The Longer School Day and Education Reform: What’s Really Going On?

page image
Students, parents, and teachers march to Chicago Mayor’s home
to protest school closures. The government must be held
responsible for providing education. Education must be taken
out of corporate hands. PHOTO/SARAH JANE RHEE
By Lew RosenbaumOn August 23, 2011, Chicago Public Schools CEO Jean-Claude Brizzard announced a plan to extend the school day from 6 hours to 7.5 hours. After refusing to go along with the contractually agreed-upon salary increase for teachers, Chicago Public Schools (CPS) then turned around and slapped the teachers with a longer school day. The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) responded that more work time should be accompanied by an increase in pay. They also opposed the change since CPS had no plan for how the extra time would be used.This battle has gone back and forth since August. The current CTU contract expires at the end of this school year, and what the new school day will look like has become the subject of contentious negotiations for the new agreement.

What is the battle around the longer school day all about? CPS says that keeping kids in school longer will improve their test scores. Some parents, grasping at any straw offered, see some possibility of salvation. Others fear releasing their children to the streets. But as Karen Lewis, CTU president, maintained on a Chicago Tonight (WTTV) interview, there is no research that indicates that a longer school day in itself improves education. More time in school does not equal better learning.

Just as important, test scores do not really measure learning anyway. There is no plan in place to introduce funding for art and music teachers, or for more staff to cover recess periods—elements that have been removed as cost-cutting maneuvers. The battle is really not about effective education.

At first the effort was part of a campaign to vilify teachers. CPS launched its attack on teachers with the refusal to grant the pay increase already agreed upon, and then accused the CTU for being greedy. The school day battle followed the same script: The CPS announced it’s plan, the CTU objected, and the CPS characterized the teachers as only interested in money, not in children.

Reality check: CPS public education policy is being decided in the interests of a certain group of wealthy adults, the Commercial Club of Chicago, and that plan has starved public schools of needed resources for almost two decades. It has created a two-tiered public education system, with high performing magnet schools at one end and a mass of so-called failing schools at the other. Whitney Young and Northside Prep, two of the highest performing magnet schools, have circulated a petition to opt out of the longer school day. They know they don’t need that extra time. The city’s scheme to privatize “failing schools” into charter schools has not improved the children’s learning. A longer school day that could mean increased class size and even more test preparation will not improve it either. CPS does not take into account that 80% of the children in public schools qualify for free lunches. The poverty rate, along with class size and prevalence of high stakes testing, limits instructional quality and makes the US rank 24th among 29 industrial countries in educational achievement.

Public education cannot be quick-fixed by increasing the instructional day. The framework of our educational apparatus is stacked against us. The Commercial Club of Chicago has no need to educate most children for the fewer jobs available, even for college graduates. Necessities of life are abundant, but produced without people having jobs. People are being replaced by “smart” electronic technology.

All children in all neighborhoods need an education that will prepare them to understand and act on the fundamental changes our society is undergoing. We must take education out of corporate hands and hold the government responsible for providing these resources. Discussion of a longer day cannot take place outside this context.

Can We Educate Ourselves Out of Recession? Alexander Cockburn and Jack Metzgar Don’t Think So. . .

[Education, Jobs and Wages, the article by Jack Metzgar referred to in the article below, can be found here , on the WCSA blog.]
from Counterpunch
Weekend Edition March 23-25, 2012
Only 25 Per Cent of All Americans Go to College and Only 16 Per Cent of These Actually Try to Learn Anything. Welcome a Nation of Helots.

The Myth of the “Knowledge Economy”

by ALEXANDER COCKBURN

“In the 21st century, the best anti-poverty program around is a first-class education,”  President Obama famously declared in his 2010 State of the Union Address, just as millions of high schoolers across the nation were embarking on the annual ritual of picking their preferred colleges and preparing the grand tour of the prospects, with parents in tow, gazing ashen faced at the prospective fees.

The image is of the toiling students springing from lecture room to well-paying jobs demanding advanced skills in all the arts that can make America great again – outthinking, outknowing  the Chinese, Japanese, Indians, South Koreans and Germans in the cutting edge, cut-throat high tech economies of tomorrow.

