Wednesday, May 7, 2014

How Did Mulgrew Get a Such a Sizable Majority At the DA on Wednesday?

He talked!

He talked so long that people who don't usually go to Delegate Assemblies (many of whom feel out of place just being at one) were afraid they'd miss the train home and finally just decided to leave.  (I should know! I saw ten of them who I had spoken with earlier (and were going to vote no) plain up and walk out before the vote).

"The one thing you don't want --- is air in the conversation"
He talked for so long that the press, who normally love to present 'both sides' of an issue, left without waiting for the traditional quotes as the delegates left (but I got my two cents in with at least one reporter earlier in the evening as did many others).

He talked for so long that people who, at this moment, still intend to vote against the contract once it comes to a general member vote, voted for the proposal simply because they hoped it would make him stop taking!

He talked (a salesman's tactic, mind you, that helped me out a lot at parties back in my college days) for so long that, that so many people -mentally- simply gave up and submitted to what he was suggesting (that this is only a vote to send it to the members so they can vote on the contract. (Don't you think it's fair that they should be able to vote for themselves?)).

(this is an update) He talked! And he wasn't completely honest! He informed the members that the city doesn't have the money for a higher-than-inflation raise (it does). He said that the changes to our healthcare wouldn't equate to premiums (it may). He said that the ATRs would be just fine under this contract (they're not). He also said that members would get a chance to vote "at their schools" (they won't. They'll be mailing the ballots home). Such is honorable combat in the 21st Century world of unionism.

He talked for so long that James Eterno got ahold of the mic and rhetorically beat the living hell out of him for talking so much. This occurred on a level that -truly- only alpha males can understand -until it got so loud that everyone in the ballroom understood (Mr. Eterno's depiction of the exchange is far too understated for what I witnessed from the back of the hall).

Of course unknown to him, this happened with Brother Michael's face plastered on enormous HD monitors on either side of the stage. Those monitors displaying a beaten, shaved head and beleaguered scowl which revealed to all of us that he was clearly overwhelmed by the arguments placed in front of him at the moment. They also revealed a relieved smile when he ruled James 'out of order!' and took the floor from him.

And, of course, once that happened he stopped talking.

But the long (long) talk did it's job. It got him what he wanted: The vote. And when he stopped talking he called that vote.

Not before he assured delegates that they were only voting on a vote that would allow the members to vote (doesn't my union make so much sense?).

And when he got his vote, after almost 2 hours of straight taking, it was over. The delegates overwhelmingly decided to send a contract that provides wages which are more than 10% below inflation when measured against 2009, and special, lessened, protections for ATRs -the same contract that failed to cap class sizes, failed to cap case-loads for guidance counselors and failed to commit resources that would continue down the path of the Cincinnati Model where wrap-around services are provided at the school level -the same contract that doesn't go far enough to relieve the terrible plague of racial segregation that infests our schools and our city- to the members for a vote. And that's how my union president got the wide margin that he received.


"The one thing you don't want" says Big Dan Teague from the classic movie "is air in the conversation".


Monday, May 5, 2014

Faking It Until They Make It

The news this morning is a buzz with how beautiful or new contract is. They speak about its more attractive features (giving more time for planning and finding a more honorable way of rewarding good teachers (I realize that is a controversial point)).  It seems almost as though they're already running a victory lap. 

This contract has many wonderful components (some of which I've written about already). It will also make the union itself a stronger, more wealthy organization. But the ability to be fired with minimal job protections is a reality that we will all have to face if this contract is ratified. And that the meager wage increases are being billed as good is an insult plain and simple. They can do better.

No one I've spoken with believes they will be around long enough to collect that retroactive pay that has been promised by the leadership.

Perhaps this is why the UFT had to delete several dozen comments from their Facebook page decrying the unfairness of this arrangement? Perhaps everyone's goal is to make it look like a win so that it becomes a win?  We shall see.

I'll be signing autographs at the Executive Board meeting tonight at UFT HQ ;) Oh and I'll me getting a peak at the details if this proposal. 

