(This op/ed piece was submitted via our Left In Alabama facebook page. - promoted by countrycat)
Too many people accuse public school teachers of having it "easy." You know the drill: they only work 9 months a year, only work 6 hours a day, etc. etc. But anyone who is a teacher or knows one will tell you (probably quite heatedly) that the reality is far different. Teachers aren't in hammocks: they're on treadmills that go faster and faster.
For instance, take the average salary of a first year teacher in the state of Alabama and start subtracting:
Education association fees
Average rent/mortgage in Alabama
Average car insurance premium,
Fuel for just the average commute to work
Average student loan payment
Average power bill
Average water bill
Cheapest Walmart prepaid wireless phone plan
Cheapest DSL and television package offered
Average additional health, dental, and vision costs that arose throughout the year
Federal minimum estimate for groceries for an individual to still be considered as having a healthy diet.
My math may be bad, but not likely since Gail Carpenter ignored the embarrassing low salary to improve those skills in students like me - we didn't deserve her dedication!
Anyway, I keep coming up with a figure that is shocking to me. A teacher starting out in Alabama has an average disposable income of around $75 a week.
To put that in perspective, let's pretend that a teacher's day is 8 hours - if you know an educator you know that is not the case. That means for each hour they work, a teacher, early in their career, gets $1.75 per hour that is not already accounted for. What does that pay for? A Netflix subscription and a few bottles of wine a month to try to forget that people of this state continue to elect individuals who don't respect the teaching profession or public education. Legislators make their lives even harder while they do their best to inspire your children to achieve more than the previous generations of Alabamians achieved.
Finally, I arrive to my point. There are five things Alabama will always have no matter what majority party is sent to Montgomery.
We will always have God.
We will always have guns.
We will always have a staunch belief that the rights' of the state of Alabama are more important than the rights of the federal government.
We will always have low state taxes.
We will always have good football either on a plain or on a capstone.
These are not variables. These are constants. If anyone infringes upon one of these constants, oust their ass out of office in the next election.
It takes a special kind of doofus to defend the late, red-baiting, list-waving Senator Joseph McCarthy - & Alabama has at least two of them working on our state's education policy. State Senator (and US House Candidate) Scott Beason & Talladega County Republican Party Chairman Danny Hubbard are either deliberately whitewashing history, totally clueless - or both.
Speaking to the Anniston Star recently, they had this to say:
McCarthy was right about most of the people he accused, Beason claims.
"So we're comparing the McCarthy investigations of the 1950s, in which he turned out to be right, with the Salem witch hunts," Beason said. [...] Hubbard put some of the flags in Beason's textbook. He said he didn't flag "The Crucible," but he thinks Beason was right to do so. Joe McCarthy, he said, was right.
"Now that all the records are out, it's clear that McCarthy didn't go far enough," he said.
And let's compare that to some recent antics in the Alabama Republican Party:
Accusations of disloyalty - Prominent birther, State Republican Committee member, and former Congressional candidate Hugh McInnish has been beating this drum for years: "In my white paper I will present what I believe is conclusive evidence that the Obama birth certificate is a forgery and Obama himself a forgerer. Do you realize what that would mean? Just think of it! It would mean that the most powerful nation in the world is under the direction of a felon. It might mean, as some legal expert contend, that all of his executive actions are null and void."
Accusations of pro-Communist activity: In September 2012 AL State GOP Chair Bill Armistead urged everyone to see a birther movie which, "according to its director Joel Gilbert, “presents the case that Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist Party USA organizer and propagandist, was Obama's real father, both biological and ideological, and indoctrinated Obama with a political foundation in Marxism and an anti-White world view.”
Well, those first two certainly fit the rest of the definition: "unsupportedbyprooforbasedonslight,doubtful,orirrelevantevidence."
It's no surprise that this McCarthy rehab effort is part of the right wing's fight against Common Core standards. The wing nuts are the worst enemy of standards opponents - many of whom have quite valid concerns about the high-stakes testing and corporate involvement in education.