Start with the raw material in this epic knowledge battle. As a dose of cold water over all this high-minded talk it’s worth looking at Josipa Roksa and Richard Arum’s recently published  “Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses.” The two profs  followed more than 2,300 undergraduates at 29 universities, selected to represent the range of America’s 2000-plus four-year college institutions. As resumed by Steven Kent in Daily Finance:

Among the authors’ findings: 32 per cent of the students whom they followed in an average semester did not take any courses that assigned more than 40 pages of reading per week. Half did not take any courses in which more than 20 pages of writing were assigned throughout the entire term. Furthermore, 35 per cent of the students sampled spent five hours or less a week studying alone.

Typical students spent about 16 per cent of their time on academic pursuits, and were “academically engaged,” write  the authors, less than 30 hours a week. After two years in college, 45 per cent of students showed no significant gains in learning; after four years, 36 per cent showed little change. And the students who did show improvement only logged very modest gains. Students spent 50 per cent  less time studying compared with students a few decades ago.

Students who majored in traditional liberal arts fields like philosophy, history and English showed ‘significantly higher gains in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing skills over time than students in other fields of study.’” But of course these are the courses and instructors being ruthlessly pruned back.

One of the study’s authors , Richard Arum, says college governing boards, shoveling out colossal sums to their presidents,  athletic coaches and senior administrative staff, demand that the focus be  “student retention,” also known as trying very hard not to kick anyone out for not doing any measurable work. As Arun put it to Money College, ”Students are much more likely to drop out of school when they are not socially engaged, and colleges and universities increasingly view students as consumers and clients. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that all students want to be exposed to a rigorous academic program.”

Rick Santorum briefly struck out at ingrained snobbery about going to college: “President Obama once said he wants everybody in America to go to college. What a snob.” Amid howls from Republican governors, this was a piece of derision it didn’t take him long to retract. Actually, it turns out only about 30 per cent  of Americans over the age of 25 have bachelor’s degrees.  Jack Metzgar, emeritus professor of humanities at Roosevelt University in Chicago, had a very useful piece in Working Class Perspectives, the blog of the Center for Working Class Studies Site, with this and other useful facts and reflections.

The US government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports that in 2010 only 20 per cent of jobs required a bachelor’s degree, whereas 26 per cent of jobs did not even require a high school diploma, and another 43 per cent required only a high school diploma or equivalent.

Please note that the latter 69 per cent were therefore free of the one debt  in America that’s even more certain than taxes – a students loan. At least, if you’re provably broke the IRS will countenance an “offer in compromise.” In fact they recently made the process  slightly easier. No such luck with student loans. The banks are in your pocket till the last dime of loan plus interest has been extorted.

Now for the next dose of cold water. The BLS reckons that by 2020 the overwhelming majority of jobs will still require only a high school diploma or less and that  nearly 3/4ths of “job openings due to growth and replacement needs” over the next 10 years will pay a median wage of less than $35,000 a year, with nearly 30 per cent paying a median of about $20,000 a year (in 2010 dollars

As Metzgar correctly remarks, “Put these two sets of numbers together, and it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Americans are over educated for the jobs that we have and are going to have.  It’s hard to imagine why anybody would call us ‘a knowledge economy.’” In other words millions of Americans are over-educated, servicing endless debt to the banks and boosting the bottom lines of Red Bull and the breweries.

The snobbery, as Metzgar  points out,  stems from the fact that America’s endless, mostly arid debates about education are conducted by the roughly one third who are college-educated and have okay jobs and a decent income.

The  ”knowledge economy” in the U.S., now needs more than 6 million people with master’s or doctoral degrees now, with another 1.3 million needed by 2020.  But this will still be less than  5 per cent of the overall economy.

Even if we expand the definition to include jobs requiring any education beyond high school, the ”knowledge economy” – now and a decade from now -will still represent less than one-third of all available jobs.

This is a lot of jobs, about 44 million now, and if you work and live in this one-third, especially in its upper reaches, more education can seem like the answer to everything.