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Dude, This is Pretty Messed Up Right Here (My New Contract)

I LOVE the new innovations:

  • teachers as validators
  • teachers paid more to be Ambassadors, Model and Master Teachers
  • More PD time During the Week
  • The poison pill given to charter schools (Stuff it Eva!)L: 200 new schools to operate on a thinner contract. 

I HATE HATE HATE that they're asking us to approve:
  • Firing ATRs with as little as two days in the classroom
  • Giving us meager wage increases (4-4-0-0-1-1-1-1.5-2.5-3). Honestly, folks. This doesn't even keep up with the 2.2.% inflation since '09 -much less the inflation that we're all in for
  • Making us wait until 2015 for the first (of 5) disbursements of our retroactive pay).
  • Allowing only $5,000 for good teachers to go into tough schools (not NEARLY enough to convince teachers to address the MASSIVE issues of inequality in our city schools)
  • Giving in to merit pay (side note: I'll probably qualify for this and when I do, I'll spend it on a full page ad denouncing it) 
  • Test scores will still count on teachers' evaluations. 
I'm voting no on behalf of my ATR brothers and sisters. I'm voting no because of the meager wage increases. I'm voting no because I don't want to wait to 2015 for my first round of back pay. 

I'm voting no because this is a bad deal for classroom teachers. 

Wednesday, April 30, 2014

These Brave Teachers from Brooklyn

Word from Ednotes' Blog that 26 unbelievably brave high school teachers from Brooklyn plan on refusing to administer a standardized exam tomorrow deserves all of our attention -now

I care more about this than the contract (being announced tomorrow).

If you do one thing tonight, read this announcement.

If you do one thing tomorrow, find a just way to support these brave teachers from Brooklyn

Stand Up, Opt Out: Support Teacher Test Refuseniks

http://standupoptout.wordpress.com/

MOREistas (and supporters):
Almost 30 teachers are refusing to give the NYC ELA Performance Assessment to our high school ELL students. This is very big news and we're excited!!!!! We need as much support as we can get! Please pass this around in your schools and on your networks and send us a solidarity picture or message from your school chapter on our website,www.standupoptout.wordpress.com.

In Solidarity!
Emily and Rosie
Support the First High School Teachers to Join
Growing Opt Out Movement in New York City!!!!

On Thursday, May 1, 2014, we, the teachers and school staff, at the International High School at Prospect Heights 

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Ed In The Apple Answers Your Questions: Why Are Contract Negotiations Taking So Long? And Other Questions You Wanted to Ask.

Teacher: Why are the negotiations taking so long?

EdInTheApple: Because our union leadership doesn't like to announce a contract until the month of May, at the earliest. It's just a thing they have.  In addition to that, because we say so. That's why.


Teacher: Other unions received 4% increases in 2008 – why don’t teachers receive the same increases?


EdInTheApple: Because back in '09, we chose not to take a 4-4 raise that the rest of the city was offering. Now, of course, we're begging for that 4-4 in negotiations. Pray that we get it, pal. Pray that we get it. 


Teacher: If the City and Union agree to a rate that teachers should have received on November 1, 2009 would we receive that rate each year up until the new contract is negotiated?


EdInTheAppleFirst, let me say that that question makes sense to one else but you and I. I know you're referring to the fact that real unions, like the Teamsters, receive full retroactive pay goin back to the expiration of their last contract and that in other unions a raise is, indeed, a raise. Here in the UFT, we do things in a different manner. Therefore, when the newspapers report "full" retroactive pay, it won't be full full retroactive pay -as in you'll actually receive that money retroactive pay. It will be something else under the title of retroactive pay. The truth is that the money you had expected when you heard the news of full retroactive pay won't show up. Maybe you'll get a check or something like that to make you feel better. Plus, it sort of sounds like you're trying to pin me down to answer there. I'm not sure how I feel about that.


Teacher: Once the parties agree on the total amount of retroactive pay will all teachers receive the same rate?