And it's no surprise that the TEA Party conspiracists & birthers (aka.. the GOP base) look with longing to those thrilling days of yesteryear when a politician only had to wave a sheet of paper containing a mythical "list of Communists," and a fearful populace would fall into line - at least temporarily.
But those days are gone. Chain email crap like this won't bring them back. Please children, go back to squabbling amongst yourselves about whether President Obama had a Marxist Kenyan or American Communist father or whether the black helicopters are taking you to a FEMA camp or a secret Marxist prison and stop trying to impose your anti-intellectual, revisionist fantasies and paranoia on our state's public students.
"Social justice is contrary to traditional American notions of justice and the United States Constitution and based on individual rights. Social justice teaches children that America is an oppressive and unjust society that should be changed!" So says Dr. Terry Batton a preacher & leader of the Barbour County TEA Party as he ranted against SB443 in committee yesterday in Montgomery.
If Jesus were still in His tomb, he'd be rolling so fast that it would surely measure on the Richter Scale.
Opposition to Common Core spans the political spectrum, and I have left-leaning friends who oppose the standards, warning that they rely too much on high-stakes testing and will increase the corporatization of American education. They're frustrated that people don't take them seriously - and it's people like Batton who have poisoned the well for the opposition.
Mention anti-Common Core & someone like Dr. Batton is the stock image that pops up: a minister who rails equally against "homosexuality" and "redistribution of wealth," considering them both "anti-Christian and anti-Catholic." I'm wondering about the difference between "Christians" and "Catholics," but he didn't provide specifics.
Well, he gets one thing right:
"Look at our government today. Do you really trust this Congress with the future of your children?"
Heck no. I wouldn't trust Eric Cantor or John Boehner to select the brand of toilet paper for the Congressional bathrooms.
But I also don't trust people like this to get anywhere near our state's educational system or standards.
On March 18th, the Alabama Alliance for Healthy Youth will bring young people from around the state to Montgomery to show their support for HB139. AA4HY is a statewide group of diverse youth and young adults working together to influence policies and programs that support sexual health.
In Alabama, no schools are required by law to teach any form of sex education. If public schools do chose to offer sex education, the state has nine minimum content requirements. Many of these minimums, such as HIV/AIDS education, are considered important parts of comprehensive, age-appropriate, sex education. However, the eighth minimum states that it should be taught that “homosexuality is not a lifestyle acceptable to the general public and that homosexual conduct is a criminal offense under the laws of the state.”
The AAHY and young people across the state are supporting HB139 because it mandates that “all material taught be done in a culturally sensitive manner.” The bill removes the eighth minimum completely, and minor words in the law are changed to reflect current phrasing.
In addition to making minimum content more affirming, HB139 is correcting false information. It is incorrect to say that “homosexual conduct” is a crime in the state of Alabama. The decision of the 2003 Supreme Court case, Lawrence v. Texas, overrides all laws of that nature in the United States.
LGBT identities are not crimes, and students should not be taught that their existence is invalid and shameful. No student in Alabama should be devalued in the classroom, and HB139 is an important step towards celebrating the diversity of cultures and identities in our state. These changes are making schools safer and more affirming.
Young people organized around a similar bill last year, and we are supporting HB139 because we believe in education and because we believe in Alabama. We want the strongest futures for our peers, for our communities, and for our families, and to do that, we need to strike the fear and shame from our education system. We need to pass HB139.
The enduring images of "ClusterFlake 2014," in Alabama include stranded motorists hiking down a snow and ice-covered Highway 280 in Birmingham, a physician walking miles to perform emergency surgery, good-hearted people helping strangers, and teachers keeping calm & carrying on as they soothed and cared for children stranded overnight at school.
After the uproar over the private school welfare bill Alabama Accountability Act, confusing restrictions on student gifts, and ugly comments from Alabama legislators about greedy & lazy public employees, this last image particularly resonated with many. Teachers doing what they do best - caring for our children - even as their own families were dealing with the same crisis.