Indeed, according to the BLS, having a bachelor’s degree should yield a person nearly $30,000 a year more in wages than a high school graduate. But most of the American economy is not like this.

The BLS’s three largest occupational categories by themselves accounted for more than one-third of the workforce in 2010 (49 million jobs), and they will make an outsized contribution to the new jobs projected for 2020.They are: Office and administrative support occupations (median wage of $30,710);- Sales and related occupations ($24,370); Food preparation and serving occupations($18,770). Other occupations projected to provide the largest number of new jobs in the next decade include child care workers ($19,300), personal care aides ($19,640), home health aides ($20,560), janitors and cleaners ($22,210), teacher assistants ($23,220), non-construction laborers ($23,460), security guards ($23,920), and construction laborers ($29,280).

As Metzgar writes, “As an individual, get a bachelor’s Degree or you are doomed to work hard for a wage that will not provide a decent standard of living for a family.  You may not get such a wage even with a bachelor’s degree, but without it your chances are slim and getting slimmer.” Here’s his kicker: But as a society, “the best anti-poverty program around” cannot possibly be “a first-class education” when more than 2/3rds of our jobs require nothing like that…we need to stop fostering illusions that good educations can ever substitute for the organized collective action - in politics, in the workplace, and in the streets – that will be required to reverse the increasingly miserable  future.”

So what is the best anti-poverty program? Higher wages for the jobs that are out there, currently yielding impossibly low annual incomes. The current American minimum wage ranges between $7.25 and $8.67 per hour. From time to time senior executives of Wal-Mart call  for a rise in the minimum wage since, in the words of one former CEO, Lee Scott, “our customers simply don’t have the money to buy basic necessities between pay checks.” The minimum wage in Ontario, Canada, is currently well over $10 per hour, while in France it now stands at nearly $13. Australia recently raised its minimum wage to over $16 per hour, and nonetheless has an unemployment rate of just 5 percent.

Any Republican candidate seriously pledging to raise the minimum wage to $12 would gallop into the White House, unless – a solid chance  – he wasn’t shot dead by the Commentariat, or maybe by a Delta team acting on Obama’s determination relayed to him by the bankers, that this constituted a terrorist assault on America. As Ron Unz, publisher of  The American Conservative – who favors a big hike in the minimum wage, recently wrote:

“The minimum wage represents one of those political issues whose vast appeal to ordinary voters is matched by little if any interest among establishment political elites. As an example, in 1996, following years of unsuccessful attempts to attract the support of California politicians, disgruntled union activists led by State Sen. Hilda Solis, now serving as President Obama’s secretary of labor, scraped together the funds to place a huge 35 percent minimum wage increase on the state ballot. Once Republican pollsters began testing the issue, they discovered voter support was so immensely broad and deep that the ballot initiative could not possibly be defeated, and they advised their business clients to avoid any attempt to do so, thus allowing the measure to pass in a landslide against almost no organized opposition. Afterward, the free-market naysayers who had predicted economic disaster were proven entirely wrong, and instead the state economy boomed.”

Film Showing & Discussion: King and Chicago Then And Now

King and Chicago:  Then and Now
Sunday Jan. 15
7:15- 9 pm @ Mess Hall
6932 N Glenwood (@Morse Ave)On the occasion of Martin Luther King’s birthday, city of Chicago politicians may decide this week that the kind of protests, for which Dr. King is famous, will be illegal. Occupy Rogers Park has our own plan to celebrate this important date. We begin a series of educational programs with King in Chicago, a video presentation and discussion of Chicago then & now, similarities and differences, race and class, featuring

• Allen Harris: journalist and member of Occupy the South Side,

• Joe Peery: Founding member of the Chicago Gary Area Union of The Homeless in 1986. Led effort to fill public housing’s empty units with homeless during the 1980s and 1990s. Formerly a Youth Organizer in Cabrini Green. Former resident of Cabrini Green. Currently a reporter for the People’s Tribune. Currently a resident in the mixed income housing that was built to replace Cabrini Green and fighting the unequal apartheid like treatment of CHA residents residing there.