EdInTheApple: Great question! We're going to screw the people who resigned anytime between '09 and today. But we're going to take care of anyone who retired. As you know, our reelection depends on the retirees who chose to still pay union dues. Check our bylaws to find the standard that one has to meet in order to reach retirement and still be a UFT member. Whoever matches that criteria will receive their back pay. Anyone else is screwed. Sound unfair? Well, that's unionism. Former members don't vote in our elections.


Teacher: Will receive the retroactive pay be paid in a lump sum?



EdInTheApple: Your grammar is horrible and I refuse to answer that question. 


Teacher: The Mayor has mentioned that contracts must include cost savings – what does he mean?


EdInTheApple: Fine! I'll answer the other question. The answer is no. No way, no how. You'll get it over three years -maybe more. In smaller sums -IN THE SAME CHECKS AS YOUR PAY (you know, so as to ensure that they take out so much in taxes that it won't even help you as much as you think).

OH, and to the other guy; it means that we, at the top of the food chain, have to decide which serfs' gets saved and which get screwed.  That's a tough choice. But some of you will keep your pensions and some won't. We just need to begin working out those details.


Teacher: Does the teacher union negotiate health plans?


EdInTheApple: No. I mean, yes. I mean no. Look, you're paying for your healthcare moving forward. Pick your poison:  The Cadillac tax, the Belly Button tax or maybe we'll just send you all out to purchase your own via Obamacare (in fact, strike that last sentence. We'll pick it for you).


Teachers: So, the contract could give us a raise and the increased health plan costs can erode some of the increase?


EdInTheApple: Err der...


Teacher: Would we lose some health plan coverage?

EdInTheAppleThis is starting to bore me. What part of 'you're screwed' don't you get?


Teacher: Will the just announced MTA-TWU labor agreement, 8% over 5 years impact the teacher negotiations?

Special thanks to Ed in the Apple for answering questions about contract negotiations today.


EdInTheApple The mayor says no. The governor says no. The union says no. So, in other words, yes.

Teacher: Do you have any idea of the rate going forward?


EdInTheApple:  It looks like the pattern that is going ot be set will be 4-4-0-1-2 (and then 2 & if it goes two additional years). In addition to that, there are mentions of teachers working longer days. That will lead you as teacher to have raise that appears larger than the pattern It really won't be. You'll just be compensated for the extra time, but, yeah. All told, take 2 1/2 (the average inflation rate since 2009) and multiple that by 5 years (or seven if the contract lasts that long). Your total amount of raise will be roughly equivalent to that (12.5 total if the contract lasts until 2014. 17.5 if it lasts until 1017). The great thing about being a city teacher is your pay keep up with inflation. Wait, what did I just say? Never mind. That's too complicated for you as a rank member to understand

Teacher: What happens if negotiations stall?

EdInTheApple: The fact finding report will be issued and the world will get a little confusing for a while, but at the end of the day, it won't turn out well.

Teacher: Who gets to vote on the contract?

EdInTheApple: You <dummy>

Teacher: Will we have the contract before we vote?

EdInTheApple: The is the Mighty UFT. You never know what you're voting for until you've voted for it -and that's only the times where you're allowed to vote! 

Get it?
Go it?
Good! ;D



Sunday, April 27, 2014

To the (New) Member of MORE Who Called My Cell Today

Dear (new) member of MORE who called my cell today,

First, let me say that I was surprised to get a call today, but I'm really glad I picked up. I don't usually answer numbers I don't recognize, but it's a good thing I did. I had a guilty feeling in my stomach from missing this afternoon's MORE meeting. Sure, I had a First Holy Communion to attend out here in the suburbs, and I knew there was no way I was going to be able to make it into the city, but that doesn't mean I liked not being there. Having someone from the caucus get in touch with me made me feel a bit better about the whole thing.

Also, and just to preface, it's always nice to hear from a young teacher who believes in changing the world. You may not realize it, but it's the idealism from young people like you that keeps old-timers like me thinking about the big-picture items that effect us all. It also reminds us of how important it is to keep trying to make the world a better place. The positive outlook you have is absolutely infectious and, whether you know it or not, has an enormous effect on people like me.