They probably have little chance of receiving any extra compensation from the state or their local school systems, but one resort in Gulf Shores is offering a "thank you." Trouble is, it may not be legal:
When David Clark, general manager of The Beach Club resort on Fort Morgan Peninsula in Gulf Shores, read stories last week of teachers who stayed with stranded students overnight in the Birmingham area during the winter storm, he wanted to thank them. [...] Clark decided to offer 25 two-night condo stays to some of those teachers. The offer was posted on The Beach Club’s Facebook page Friday evening. The teachers, or those nominating them, were supposed to email Clark directly. [...] While he hasn’t read every email, Clark said he’s looked through many of them and has been touched by stories of cafeterias making dinner for the children; teachers leaving and using their own money to buy groceries and other items for the kids; and even one teacher who made a birthday cake to soothe an autistic student who had never spent a night away from home.
The response to the offer was so great that the mangement decided to offer another 25 vacaton stays.
Sen. Cam Ward, R-Alabaster, said he believed the giveaway might be a violation, but said the issue was a question for State Ethics Commission officials to answer.
First of all, the limitations on gifts to state employees are designed to avoid the appearance (and reality) of corruption. How does a thank you contest giveaway corrupt teachers? Will they suddenly only include Gulf Shores in Alabama geography discussions, hand out resort-branded pencils and stationary for assignments, or have test questions where kids have to find "The Beach Club" on a map?
The state should back off on this, but if the Ethics Commission decides that isn't possible, here's an idea for a solution. Hotels and other businesses routinely offer discounts to public employees, so how about a "thank you discount" for selected teachers that offers use of a condo for a discounted price per night? It's not a freebie: it's a discount.
And it's the least we can do for the teachers who did so much for their students last week.
Note: We'd like to give proper recognition to Larry Brook, publisher of the Southern Jewish Life magazine, for coining the "ClusterFlake 2014" phrase.
Kansas' Republican Governor Sam Brownback & the GOP-dominated legislature lost a court battle with parents & school systems over public school funding cuts in 2013 and appealed to the state Supreme Court. Kansas GOP legislators say that if they lose, the next step is to amend the state constitution to remove the requirement that the state fund public schools and to remove the ability of the courts to enforce any funding obligations.
In plain language, the Kansas Legislature may try to remove the state's obligation to fund public schools and strip courts of any ability to intervene.
If this is starting to sound familiar, look no further than Montgomery, and the dispute among members of the Constitutional Revision Commission about the wording of the Education article. As we wrote just yesterday, Commissioner Matt Lembke added this language:
Provided that nothing in this section shall create any judicially enforceable right or obligation.
I'm not usually given to conspiracy theories, but this can't be a conincidence. We're watching a nationwide effort to undermine public education in this country. The first step is to starve schools of funding, then point to their failure as a reason for further reduce funding (and support charters & private schools instead), and finally, change state constitutions to make it all "legal."
Kansas state courts saw the folly in the plan and pointed out that the Kansas legislature looks to be about as clueless as the Alabama GOP supermajority. For sure, they have the same problem with basic math:
Also last year, lawmakers enacted a historic multibillion-dollar package of income tax cuts that are expected to take a big bite out of future state revenues. Supporters of the cuts are hopeful they will stimulate economic growth, but critics have said they will produce huge budget deficits in future years, resulting in further cuts to education funding.
Plaintiffs in the Gannon case argued those cuts proved the state could have afforded to fully fund education, but chose tax cuts as a higher priority.
In today's opinion, the court agreed with that argument, although it took no judicial action to overturn the tax cuts.
"It seems completely illogical that the state can argue that a reduction in education funding was necessitated by the downturn in the economy and the state's diminishing resources and at the same time cut taxes further, thereby reducing the sources of revenue on the basis of a hope that doing so will create a boost to the state's economy at some point in the future," the court wrote.
While Kansas is having a very public, acrimonious court fight, it appears that some members of our state Constitutional Revision Commission have found a quieter, more devious way to reach the same goal. Even so, a vocal minority of the Commission is working hard to publicize the issue.