Dinnerluck/potluck precedes program, which begins at 7:30 sharp, Mess Hall, 6932 N Glenwood just south of Morse. Presented by Occupy Rogers Park, in conjunction with Mess Hall.

Re-Learning What We ‘Know’ — Deborah Meier to Diane Ravitch

[This is part of an ongoing dialogue between author of this essay, Deborah Meier, and Diane Ravitch, taken from Meier's blog on Education Week On-Line| .  I'm looking forward to her comments about what she learned from Occupy Wall Street!  --  Lew Rosenbaum]

Re-Learning What We ‘Know’

By Deborah Meier on October 20, 2011 10:38 AM

Dear Diane,

I loved Nancy Creech’s piece from Valerie Strauss’s Washington Post blog last summer. Thanks, Diane, for sending it along. It’s a vital reminder as the nation faces a new federal Race to the Top demand: Start testing at age 3. Or else.

Creech’s detailed minute-by-minute counting of what it means to pursue the latest early-childhood “Reform Agenda” is mind-boggling! Thanks, Nancy, for writing it. I’ve done something similar to show the absurdity of most homework policies. Designing, assigning, reading, thinking about, and responding to 20 to 30 students’ homework accounts for a staggering amount of teacher time—if it’s taken seriously and conscientiously. Not to mention that one cannot observe how homework is actually “getting done,” nor who is doing it!

For these reasons we decided, at Central Park East and Mission Hill, on a different approach—certainly for 3- to 7-year-olds. We made an agreement with our children’s families: You don’t tell us what to do during the hours a child is with us, and we won’t tell you what to do during the hours the children are with you. But we can both make suggestions! We promise to take your advice seriously, and we hope you will accept ours in the same spirit. Taking children’s parents seriously as their child’s first teacher requires collaboration not mandates.

Nancy Creech quotes a distinguished educator who says that teaching what one already “knows” is a waste of time. I disagree. We’re constantly re-learning; it’s how things that we have “learned” get consolidated, and sometimes revised. It’s why I found teaching 4- and 5-year-olds so intellectually fascinating—because I was rethinking facts and concepts I thought I “knew,” but had barely scratched the surface of, or had—in fact—misunderstood. My (frequently retold) story about 5-year-old Darryl convincing his peers that rocks were actually alive neatly captures this idea for me. In looking at the concept of living vs. nonliving he naively he picked up on “the wrong” clues. My scientist neighbor noted that he was therefore actually “on the cutting edge of modern science.”

In fact, of course, as with a lot of instruction, just re-teaching something may only entrench the confusion rather than expand understanding. Watching children “in action,” one learns the most about what they “know” (and don’t know). It’s in organizing the environment so that children are driven by curiosity to make sense of the world that they learn to drive themselves. It’s in organizing the environment and then carefully observing each of those 20 children’s response to it and to each other that we learn the vital stuff—the stuff to “teach.”

If we carefully observe children at play we realize how enlightening their ignorance is if viewed respectfully and nonjudgmentally. They grow dumb (silent) when we fail to acknowledge it because it’s our job to correct mistakes.

Jean Piaget had a big influence for a time on American educators. But mostly by giving labels to stages of development. I found, especially after reading Eleanor Duckworth’s The Having of Wonderful Ideas, something more fascinating. She reminded me that we, as adults, all get stuck at an early stage with respect to ideas that either don’t interest us much or where simplistic theories serve our purposes well enough. My amazement, over and over, at the light rays that came directly to me—and only me—across the lake is perfectly natural and obvious and only rarely requires realizing that it’s an “illusion.” That the ray of light is also coming straight across the water to you—standing 100 feet to my right—is absurd. Who cares? But, once you do ….

Teachers have never figured out how to teach more than 10 new words a week—some of which are soon forgotten, but meanwhile children between birth and adolescence actually are learning more than 10 words a day. Some more and some less, but no normal child doesn’t do better teaching themselves, so to speak, than their teachers do. To turn the education of 3- to 7-year-olds into planned, deliberate, step-by-step “instruction” is to retard their intellectual growth.

