We’re accustomed to strange political phenomena rising out of Minnesota.

   We can accept the occasional Jesse Ventura or Al Franken winning statewide office, because the state’s voters obviously like to be different.

   But we doubt even the most offbeat citizens of that state would approve of the new K-12 teacher education program that’s been proposed for the University of Minnesota’s Twin Cities campus.

   While the rest of the nation is trying to force teachers to help our children reach their potential, the university’s College of Education and Human Development wants to make sure future teachers are more anti-American, so they can share that philosophy with their future students.

   We couldn’t even begin to make something like this up.

   According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, College of Education officials recently established the “Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group.” It’s charged with helping to devise a new system for training prospective K-12 teachers, because current teachers lack “cultural competence,” a factor officials believe contributes to the poor performance of minority students.

   The task force has issued its final report, and officials from the College of Education are expected to review its recommendations in January.

   What’s the task force’s main recommendation? That new teachers be immersed in a liberal political agenda that’s highly critical of American social norms, particularly the notion that all people can positively influence their own destiny through hard work and determination.

   The task force “recommended that aspiring teachers must repudiate the notion of the ‘American Dream’ and instead “must embrace  - and be prepared to teach our state’s kids - the task force’s own vision of America as an oppressive hellhole: racist, sexist and homophobic,” according to writer Katherine Kersten of the Star Tribune.

   “The report advocates making race, class and gender politics the ‘overarching framework’ for all teaching courses at the university,” Kersten wrote. “It calls for evaluating future teachers in both coursework and practice teaching, based on their willingness to fall into intellectual lockstep.”

   The task force recommends that prospective teachers begin by confessing their own bigotry. They would have to prepare a report “describing their own prejudices and stereotypes, questioning their ‘cultural motives’ for wishing to become teachers, and take a ‘cultural intelligence’ assessment designed to ferret out their latent racism, classism and other ‘isms,’” according to the newspaper.

   More than anything, “future teachers must. . . recognize and denounce the fundamental injustices at the heart of American society,” the article said.

   What about those prospective teachers who refuse to fall into “intellectual lockstep?” After all, there’s bound to be a stubborn conservative or two who think America’s a pretty decent place to live, work and raise a family.

   For them, the university “must develop clear steps and procedures. . . including a remediation plan,” the report said.

   We wonder if the university’s “remediation” program will prescribe years of hard labor, so the unenlightened will have plenty of time to ponder their foolishness.

   Silly us. The whole time we thought the problem was that our kids were falling behind in key subjects like science and math.

   We never understood that the key to quality education is to teach all youngsters to hate their country, and teach minority kids that society’s cards are impossibly stacked against them, so they might as well go sell crack.

   And silly us, we were  under the impression that free thought was still allowed in this country, even in the intellectual gulags otherwise known as university campuses.

   But back to reality. We think the proposed program at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities is an unbelievable pile of dung, a complete waste of tax dollars, and an insult to university students and the K-12 students they will be teaching.

   God help us if this is the prevailing attitude in schools of education across the land.

   Now that the good citizens of Minnesota are aware of this nonsense happening right under their noses, we trust they will kill it out before it’s put into practice.

This story is from the “No matter how cynical I get, I just can’t keep up” file. I have once again been disabused of the notion that the teachers’ unions may actually emerge from their radical egalitarian, socialist and incentive killing worldview. From the Boston Herald….

“Grinchlike union bosses are blocking at least 200 of Boston’s best teachers from pocketing bonuses for their classroom heroics in a puzzling move that gets a failing grade from education experts.

“The Boston Teachers Union staunchly opposes a performance bonus plan for top teachers - launched at the John D. O’Bryant School in 2008 and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates and Exxon Mobil foundations - insisting the dough be divvied up among all of a school’s teachers, good and bad.”

To read the rest of the article, please go to http://tiny.cc/8Y8hF

An interesting document found its way to my inbox over the weekend. It was a PowerPoint presentation of an analysis done by the New Jersey Education Association, regarding its efforts to re-elect Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine.

The document can be found at NEAexposed.com.

Citing “Electile Dysfunction,” meaning the polls were telling them that voters, including teachers, weren’t as enthusiastic about Corzine as they would like, the union’s Director of Government Relations, Ginger Gold Schnitzer, proposed a double-dose remedy: “A robust member-to-member campaign,” followed by “an independent communications campaign to inoculate the public.” 

The first dose of the union’s plan was to appeal to its members. The radical community organizer Saul Alinsky taught the NEA that the trick to “organizing people is to appeal to their self-interest.”  Thus, the union promoted Corzine’s pro-union “accomplishments,” like investing $3 billion into public pensions, increasing school funding, increasing school construction, expanded pre-kindergarten programs, opposition to vouchers, and free medical benefits for teacher for life.

Oddly, the union didn’t cite any accomplishment that actually helped students.