One big difference between Alabama & Kansas is the willingness of other Republicans to stand up to the governor. The "Traditional Republicans For Common Sense" are challenging the extremism of the current governor & legislative leadership:
Traditional Republicans for Common Sense is led by more than 70 former Republican elected officials with more than 700 years of combined experience at the state and national level.
"We, as a group, think the state is heading in the wrong direction as a far as education policy, tax policy and judicial selection," said former Kansas Rep. Charlie Roth, of Salina. "The group is gaining momentum and we will be active through the next election cycle, not only in support of candidates but in what we think is a common-sense approach to government.
"It is my belief that the Republican Party has been hijacked by the extreme wing of the party." [...] "We believe in limited government and market capitalism," Roth said. "There are parts of the new Republican Party that want me to be anti-immigrant, homophobic and other things I don't want to be. They want to count my church attendance. I'm not that type of Republican."
Are there any Republicans in Alabama willing to stand up to their extremist leaders?
Alabama has the nation's longest state constitution and - in some ways - one of the worst. While the Judicial Article that was adopted in the early 1970's is a model for other court systems, the rest of the document concentrates power in Montgomery, contains racist language, and is just too darn long.
Unfortunately, the Constitution Revision Commission members who worked to revise the Education article may be about to make things worse.
To avoid confusion and disorder and to promote effective and economical planning for education, the legislature may authorize the parents or guardians of minors, who desire that such minors shall attend schools provided for their own race, to make election to that end, such election to be effective to such period and to such extent as the legislature may provide.
That same article/section specifically says that no student has the right to education or training at public expense.
There's disagreement between members about the wording of the proposed Education article. The racist language was a no brainer to remove, but the question of funding and "rights" tied the committee in knots. The language seems minor, but could have huge implications for public schools in the state.
Approved wording for the Education Article (XIV, Section 256) revision that says: The Legislature shallestablish, organize and maintain a system of public schools throughout the state for the benefit of children there-of.
Then Commissioner Matt Lembke offered the following amendment which was approved in a 9-7 vote:
Nothing in this section shall create any judicially enforceable right or obligation, nor shall it in any way limit the effect of Amendment 582 to this Constitution. (Amendment 582 states, No order of a state court, which requires isbursement of state funds, shall be binding on the state or any state official until the order has been approved by a simple majority of both houses of the Legislature.)
The ACCR's December 2013 newsletter (not online yet) explains the controversy:
As you know, there were some problems with the wording the Commission chose to replace Section 256 of the Education
Five if the Commissioners who voted against an amendment added to the generally approved words proposed by two subcommittees of the Commission, have submitted a Dissenting Opinion to the Commission Chair, Governor Albert Brewer, to be included in the report that will be given to the Legislature to consider for legislation. Those five Commissioners are: Jim Pratt, Patricia Todd,Carolyn McKinstry, Phillip Brown and Quinton Ross. The other two commissioners who voted against the amendment were Gov. Brewer and Senate President Pro Tem Del Marsh (by his proxy, Ryan Cantrell).
But Governor Brewer chose to NOT include the dissenting opinion as part of the Constitution Revision Commission report because it had not been part of the official meetings. So the dissenting report will be provided to each legislator,by personal letter accompanying the Commission report.
Madison County Senator Paul Sanford has reintroduced a bill (SB25) that would prohibit courts for ordering "any person" to provide for the support or educational expenses for anyone who has reached the age of 19. Simply put, this seems to imply that a parent can't be compelled to help pay a child's living expenses & tuition while the child attends college or receives post-secondary education or training.
"(f) No law, rule, or court order shall compel, either directly or indirectly, any person to provide post-minority education support, including, but not limited to, support for postsecondary education, to another person who has reached the age of majority, or otherwise has become self-sufficient or completed the 12th grade, whichever occurs first, unless the child is mentally or physically disabled at the age of 19 years."
Last session, he had 3 co-sponsors (Beason, Fielding, and Glover). Currently, he has no co-sponsors for this year's effort, although that could change at any time.