The whole idea of prepping for standardized tests as a model of teaching/learning goes against not only what is most amazing about human learning, but especially the part that engages us in the work essential to our modern world. To accept, as young children do, the fact of uncertainty, and to tolerate this state of mind, grows increasingly rare as we “grow up.” Asked constantly to choose: a,b,c, or d—Which is the one right answer?—is bound to retard growth even further.

I’m stuck on the form of accountability that says “throw the rascals out.” Democracy in its many forms is the answer to accountability, if practiced close to where we all live, work, and think about the world.

Best,
Deborah

P.S. I have spent some time observing Zucotti Park, and watching it with my kindergarten teacher eyes and ears helps me see how they have hit upon some very novel but powerful educational tools. Spending time there was fascinating. More on that next week—maybe.

You can access this article and others by clicking this link, taking you to  the Education Week On-Line web site.

September Issue of People’s Tribune Features Fight For Public Education

The current issue of the People’s Tribune may be read on line here.

Lew Rosenbaum has written an article summing up the fight for public education in Chicago, and the entire issue focuses on the national battles on public education, with articles from Los Angeles, Atlanta, Southern Illinois and about using the example of the Triangle Fire in the classroom.

Jack Hirschman contributes an article on the World Poetry Movement.

Jack Hirschman in Medellin, Columbia

Susan Ohanian Is Not Entirely Pleased By The Save Our Schools Rally: Sex, Lies & SOS

” Teachers aren’t going to be stirred to save themselves unless and until they understand why these terrible things are happening to them and the children they teach. Teachers need to understand the corporate plan progressing since the Business Roundtable first outlined it in 1988.”

Orwell Award Announcement SusanOhanian.Org Home

Sex, Lies, and SOS

Publication Date: 2011-08-05

By Susan Ohanian

For all the music and praise of teachers, the SOS march had a more troubling side.
We all know that Superman isn’t going to rescue public schoolchildren. But let’s face it: Neither is Action Hero Matt Damon. At his educator mom’s request, Damon traveled from a movie set in Vancouver, British Columbia to speak out for public schools at the SOS march in Washington, D. C. on July 30. Inexplicably, most of the D. C. area teachers stayed home.

Longtime educator Gary Stager, who red-eyed from California, asked an important question : “Washington D.C. is less than a day’s drive from hundreds of thousands of teachers. Why was Matt Damon fighting for their profession while they stayed home?” A subway ride away and they couldn’t make it?

Please don’t say these hundreds of thousands of teachers were scared. What should scare them is the reality of their profession being systematically destroyed.

I’m naive enough to have been stunned by the low turnout at the SOS march, but I think I’ve figured it out. Both the NEA and the AFT made a show of donating $25,000 for necessary basics like lots of water, a medical station, and so on. But union leaders didn’t come and they didn’t bother to mobilize teachers to show up. A dozen or so people worked the crowd handing out souvenir fans (compliments of WTU/AFT Local No. 6 AFL-CIO) but there was no mobilization of DC teachers.

I didn’t see thousands of New York City teachers either. I hung out with GEM (Grassroots Education Movement) a dissident activist group within UFT. They made the film “Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman” which got a great reception Friday night before the march. I met Norm Scott, one of the GEM leaders eight years ago when we were in a group traveling to Birmingham, AL to pay tribute to the World of Opportunity (The WOO). I mention this because I also met my SOS roommate Juanita Doyon, the WA state mother who is national Button Queen, at the WOO in Birmingham. And John Lawhead, who rode his bike from New York City to the DC march. And Nancy Creech from Michigan who has had two salary cuts of $9,000 each in the last two years was also at the WOO. She told me, “Now they are after our pensions.” With the price of gold up, Nancy sold jewelry to finance her trip to D. C.

I mention this WOO connection just to show the commitment of teachers and parents who showed up at SOS. It was very good to mingle with them and with new friends–a teacher who came alone from Norman, Oklahoma, a Colorado mom whose children were kicked out of charter school when she insisted on opting out of the state test (people on a very small discussion each donated $50 to get her there), two teachers from North Carolina, a Florida activist who is neither a teacher nor the parent of a school age child–but someone who knows that public schools are vital to democracy. And many many more. I now kick myself for not writing down names.