To “inoculate” the public, the union targeted women under 45.  It purchased advertising on cable channels typically watched by women, like the Food Network, HGTV, Lifetime, TLC, Bravo and a few others. Even though the ads were purchased by an “education” organization, they focused completely on issues they thought would sway women to Corzine, like health care and family leave. The ads also directed viewers to a website operated by a group called “NJ Kids and Families.”

How heartwarming, not to mention completely phony.

We all know Corzine went down to defeat November 3. But the New Jersey teachers’ union held its head high in one aspect - it successfully tore Christie down in the eyes of women under 45.

According to polling conducted in August, 36% of women under 45 favored Corzine while 32% supported Christie. But at the polls, following the advertising blitz, 54% of that demographic went for Corzine while 41% voted for Christie.

This leaked analysis underscores the fact that teachers unions are inherently political organizations that put the interests of their members first.  And kids?  Heck, what do they have to do with schools? 

To “inoculate” the public, the union targeted women under 45.  It purchased advertising on cable channels typically watched by women, like the Food Network, HGTV, Lifetime, TLC, Bravo and a few others. Even though the ads were purchased by an “education” organization, they focused completely on issues they thought would sway women to Corzine, like health care and family leave. The ads also directed viewers to a website operated by a group called “NJ Kids and Families.”

How heartwarming, not to mention completely phony.

We all know Corzine went down to defeat November 3. But the New Jersey teachers’ union held its head high in one aspect - it successfully tore Christie down in the eyes of women under 45.

According to polling conducted in August, 36% of women under 45 favored Corzine while 32% supported Christie. But at the polls, following the advertising blitz, 54% of that demographic went for Corzine while 41% voted for Christie.

 This leaked analysis underscores the fact that teachers unions are inherently political organizations that put the interests of their members first.  And kids?  Heck, what do they have to do with schools?

  The state of Arizona has successfully tackled teacher tenure.

   Starting tomorrow, a new law severely curtailing traditional aspects of tenure will take effect in the Grand Canyon state. The law passed the legislature with bipartisan support and gained the signature of Gov. Jan Brewer in September, according to the Arizona Republic.

    Seniority will no longer be a consideration for layoffs or callbacks. Schools will no longer be required to make salary reductions equitable for all tenured employees. District will be able to lower salaries for selected employees if they choose.

   And districts will no longer be required to give teachers notification of their fall employment status by April of every year.

    The new law does not tell school districts what criteria to employ it when it comes to staff assignments, layoffs or callbacks. But State Rep. Rich Crandall, chairman of the House Education Committee, suggested that districts take advantage of the law by tying teacher salaries and other workforce decisions to student performance.

    “The bottom line is teachers need to be retained based on their achievement, not on how long they’ve been on a job,” Crandall told the Arizona Republic. “This is where the United States is going and we’re just the early leaders.”

    Representatives from the NEA and Arizona Education Association were predictably upset.

     “I don’t know another sector of the economy or the workforce that would find itself the subject of interference of the relationship (between) employer and the employee,” said John Wright, president of the AEA.

     You’re not part of the private workforce, John. Teachers are public employees and work for the government. That gives the government the right to determine the terms of your employment. The public wants more for its education tax dollars and the state is honoring that wish. Nobody is doing anything wrong here.

    In fact, this new law gives Arizona school districts the tools they need to make rapid improvements in the classroom. We’re guessing that many of them will not only take advantage of the new rules, but will entice more teachers to excel with different forms of merit pay.

    We’re also guessing that this will light a fire under a bunch of teachers who could use a little motivation.

    But one thing is for sure. The state of Arizona is no longer going to allow bad teachers to hang around and collect paychecks. This is a huge step in the right direction, and we expect to see other states falling into line very soon.

Greetings,

I wrote this article - http://www.city-journal.org/2009/eon1120ls.html - in response to outgoing NEA general counsel Bob Chanin’s outrageous comments at this past summer’s NEA convention. If you are not familiar with the speech, a link to it follows.

For the first part of his 25 minute speech, Mr. Chanin was pleasant enough recalling with fondness his 41 years as NEA’s top lawyer. But at 15:30 “Uncle Bob” switched gears and started lobbing grenades at perceived NEA enemies, referring to them as “conservative and right wing bastards.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqn1rvv7Fis

Podcast from Evergreen Freedom Foundation in WA…. Mike Reitz, general counsel of EFF and Ben De Grow, public policy analyst at the Independence Institute in CO, talk about the Citizen Power initiative in California.
http://www.libertylive.org/blog_main/post.php?post_id=1718

    (The following is a statement published online by an anonymous teacher in the Cheboyan, Michigan, school district, which is currently plagued with labor strife. While we can’t guarantee the authenticity of the statement, the comments ring true, and probably represent the private feelings of many rank-and-file union teachers across the nation.)

    I am a local teacher and I think it is absolutely ridiculous that we do not pay anything for our health care.

    I have asked for the last several years to change our insurance so we can balance the budget. It seems like the union (which I would gladly leave if they would let me) would rather have more kids in a class and more teachers laid off then consider having each teacher pay a deductable. If more teachers are laid off at the end of the year and we are still not paying a dime for our insurance, people definitely have the right to be upset. I do get paid well enough that I certainly can contribute to balancing our budget.