This bill seems odd and disruptive: many divorce decrees and custody agreements provide for support for college or post-secondary training. It raises several questions:
Does this mean that educational expenses can't be included in a custody/support agreement even if the parents want it there?
What about existing agreements? Does this abrogate them?
But the biggest question about the bill - IMO - is why? This just seems mean-spirited.
As college costs skyrocket, so has student load debt. It increased 551% between 1999 and 2011. Students accept that debt burden because a college education is almost a necessity for a successful career and secure retirement. In 2012, the medidan weekly salary for someone with a Bachelor's degree was $1022. A high school diploma netted you $652/week on average.
...published college tuition and fees increased 439 percent from 1982 to 2007 while median family income rose 147 percent.
There's no doubt that some parents are barely hanging on and simply can't afford college/training for their kids. But shouldn't that be an issue that courts address on a case-by-case basis when a parent asks to have a support order revised?
Totally prohibiting post-secondary support and education assistance seems like a heavy-handed "solution." We should be making access to education and training easier if we want to build a more effective, educated workforce and population. It's the only sure way to get more high-paying, quality jobs in the state.
For those of you who are familiar with family law in the State of Alabama, the Bayliss Court, 24 years ago, interpreted the child support statute to authorize post-minority support for college education. In essence, that Court made new law even though the age of majority is exclusively controlled by Statute. Based on Bayliss, the Courts have slowly expanded that ruling to including other post-minority expenses since they were tied to college education.
The court reversed that, but did allow existing agreements to remain in place:
That being said, this decision will not disturb final post-minority educational support orders entered before this date. The Court has said that where parties acted in good-faith believing past decisions, they would be protected, although future decisions are to be overruled. Accordingly, this Court expressly overruled Bayliss because the child custody statute does not authorize a Court in a divorce action to require a non-custodial parent to be pay educational support for children over the age of 19 years.
Thanks for that tip: it brings more clarity to what Sanford's bill was addressing.
McGill said he wants parents to refrain from the mindset that pushes kids only in the academic direction. He told a story about a man whose son was good at working with hands but made failing grades in school. “That broke my heart. So often our system tries to push every kid in the direction of academics. So many of them God just didn’t create that way. Our testing is in relationship to academics and not what they were created to do; they were created to work with their hands, but we are not testing them on that. Are we not first making failures out of them before they drop out or graduate by the skin of their teeth?” he said.
Now, the thing here is that McGill actually has a good idea and I agree with him that technical education has a bad rap:
One key to developing a greater workforce, he said, is to change long held attitudes about technical education. “For years we have had the mindset that career tech is loud, hot, smelly, dangerous and etcetera. That simply isn’t the case for career tech industry. These days, it looks like a computer attached to a machine and for the most part it’s an air conditioned environment that produces a product,” he said.
Not every kid wants to attend college. People do have interests and talents, and when you force them into a situation that's not suited to their interests and goals, they often won't perform as well.
For example, there's a huge push to get high school students to take Advanced Placement (AP) courses. Our daughter's school received a grant that was based on the number of students enrolled in AP classes. They pressure was on to pack those classes with students - any students - whether they were ready for the coursework or not. Yet, when she expressed an interest in taking a tech class, her guidance counselor acted like she'd just listed prostitution as her main career goal.
But consider that many of these "tech" jobs can't be outsourced. Nobody in China can cut your hair and your car's bent frame can't be straightened by a call center in India. Welding, electronics, & other "hands-on" jobs are good-paying and necessary. A kid who hates learning from a book (or iPad) might be a superstar when it comes to hands-on work on a project. And some people are good at both, so we should be encouraging students to explore their options instead of forcing them into a particular track.
But here is where McGill & I part ways. When we start framing the issue in terms of "how God created" someone, that's not just forcing them onto a particular path; it's adding a Divine stamp of approval! And it's uncomfortably close to assuming that biology is destiny. Or, more accurately, that "demographics are destiny," and that someone from a particular background or ethnic group might be "more suited" to particular jobs.