And here’s a shout out to those young GEM teachers who recognized how hot this old lady got during the march itself. Where they got it I don’t know, but they kept bringing me bags of chipped ice.

The march itself was short. Before that, I walked around for 4 hours at SOS, talking with earnest, hopeful, angry teachers and parents from across the country–people thinking they were going to an event that would be start of a resistance movement. They didn’t realize the unions had sold them out from the get-go. They didn’t realize the featured speakers had a limited agenda, speaking passionately but not moving beyond equitable funding, an end to high stakes testing, a richer curriculum.

Seems like we’ve heard this a few hundred times before.

Those speeches from the podium didn’t clarify things, didn’t even mention the deliberate and systematic plan in progress to destroy social and educational contracts made over the past decades. Teachers aren’t going to be stirred to save themselves unless and until they understand why these terrible things are happening to them and the children they teach. Teachers need to understand the corporate plan progressing since the Business Roundtable first outlined it in 1988.

Why didn’t anybody at the podium call out Barack Obama, whom Black Agenda Report editor Glen Ford describes as the corporate Democratic Trojan Horse? Not only is Obama setting in motion “a rolling implosion of Roosevelt’s New Deal and Johnson’s Great Society,” he’s data bombing the principles of John Dewey, Paulo Freire, John Holt. . . and every thoughtful practitioner in the country today.

If you think that’s harsh, take a look at this:

U.S. President Barack Obama is singularly the most dangerous, anti-democratic president in the history of this nation. He has used his pigmentation as as a shield for corporate fascism and the emaciation of everyday, ordinary Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow people in this nation and around the world.
–Larry Pinkney, BlackCommentator.com Editorial Board, Obama’s Bait and Switch Game: Otherwise Known As B. S. Aug. 4, 2011

Maybe this is way over-the-top, but why did Obama get a pass at SOS? Ask the NEA. Ask the AFT. Ask the SOS speakers.

Maybe it’s to be expected at an event underwritten by a union that has already endorsed Barack Obama for a second term that the only visible criticism of Obama at SOS was provided by someone in the crowd from LaRouche who showed up with a poster depicting the President with a Hitler mustache.

D. C. union (WTU) president Nathan Saunders welcomed the crowd to the SOS march. Last December, soon after his election, he told the Washington Post: “I’ve got more skills to solve problems than practically any president that’s ever run WTU. I also have formalized training in problem resolution. My masters is in negotiation and management….Part of the Harvard Trade Union Program is conflict management. And so I think I have some unique skills to solve problems.” He added that he absolutely does not believe in confrontation.” He added that ” confrontation is not the first order business.”

How many teachers’ careers have to be destroyed before confrontation does become the first order of business– in DC– and across the country?

Confrontation will be difficult. Teachers are by their nature people pleasers. We don’t like to say “No.” We like to cooperate. But to save the profession, teachers will have to be willing to ramp up the rhetoric a thousandfold from what they heard at the SOS. Ramp up the rhetoric and the collective action, too. Teachers must be willing to strike; they must refuse to give the tests. I’m not talking individual heroic acts here. I’m talking mass action, hundreds of thousands of teachers standing up and shouting that they’re mad as hell and not going to take it any more.


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

For Matt Damon’s comments at SOS click here.

“Redefined”: Laid Off Art Teachers Turn To Their Craft To Express Themselves

[Displaced teachers is simply a kinder, gentler way of saying fired.  Some are even scarred by an acronymic category: they are on the "DNH" list.  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to recognize that Do  Not Hire is the latest form of blacklist.  This is what many teachers were protesting at the last Chicago Board of Ed. meeting.  Of course the standard explanation for the education cutbacks is the city's financial crisis.  Certainly some of the losses are due to the privatization which proceeds apace in the Chicago Public Schools, turning over public real estate to private corporations to run, while "laying off" most if not all the personnel and prohibiting unionization.  At the same time technological changes in society at large demands many fewer workers educated to the level of employment that the robotic industries and offices are now doing  (some must be trained to do a higher level of work). And technological changes in the schools themselves automate the job of teaching those consigned to the lower tier of education.  If this makes the job of the teacher under capitalism redundant, it poses a challenge for those who want to "redefine"  what teaching and learning is for in a new society.  Thanks to Lourdes Guerrero for sending this NYT article to us.  ---- Lew Rosenbaum]