    All too often people in education forget that we are here to educate kids. If that means making sacrifices then that is what we should do. Again, I would rather see students in a class of 20 then see teachers laid off because we can’t simply pay what everyone else is paying.

    Since I am venting, I would also like to say that, in my opinion, tenure is what is bringing education a bad name.  I work extremely hard at my job and feel I am good at it. It’s unfortunate that it takes an act of God to remove someone who is lazy and incompetent. Can you imagine your child having a teacher who doesn’t care about his/her job and isn’t any good at it? They lose a year of their education.

     Perhaps we should give administration more control over letting go of the bad teachers and keeping the ones that are good but are at the bottom of the totem pole. Maybe if we get rid of tenure so we can remove those who are worthless and start putting money towards our insurance (because, let’s face it, we can afford it), then maybe people in this town will start treating us with respect again.

Mark Bucher, author of the Unplug the Political Machine initiative in CA, appeared on Martha Montelongo’s internet radio show this past Saturday. To listen to an mp3 of the interview, please go to http://www.box.net/shared/apopc5mdt8

The initiative states, “It shall be unlawful to deduct from the wages, earnings or compensation of a public employee any amount to be used for political activities.” To learn more and to get involved, please go to http://unplugthepoliticalmachine.org/

     If you didn’t catch it when it was published last month, we would highly recommend that you take a moment and read “The Quiet Revolution,” a thoughtful column by David Brooks in the New York Times.

    Brooks summarizes President Obama’s impressive effort to impose long overdue public education reforms, despite fierce opposition from teachers unions and others on the political left.

     He begins by pointing out that in many areas, Obama has a serious credibility problem.

     After working the public and the media into near hysteria with his promise of “change,” the president has managed to deliver very little. His wild spending habits are  status quo for Washington D.C., and there’s little proof that the stimulus dollars are doing much for the economy.

     His incredibly disorganized health care effort has convinced half the nation that the issue is better left alone.

     And he continues to wring his hands over Afghanistan and the military’s recommendation to use a surge-like strategy to quell the insurgency.

     But as Brooks points out, Obama has delivered when it comes to education. And he’s done so while facing incredible pressure from powerful groups within his own party to back away from his list of reforms, which were mostly borrowed from the Republican playbook.

     “The real questions were these,” Brooks writes. “Would the administration water down their reform criteria in the face of political pressure? Would the Race to the Top money end up being doled out like any other federal spending program, and thus end up subsidizing the status quo?”

     So far, so good, according to Brooks.

     State leaders are scrambling to meet the criteria to qualify for “Race to the Top” funding. Even the unions  have been showing tentative signs of warming up a bit, according to Brooks. The AFT recently introduced grants for performance-based compensation plans, while New Haven, Connecticut teachers recently approved a contract that embraces reform concepts.

    Brooks claims he’s talked to pro-reform figures ranging from Bill Gates to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, and they all say the same thing: “They are all impressed by how gritty and effective the Obama administration has been in holding the line and inciting real education reform,” he wrote.

     There are still potential stumbling blocks for the president, according to Brooks. Some powerful organizations have offered to support health care reform in exchange for a watered-down education agenda. Some state leaders seem determined to get Race to the Top money, even if they have not met the reform criteria.

    But thus far the president has remained strong, even though the public and mainstream media have taken little notice. Thus they’re calling it the “Quiet Revolution.”

    More power to Obama, at least on this very crucial issue. We hope he maintains his diligence and insists on seeing this through.

    We’re still learning about tenure laws in other states around the nation. But we can tell you that in our home state of Michigan, the tenure act is an abomination. The following are excellent examples of how the law forces schools to waste precious tax dollars:

    In the Byron Center school district near Grand Rapids, a teacher was convicted of “lewd and lascivious” behavior with a prostitute, and admitted drinking vodka on school grounds.

     But because of the “time and uncertainty” involved with trying to revoke the teacher’s tenure status, the district sought his resignation. The result? The district just wrote him a check for $106,000 as part of a settlement agreement.

     In the nearby West Ottawa school district, a teacher who gave test results to students had his tenure status revoked, but was also rewarded $89,000 for salary and benefits he would have received if he hadn’t given test results to children. The case also cost the district $84,000 in legal fees.

     We could go on and on with similar examples that have cost our schools millions of dollars.

     Why should taxpayers, and cash-strapped schools, be forced to cough up this kind of money to rid themselves of lousy employees? The union calls it “due process,” but we call it highway robbery. The lengthy, cumbersome tenture process forces schools to pay through the nose to remove destructive influences from the presence of schoolchildren.

    Given the cost and the trouble involved, we wonder how many districts have chosen to look other way when dealing with teachers of questionable moral character. And we wonder how many private companies would survive if they incurred six-figure costs every time they tried to dump an incompetent employee.

   Michigan’s tenure law must be amended or scrapped altogether, so our schools have maximum freedom to weed out characters that threaten our children, without spending a fortune.