For example, the ACLU of Alabama joined a case in Pickens County in 2006 because the school board was allocating resources unequally between high schools.
Here are a few examples of the problems:
The predominantly white high school in Pickens County offers the entirety of college preparatory classes; the black high school does not.
Students at the white high school are offered remedial and enrichment classes not available for students at the all-black high school. Students at the black high school are offered electives such as Introduction to Cosmetology, Nail Care and Application and Fashion Decisions; students at the white high school are offered Journalism, Calculus,Latin and Shakespearean Drama. Black students across the system are offered less meaningful vocational courses than white students,and black students at the predominantly white high school are more likely to be “tracked” into the less challenging science and math courses.
Teachers at the black high school are more likely to be untenured and less qualified than teachers at the predominantly white high school.
If we want to improve education in Alabama and give students opportunities to reach their full potential, then we should encourage them to explore their options and expose them to many different topics and opportunities.
But leave God out of it, please. That never, ever turns out well in Alabama government.
The Southern Poverty Law Center filed suit yesterday challenging the Alabama Accountability Act (aka.. the Great Private School Giveaway) because many of the benefits aren't available to poor students:
SPLC President Richard Cohen said poor parents can’t afford private school tuition even with the help of the new tax credit and, even if they could, often don’t have a participating private school near them. [...] Cohen called Republicans' promise that the law would help all students regardless of location and income an “empty promise."
"The reality is just the opposite. Children in Alabama’s Black Belt, most of them African-Americans, are still trapped in failing schools, still being given the short end of the stick,” Cohen said.
This isn't hyperbole. The state listed 78 public schools as "failing," but only 56 private schools (PDF) have signed up to accept transfers. Many religiously-affiliated schools are concerned that accepting state money might affect their autonomy. And that seems to be a perfectly valid concern: if you're taking state education money, you better be prepared to document where it's going and show results.
The law also allows students in "failing schools" to transfer to non-failing public schools - if they can find one that will accept them. Remember that, in the rush to steamroll the bill through the legislature, this poorly-written law seemed to indicate that public schools had to accept transfers from failing schools.
Rep. Paul DeMarco said Monday that when he voted Feb. 28 for a school choice bill he believed it contained language he had requested aimed at explicitly protecting public and private schools from being required to enroll students from failing schools.
"It was my understanding that we voted on the version that included the language I had requested," said DeMarco. "I did not see a different version until the following week. I feel that it is important to my district that this legislation includes my language."
The "failing school" label is one of particular interest. The bill defines a "failing" school as one in the "bottom 6%, so naturally people wonder about the ranking system and what schools are were in the "top" 94%. But don't ask the Alabama Department of Education for clarification. They aren't saying:
Alabama Superintendent Tommy Bice denied a public records request this month from the five members of the Huntsville school board, who had asked to see the scores for "non-failing" schools in Alabama.
"We did not generate scores for all schools across all Alabama for these years," reads the second line of a simple one-paragraph denial, dated Aug. 8, and signed by Bice.
Education officials released the scores for "failing" schools only. But state law required the state rank all schools in the state from 2007-2012.
The ranking system didn't exist last year, nor did the newly created scores.
The Alabama Accountability Act, passed by a Republican majority in both houses in the spring, ordered the state to label as "failing" any school that repeatedly placed in the bottom 6 percent in reading and math. But such a score did not exist.
So the Education Department had to make one up.
This is what happens when you pass a major piece of legislation without public hearings, without reading it, in the dead of night, with no input from educators, and with little debate.
Vote first, read later, and spend taxpayer dollars fighting in court over the details. It's the Alabama GOP Supermajority way.....
(Congratulations to our Alabama High School Democrats~ - promoted by countrycat)
Our very own Alabama High School Democrats have been named the High School Democrats of America's "State Chapter of the Year."
Nickie Mitch, National leader of the High School Democrats said, "Alabama High School Democrats truly stood out among our state chapters as a leader and innovator, especially considering the challenges they faced in terms of political demographics and party infrastructure. Time and again, Alabama's chapter and its leaders have proven that effective organizing makes all the difference. We look forward to what Alabama High School Democrats will accomplish in the future."
