handsomely rewarded with a six figure job with the Gates foundation upon her separation from the school board. There should certainly be a law barring public servants from passing laws that benefit private companies and then being hired by those very companies. "I for one, and voting for Robert D. Skeels for the District 2 school board seat because he is an education activist that could never be bought by corporations. "Martha Infante National Board Certified Teacher, Los Angeles 2009 CCSS Teacher of the Year"
Vote for Steve Zimmer, an independent voice., who, unlike Kate, has no ambitious for any other office. He only wants to help improve schools and help our students.
Mind you, this is the character of the people who want to privatize and destroy democratically-controlled school boards, and by extension, Ms. Anderson herself. Do you want schools and the overall school system run the way Bloomberg and the other billionaires run them. Bloomberg has a rubber-stamp appointed board, much like a phony legislature in a banana republic dictatorship. It is totally unelected. He wants this to happen here as well. Electing corporate puppets like Ms. Anderson is a half-way step towards that goal.
After 12 years, what do New Yorker themselves think of the results of Bloomberg's dictatorial control of public schools. Diane Ravitch said: "Crain’s NY ran an unscientific poll asking “which of Mayor Bloomberg’s policies should the next mayor abandon first?” There were five choices. More than 60% of respondents picked “education” as the first Bloomberg policy to be eliminated by the next mayor. Quinniapiac University ran a scientific poll asking New Yorkers what they thought of mayoral control. Only 18% want to see the mayor in charge of the public schools... " http://dianeravitch.net/2013/03/05/breaking-news-more-into-los-angeles-race/
http://dianeravitch.net/2013/03/05/proof-that-bloomberg-reforms-failed/ "The other 95% (of students/parents) have been forgotten, adrift in a system that has been reorganized four times, with all regional and district supervision eliminated, with the loss of large numbers of excellent principals and the hiring of large numbers of ill-prepared principals, left on their own and judged by test scores. "What have the 95% gotten? Tests, pre-tests, test prep. School closings. Overcrowded classes. “ 'Tweed,' as the central bureaucracy is called, operates with slavish devotion to 'data,' but cold indifference to human beings. The young MBAs at Tweed have spent a decade wiping out institutional memory and attempting to create a bureaucratic, efficient, computer-driven system that churns out higher test scores. "The Bloomberg example reveals the shortcomings of corporate reform. It sets parent against parent in battles for choice and space. It destroys neighborhood schools. It gives preference to schools under private management. It shatters communities so they will be unable to organize and fight back. It lacks any vision of what education is or should be. It has neither reformed the public schools nor provided better education for all students." Do the citizen-taxpayers of LAUSD want this here?
"Los Angeles already has more charters than any other city in the nation. School board member Steve Zimmer had the temerity to propose that the board develop a policy for oversight of charters before creating new ones. Zimmer enraged the charter lobby, which wants no oversight and no moratorium. "Zimmer, who started his career in Teach for America and remained in the public schools as a career teacher, is in his first term. He is known as a moderate who is independent, belonging to no bloc. "The billionaires don’t want independents on the L.A. School board. They want people who will support more charters, more onerous teacher evaluations, more high-stakes testing, more closing of public schools. "With Mayor Bloomberg’s time in office coming to an end, and the possibility that his reforms will be tossed out by the next mayor, the corporate reformers don’t want to risk losing control of Los Angeles." It's at: http://dianeravitch.net/2013/03/05/breaking-news-more-into-los-angeles-race/