CHICAGO NEWS COOPERATIVE
Laid-Off Art Teachers Turn to Their Craft to Express Themselves

Paul Beaty/Chicago News Cooperative
Lourdes S. Guerrero and her work “My God Protects My Child.”

By JESSICA REAVES

Published: July 10, 2011

Katrina Barge, an artist who was among the 1,000 public schoolteachers laid off last summer, sat up a bit straighter as she described a recent painting. “It’s called ‘Though I’m Broken and Bruised, There’s Hope in This Pain,’ ” she said.Ms. Barge, 28, and other former Chicago art teachers have returned to creating art as a way of coping with the derailment of their teaching careers. On July 3, Ms. Barge joined six other former art teachers at the Flat Iron Building in Wicker Park for the opening of their show, “Art Teachers: Redefined.”Equal parts celebration and protest, the Flat Iron exhibit runs through July 30 and is a sampling of a larger show, which runs through July 31 at the First United Methodist Church at the Chicago Temple, 77 West Washington Street. “Redefined” is the brainchild of Cezar Simeon, 47, a former first-grade teacher at Lloyd Elementary School who was laid off last summer. Mr. Simeon does not teach art, “but I was really ticked off when I heard about all these art teachers losing their jobs,” he said. “Art isn’t something you can test for, but it teaches kids problem-solving skills.”When the show opened downtown, Mr. Simeon was contacted by Charlie Rees, the founder of the Flat Iron Artists’ Association, which hosts the building’s First Friday open house each month. “I thought this was a great venue for them to show their art and tell their stories,” Mr. Rees said.Those stories are told through vivid paintings, tapestries and installations, including a work by Gina Baruch titled “Screwed,” in which a large metal screw has been strategically positioned on the seat of a wooden chair. The artists’ biographies that hang alongside their works read like a cross between job applications and statements of defiance. “She is highly motivated and passionate,” one begins, “and she refuses to go away without a fight.”

Lourdes S. Guerrero, 55, taught art for eight years at Von Steuben High School before losing her job. She became a teacher relatively late in life, after more than 30 years as a professional artist. “I was surprised by how much I loved it,” said Ms. Guerrero, who returned to school for her master’s degree in education. “Weavings,” a Guerrero work on display at the Flat Iron Building, is a multimedia self-portrait depicting a half-skeleton, half-human figure. She said the exploration of her Mexican heritage, and her disconnection from that part of her history, is a radical departure from her typical work with fiber. “I was really inspired by my students,” Ms. Guerrero said. “I couldn’t ask the kids to push themselves without doing the same for myself.”Ms. Guerrero and Ms. Barge have sent dozens of applications to schools outside the Chicago system. Ms. Barge spent the past year working as an aide at Agassiz Elementary in the city.”I’m a board-certified art teacher with a master’s degree,” she said, “and I’ve been working at a job that only requires an associate’s degree.”Ms. Barge smiled, but her voice betrayed frustration. “It’s not about the money,” she said. “It’s about the teaching.”

jreaves@chicagonewscoop.org

People’s Tribune: July On Line and PDF Versions

The July People’s Tribune is now on line.  Click here to read.  Filled with articles about the confrontation between the states an the people they are supposed to be serving, featuring articles on the education crisis, it may be the July issue but it is up to date and ready for use!  Also available in pdf :July_PT

“…none of these qualities that make me who I am … can be tested.” Matt Damon at Save Our Schools Rally

“I flew overnight from Vancouver to be with you today. I landed in New York a few hours ago and caught a flight down here because I needed to tell you all in person that I think you’re

Matt Damon (AP photo)

awesome.