The High School Democrats of America is a completely student run organization that works at the national, state, and local levels to engage and mobilizemembers to be active in the political process.The Alabama High School Democrats were founded in April 2013, they are currently working with about 15 schools to start chapters.
The "State Chapter of the Year" award is presented to an outstanding state organization for success in mobilizing high school participants in a positive and effective manner. Grayson Everett, Vice-Chairman of the Alabama High School Democrats stated, "It's amazing we're already receiving national recognition for just a few months of activity. It shows what can be accomplished at the state level with hard work."
"We are incredibly honored to receive this award," said State Chairman Jordan Cozby, "But there is much more work to do. Across the State, school is starting back up and we need your support. Please connect us with students, parents, and teachers that would like to start a chapter." You can email Jordan Cozby at: Jcozby@hsdems.org to help with chapter expansion. You can also find more about the High School Democrats here: http://hsdems.org/ and keep up with the Alabama High School Democrats on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ALHSDA.
The pictures bring pause to the most cynical, hard-edged heart and mind.
But in the midst of such death and destruction, there is a group of brave people whose fearlessness in the face of Mother Nature is getting noticed.
They responded first when their children were threatened. School teachers.
It took a damn tornado for teachers to get some good publicity.
In a country where lawmakers give lip service to providing a great education, a bunch of Okie teachers went to war when the storms came.
These days, teachers get attention when they are vilified by ungrateful parents and lawmakers who use them as political gaming chips.
In Oklahoma, in the storm zone’s ground zero, at two elementary schools, teachers put themselves between their babies and the worst the storm brought to bear.
Oklahoma teachers are the fourth lowest paid educators in the country.
When the storm hit, they didn’t think twice about what they aren’t paid.
Teachers don’t think that way when storms hit that can hurt their class.
Those Oklahoma teachers protected their babies.
Those of us who know teachers say “Of course they did.”
Teachers are people you want in life’s foxhole.
Teachers call it real life.
They’re used to it.
Teachers ask a child how he got those bruises.
Teachers call the food bank to tell them where a hungry child lives.
Teachers get a child to learn when parents let them stay up to watch late night television.
Teachers teach kids who either don’t eat breakfast or have a soft drink and chips to start the day.
Teachers will say “no” to a child who has never heard the word before.
Teachers show kids how to act in a group when parents don’t give a damn how they act anywhere.
Teachers help a child read that has never had a book read to them before they walk in the door of a classroom.
Teachers make a kid look them in the eye who has never focused on anything other than a TV or an iPad.
Teachers build, shape, and mold. They sure don’t do it for the money. They do it because they fight the good fight. They make a difference. They don’t issue press releases. In the aftermath of the storm, we’re told teachers in Oklahoma’s storm zoned acted like heroes. Saved as many students as they could. Of course they did...
And lets remember some other teachers:
Virginia Tech professor Liviu Librescu: "The 75-year-old professor and Holocaust survivor was in the middle of teaching one of his popular classes at Norris Hall yesterday when Cho tried to enter the room. As his students start jumping out the windows of the second-floor room, Librescu stayed behind to block the door, according to his students. He was killed by the gunman."
Sandy Hook Elementary School teachers: "What the teachers and principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School did for the children in their care could win a soldier in a war zone a Purple Heart."
Protecting students at Columbine: ''Under the table, kids!'' she says now, directing her attention back to the students who, moments before, had been quietly studying in the library at Columbine High School. ''Kids, under the table. Kids, stay on the floor. . . . Oh, God. Oh, God -- kids, just stay down.''
Teachers. It's about time we gave them the respect and recognition they deserve. They're occasionally called upon for extraordinary acts of heroism, but let's not forget that they have the potential to change lives - and save lives - every single day at work.
Tuesday, House Budget Committee Chair, Jay Love accidentally spilled the beans about the real purpose of the Alabama Accountability Act: support private schools with public money. Love would never admit that outright, of course, but all it takes is a little math.