I probably should have shared that with you during our brief conversation. But, to be honest, I was a bit taken aback with what you shared. You see, when you said that I would "probably know a lot more about MORE" than you would, I just didn't know what to say. My first reaction to hearing it was 'well, I probably shouldn't have told him that I've been a member for about a year now'. I'm sort of an oddball in that I don't like to make people feel like they're out of their depth when they speak with me. Given that that's exactly what you shared with me in your very next sentence -that you felt like you were a bit out of your depth talking to an "experienced" MORE person, or even working a MORE phone bank after a meeting- I'm sort of left to conclude that  sharing my membership with you wasn't very helpful. When you confided that it was only your second meeting, I should have had the presence of mind to say something more supportive. I hope these words find you because I'd like to try again.

I knew exactly what you were talking about when you said that you felt a bit out of place. I know what it's like to feel uncomfortable in front of a bunch of MOREistas. The caucus lends itself to a great many things, but comfortability around people during one of their meetings is not exactly one of them. You should know that that's not MORE's fault. It is the general nature of unionism to not feel completely comfortable around the people you're around. You see, what brings us together isn't the personal, but ideal. There is an enormous difference between those two concepts. Because everyone is there there for the idea of strengthening our schools, our students and our profession, the opportunity of a MORE meeting doesn't always lend itself getting friendly with people. So if you feel like someone's talking through you or cutting you a bit short or not interested in a point you're trying to make, just remember, it's nothing personal. It's a union caucus and it has some items it needs to get through during its meetings.

Also, hearing from so many people who are so much more well versed about the ideas that brought you that meeting can be very intimidating. The people who lead MORE are absolutely brilliant. And although they try not to make a big deal about that, it does show and it can still be a bit of a jolt when you see someone whom you've seen on TV standing next to you or hear someone introduce themselves with a name that you've seen quoted in the newspapers. I know from my own experiences that that stuff can mess with your head. But don't sweat it. Don't sweat it one bit. Sure, they probably sounded a lot more confident with the calls they made during the phone bank time on Saturday (and I'm sure some of them actually looked like they enjoyed it), but that's just because they're a little more experienced in their roles as union people than you are. You'll grow into being comfortable with calling complete strangers and trying to convince them to come out for a Save Our Schools March (on May 17). Trust me, if you came to yesterday's meeting based on the idea -the idea- that there is something very wrong with how we do education and unionism in New York City, then you're every bit as brilliant as they are.

So now that  I've tried to convince you that you're not out of your depth after all, let me just try to convince you that you're probably exactly where you need to be. As I tried to explain to you on the phone, you're now part of a larger push to try to stop a few things. Corporate education reform and improving teaching conditions are only a small part of what the people from MORE are about.

I didn't have a chance to explain to you that they're also about giving real opportunities to that young, disaffected student in the back of your classroom. They're about making sure he has a safe environment in which he can learn. They want him to have eyeglasses, healthcare, a hot meal and they want him to feel safe enough on the streets of his city -from even the officials- to grow into a healthy, confident and educated adult with real opportunities and a real shot at a successful future. You're probably sophisticated enough to realize that charter schools in this city say they're all for equity and you've probably observed them use all of the language of the Civil Rights Movement with the hope of appealing to that kid. But your instincts are correct; that's all part of a grand claim that they are the ones who are trying to level the playing field for him. When you get a full sense of that 'Big Lie", and realize that those charter networks are supported by the very entities in our society who are working hard to make the playing field decidedly uneven for your student (see this brilliant piece of writing if you're ready to start unpacking that lie), you'll have an easier time convincing people that MORE's path is the correct one.

I think you know that the only true path to equity for that student is through a full commitment to Social Justice. I know you sense that we don't need catchy slogans and school network leaders who make $600,000 a year in order to get there. Once you know that we need safe neighborhoods, a strong and protected workforce with a liveable wages for all, a fair tax structure, an end to the school-to-prison-pipeline, and that all of us need to grapple with effects of racism in our city (both how we can help stop it and how we all contribute to it in our own way), then you'll look back and realize that you were exactly where you needed to be yesterday.