I was raised by a teacher. My mother is a professor of early childhood education. And from the time I went to kindergarten through my senior year in high school, I went to public schools. I wouldn’t trade that education and experience for anything.

I had incredible teachers. As I look at my life today, the things I value most about myself — my imagination, my love of acting, my passion for writing, my love of learning, my curiosity — all come from how I was parented and taught.

And none of these qualities that I’ve just mentioned — none of these qualities that I prize so deeply, that have brought me so much joy, that have brought me so much professional success — none of these qualities that make me who I am … can be tested.

I said before that I had incredible teachers. And that’s true. But it’s more than that. My teachers were EMPOWERED to teach me. Their time wasn’t taken up with a bunch of test prep — this silly drill and kill nonsense that any serious person knows doesn’t promote real learning. No, my teachers were free to approach me and every other kid in that classroom like an individual puzzle. They took so much care in figuring out who we were and how to best make the lessons resonate with each of us. They were empowered to unlock our potential. They were allowed to be teachers.

Now don’t get me wrong. I did have a brush with standardized tests at one point. I remember because my mom went to the principal’s office and said, ‘My kid ain’t taking that. It’s stupid, it won’t tell you anything and it’ll just make him nervous.’ That was in the ’70s when you could talk like that.

I shudder to think that these tests are being used today to control where funding goes.

I don’t know where I would be today if my teachers’ job security was based on how I performed on some standardized test. If their very survival as teachers was based on whether I actually fell in love with the process of learning but rather if I could fill in the right bubble on a test. If they had to spend most of their time desperately drilling us and less time encouraging creativity and original ideas; less time knowing who we were, seeing our strengths and helping us realize our talents.

I honestly don’t know where I’d be today if that was the type of education I had. I sure as hell wouldn’t be here. I do know that.

This has been a horrible decade for teachers. I can’t imagine how demoralized you must feel. But I came here today to deliver an important message to you: As I get older, I appreciate more and more the teachers that I had growing up. And I’m not alone. There are millions of people just like me.

So the next time you’re feeling down, or exhausted, or unappreciated, or at the end of your rope; the next time you turn on the TV and see yourself called “overpaid;” the next time you encounter some simple-minded, punitive policy that’s been driven into your life by some corporate reformer who has literally never taught anyone anything. … Please know that there are millions of us behind you. You have an army of regular people standing right behind you, and our appreciation for what you do is so deeply felt. We love you, we thank you and we will always have your back.”

Click here to see Matt Damon at the Save Our Schools Rally

The print version is available here.

Stand For Children Or Stand For Corporations?

Simmering discontent puts Stand for Children in hot water

Portland group hammered by criticism from volunteers, others after leader brags about political maneuvering

By Jennifer Anderson in the Portland Tribune

Pamplin Media Group, Jul 19, 2011, Updated Jul 19, 2011 (17 Reader comments)

(news photo)

Thousands of people attended a February 2009 rally on the capitol steps in Salem organized by Stand for Children. The Portland group faces heavy criticism for comments by its leader and for changes that have alienated longtime volunteers.

Tribune File Photo

Portland’s nonprofit Stand for Children, an education advocacy group with chapters in nine states, is under fire by critics this week after a video and blog post raised questions about the organization’s direction and leadership.

A now-viral video of Stand cofounder Jonah Edelman, the Portland son of national civil rights activist Marian Wright Edelman and leader of the group, was recorded at a public forum in Aspen, Colo., describing how he out-politicked a teachers’ union to get a piece of education reform legislation adopted by the Illinois Legislature. The three unions involved, in Illinois and Chicago, issued statements of “disappointment” and Edelman quickly apologized for the comments.

But the tussle opened a floodgate of scrutiny and criticism by disaffected Stand for Children volunteers, including Portland parent Susan Barrett, who wrote a critical Internet post that was published Thursday, July 14, in The Washington Post.

In her article, Barrett writes that she feels like the group has strayed from its grassroots beginnings in 1996 to pursuing the agenda of the big-money investors who now comprise Stand’s board of directors. [Read more by clicking this link]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.