MORE doesn't pretend to offer some easy solution to these problems. It doesn't have some slick, handsome dude like Dr. Steve Perry or Geoff Canada doing radio ads or starring in movies to lead the charge. All it has on a Saturday afternoon is some tired looking 20 and 30 somethings, often wearing the wrinkled red t-shirts, looking like they spent a little too much time at the bar the night before. But those people at those meetings are armed with something more powerful than anything that anyone else like the charter guys have. They're armed with brilliant ideas, with boundless energy and, most importantly, they're armed with you.

That's why this caucus will change this city, if even in its own small way. And it's why you, and even I, will be a part of that, if even in our own small way. No we'll never be superstars. We won't be on TV defending the basic principle of public education and social justice. We won't be writing articles for the newspapers. But we'll be on the right team. We'll be there at the right time. We'll be fighting the right battles. And, at the end of the day, we'll be winning. That's why I'm glad you called. Your call help me keep my head thinking about what I have to do on May 17 and where I have to be (wearing my own wrinkled red t-shirt). And if I should see you, I'll make sure to come over and say hello because I really am glad you called.

-In Solidarity


Tuesday, April 22, 2014

How inBloom Was Killed By the Left and the Right; Our New Political Reality

News of inBloom's demise came as a wonderful surprise for activists, as well as interested parties across the state. The venture, which would have made data from school children available to a private corporation, drew resistance from teachers and activists and parents alike from day one.  Among of the most vocal critics of this endeavor were parents (it seemed from my perspective that New York parent advocate Leonie Haimson led the charge (see here as well). Rightly so. Their concern of the privacy of their children's data was probably the most legitimate objection to inBloom. People would have to be deaf, dumb, blind and greedy in order not to have given those concerns the full hearing they deserved. I myself do not want my child's data being shared with a corporation under any circumstances. As recent events on the national news scene have shown us, data cannot and will not ever be kept private.

But just behind yesterday's victory lies a new reality -a sort of joining of political ideologies to be sure-  that troubles a great many people. It is a joining that is as strange as the times in which we live and work. It is comprised of what moderates would characterize as members of the extreme left of the political spectrum finding political agreement with members of the extreme right. I can't speak for the right, but I can say that this is an alliance that makes some members on the left feel rather uneasy.

The issue of having strange bedfellows comes up from time to time on several (left leaning) mailing lists to which I suscribe. It usually comes in the form of a question:

 "Do we have a natural alliance with the Tea Party?"
When posed, the question typically raises all sorts of opinionated responses from list members ranging from 'hell no!' to 'sure. Why not?'. Thing is, the question isn't often posed. This joining is more of an accident that keeps happening over (and over) again.

Those of you not knowing what the connection left-wing activists and the conservative right may be, you're not alone. It isn't easy to see the common ground between conservatives and the progressive left. Not easy, that is, until you see it -and once you see it, it's actually kind of hard not to see. The fact is that when a topic turns to anything related Common Core, or the general intrusion and growth of the federal government around the issue of Education, time and again people from the right have found that their views and anger match perfectly our own.

But perfectly aligned opinions around the issues of anything that is related to President Obama's Race To the Top initiative aren't the only thing we on the left and they on the right have in common. We also share some of the same methods. Education activists rely on social media in the same manner that the Tea Party movement does. Neither left or right is averse to taking to the streets to demonstrate. This is because both sides rely on applying pressure to their elected officials in order to bring about the desired change. (And, of course -no one- and I mean no one, is afraid to call a reporter to try to get the press to cover their cause). We have our awkward meetings at strangers' kitchen tables and our petition drives and so do they.  The edu left sells t-shirts to help fund the cause as does the political right (this is pretty cool design right here).

The similarities are, actually, a bit erie.

Regardless of all of we have in common, these similarities between the left and right have taken a great many people by surprise. When the New York Times asked Common Core cheerleader Michael Petrilli what his impression was of the backlash in New York  (a left-wing state if ever there was one one according the Times)  against the Common Core, his response was to allude to this very emerging alliance:

  “It’s bizarre,” he said. “New York is in some interesting company, right up with the reddest of the red states. 


Seattle blogger Melissa Westbrook, who herself wrote an awesome piece announcing the death of inBloom shared something that struck me as a sign of the times back in February (around the the topic, of all things; of student privacy):

 They may be people whose positions on most issues that [many] avidly dislike. But I have talked with a Tea Party legislator in WA State on student data privacy and she is absolutely on the same page. No, it's big government, no it's local control - she wants to protect children and that's exactly what I want.


When prompted to discuss the matter, many express deep reservations about agreeing with the idea of anything related to anyone associated with the right wing. As one very brilliant blogger put it, to align with an organization that seeks to take out some of the very public institutions many are fighting to protect is not in the best interest of someone trying to save public education.  Sure, our interests align when a then topic turns to Common Core (or student privacy). But what happens when the topic turns to equitable healthcare? Or the role of race in education? On those topics for the Tea Parties' (as a for instance) position seem to be so far off to the right has to be actually destructive to many of our existence as public educators.


But they have to be prompted to say so. And in the meantime, the new reality of left-wing and right-wing fighting for the same thing continues to grow.

The demise of inBloom is another prime example. It did not come solely from the activists on the left. inBloom was able to survive, to hold on by a thread, as long as the elephant in the room of national education -the government of New York State- remained on board. As Leonie Haimson wrote in her post yesterday, New York was also the "only [state] in which legislation was needed" to pull out.  It takes a lot to move a legislature (particularly the legislature of this state) and activists of any ilk, would never be able to do it alone.

And in New York, the legislative pull away from inBloom came from a place where all legislative shifts come: It came from angry voters. The expressions of deep reservations, from voters in the suburbs, is what moved the legislature in New York (and New York's pull from inBloom is what ultimately killed the company). It was the suburban moms, who stalked out their legislators on the soccer and baseball fields on Saturday afternoons and in community BBQs throughout the summer that undid this mess.  They are the ones who, after making their position absolutely clear that the government was intruding in their privacy by allowing the collection of data about their children, actually ended the awful idea of making children data available to Big Data.

We often remember the leaders of armies who win battles. But it isn't a leader who actually wins that battle. It is the army the fights it. This battle was led by parent activists on the left. Yet it was won by an army of suburban moms and dads who refused to allow to let it to happen.

And that army is overwhelmingly conservative.

You may have read that last line and rolled your eyes at the assertion that everyone in any one location comes from any one political side. The idea that people from the suburbs must be right wingers, or even Republican, simply because they are suspicious of their government is just ridiculous. Under normal circumstances I would say that you are completely correct.  I too hate speaking in such broad strokes. But as it so happens, I grew up in one the very the suburban towns that helped end inBloom here in New York. Specifically, I grew up in the town of Port Jefferson and I'm here to tell you that my hometown is as Republican as Republican gets. This was true in 1980, when Ronald Reagan won an almost unanimous straw vote in my elementary school against Jimmy Carter (literally,  held with milk straws from the cafeteria, where only I and one other in my grade voted for Carter) and it still holds true today.
Long Islanders at a rally against testing last summer

It was also true last year when that community's school district planned a rally against high stakes exams and the Common Core.  I was reminded of this in the days leading up to the rally. As I excitedly tried to explain a friend, still a member of the community, some of the complexities of the education reform movement I was interrupted mid-sentence: "Look" he said, "I just don't want the government in my kids' school.", then asked whether or not I was going.

The next day, 1500 people showed up to protest against high stakes tests (here). In New York City if 200 people show up for one rally it makes the news on some level. On that day 1500 suburbanites (folks who never rally) came out in force. That is something!

From what I understand, that protest was partly a success because, and gave rise to, an absolute star in rank and file union circles named Beth Dimino. She is the president of the small union that represents the teachers of that district (you can see her rip John King apart in a video here). I don't know (nor do I care) whether she's from the political left or the political right. But I do have to assert that at least part of her increased profile is because she was able to help rally a community that is made up of a more than a fair amount of Republican conservatives.

Later in the year when MORE, that wonderful little union caucus that could (and has!) make a difference, engaged with her in an alliance to try to save the state union from being overtaken by our ruling brother and sisters in the Unity Caucus, no one asked about the members of her community. "This is a union sister and a damn good leader" one MOREista quipped to me during a telephone conversation when I raised the issue of right-wingers in the suburbs back in February. "I'm a union man. I don't see what the problem is or even what you're talking about"

That last phrase is union brother language for 'shut the heck up -right now'.  And he was, of course, totally and completely correct. Union rules for discussion are much the same as bar rules for discussion. You try to stay away from talking about anything related to sports, religion or politics. In the context of union brotherhood, it typically isn't anyone's business, nor should it be their concern, to ask about the political affiliation of the person you're rallying alongside.

But it is important to take note that our new reality consists of what moderates would describe as the far left and the far right working together to undo some of the harmful damage that has been done.

State Senator Kenneth LaValle
Just as MOREs alliance with suburban teachers (built on support from suburban parents) outlines the new reality that the left has combined with the right over the issue of education so too does the story of inBloom show how powerful that alliance is once focused on the level of the state legislature. Sure, progressive politicians who serve progressive districts from the city have expressed reservation, even outrage, about these things for years now. But when these same reservations are expressed by right-leaning folks to their elected leaders, believe you me the leaders of the legislature stand up and take notice.

One of those legislators, state Senator Kenneth LaValle, a Republican who represents Port Jefferson and chairs the High Education Committee for the state (and who also hosted the event where Dimino ripped King a new one) took notice -in spades- when he sent these words home to his constituents just days after the Port Jefferson rally:

This past Spring I began hearing from the parents of elementary school students about perceived problems with New York State’s implementation of the new Common Core Curriculum and associated testing.  I met with those parents, listened to their concerns,  and also met with representatives of the State’s Education Department. I agree that the implementation of the Common Core could have been better handled in terms of sequence and we need to make sure that the Board of Regents and State Education Commissioner, going forward, make certain that the curriculum resources are in place.
While the legislature had no role in the adoption of Common Core and the new testing standards, I as your State Senator have introduced legislation to provide oversight and insure that the tests are fair, unbiased, grade level appropriate and administered properly. My  bill requires disclosure of test questions and answers so that parents, teachers and students can have an opportunity to review test questions to better understand and the reason behind a particular class or child's test scores.


The New York State Senate is known for it's partisanship. So to hear this from a Republican Senator (and a professional politician who knows his job and how to keep it) is, while not ground shaking,  certainly noteworthy -and more proof of our new reality.

LaValle's position during the late budget negotiations in New York was much the same. He had this to say to constituents in the middle of the budget process:

Albany, March 11, 2014 - Today, on behalf of the anxious students and frustrated parents and teachers I represent, I will oppose all four of the Regents the Assembly brought before us for a vote.  I cannot and will not accept the status quo from the Board of Regents- the group responsible for the flawed implementation of the Common Core Learning Standards – who seem to have turned a deaf ear on the demand of so many to delay the implementation process.   
And asked the Board of Regents to 'hit the delay button' on the Common Core rollout.

This isn't a left-leaning activist like the mayor of New York. In fact, he isn't even left-leaning. But his constituents were angry and as an elected official, it was his duty to fall in line with the anger expressed by his constituents.

That, as a professional politician who knows his district,  he wholeheartedly opposes college classes for inmates, many of whom suffer from what we on the left identify as the school-to-prison-pipeline, ruffles, for today at least, no one's feathers at all (unless you make then think about it)

And, for the time being at least, the brave warriors who are fighting to save public education aren't thinking at all about it! Well, maybe they shouldn't. Getting the New York State Senate to undo something like student data collection is nothing short of a political miracle. Miracles aren't possible without a broad coalition of voters.

But our new reality -that a combination of the two fringes of the political spectrum is underway-should not be ignored either.