Let's do some.
The chairman of the House education budget committee estimated that the state’s new school tax credit program could cost the Education Trust Fund between $50 million and $60 million in 2014. [...] The new law, called the Alabama Accountability Act, allows families with children zoned for failing schools to receive tax credits – estimated at up to $3,500 annually -- to help pay tuition at a private school or a better public school. [...] Love said he assumed that 25 percent of the state’s 61,000 private school students would qualify for the credit. [...] Love said he also assumed that 10 percent of an estimated 74,000 students at "failing” schools would transfer and take the tax credit.
25% of 61,000 private school students: 15,250 students.
15,250 students x $3500 tax credit: $53 million
10% of 74,000 "failing school" students: 7,400
7,400 students x $3500 tax credit: $26 million
Total impact to the Education Trust Fund:
$53 million in private school subsidies $26 million for public school students $79 million
Again, we run across that seemingly ubiquitous GOP math impairment.
Using Rep. Love's numbers, the expected hit to the ETF is almost $80 million dollars. That's a third more than his high estimate of $60 million.
It could be that Rep. Love graduated from one of those "failing" public schools where math wasn't taught, but it's not likely. No, here's what's going on.
Look at the numbers of students expected to claim the credits: 25% of private school kids, but only 10% of public school kids. It looks like Love understands the basic finding of AL.com reporter Challen Stephens' investigative report. Most public school kids won't get to use the credit because there's no place for them to go.
Let's start with the bad news. After holding over a committee vote on HB57 (the TRAP bill), the Senate Health Committee voted 7-3 to support Mary Sue McClurkin's ill-conceived bill:
The committee turned back an effort by Sen. Linda Coleman, D-Birmingham, to amend the bill. Coleman recommended a number of changes, including a provision to grandfather in the state’s five existing clinics. [...]
Coleman said she was not surprised her amendment was rejected and said she might try again on the Senate floor. She said she did not think the bill was really about health and safety.
“This was an attempt to close these type facilities down because of personal religious beliefs,” Coleman said.
Meanwhile, outside the Statehouse, Governor Robert Bentley was busy acting as ringmaster for the anti-choice circus. Governor ("only Christians are my brothers") Bentley went himself one better with this comment:
“We need to remember we are dealing with human life and this is what God expects us to do,” Republican Gov. Robert Bentley said at a Montgomery rally organized by abortion opponents in Montgomery. The Legislature’s Republican presiding officers, Lt. Gov. Kay Ivey and House Speaker Mike Hubbard, also attended the rally.
This just begs some good journalist to ask the obvious question: Why does God want Bentley to shun the Medicaid expansion that will really protect human life?
The good news - public education advocates had reason to cheer:
Momentum on on the "Dump Common Core" effort has slowed. The Senate Education committee held a public hearing yesterday, but delayed a vote until next week. Note that's only a minor victory: look what happened with HB57!
Speaker Mike Hubbard hit a roadblock in the form of Montgomery Circuit Judge Charles Price, on the "Alabama Accountability Act:"
“The judge mentioned that not only did they violate their own rules, they also are in violation of the state constitution that says you can’t take a bill and introduce it as a bill and say it’s about one thing and substitute it with a different bill,” said James Anderson, an attorney for the plaintiff.
The judge’s order prevents the House Clerk, Jeff Woodard, from delivering the bill to Governor Bentley for signing.
Hubbard decried the so-called "judicial activism," which the GOP seems to define as "any decision we don't like." He's appealing to the Alabama Supreme Court.
And finally, Governor Bentley showed a tiny piece of common sense and vetoed the first "guns in schools" bill to hit his desk:
Gov. Robert Bentley today sent a note to Franklin County lawmakers saying he is vetoing a bill approved last month by the Legislature to allow teachers and community members there to be trained as reserve police officers and sheriff’s deputies.
In the letter, Bentley said he was concerned primarily with the training because the bill does not provide adequate training requirements.
“Failure to provide for specific, applicable training would create an unacceptable high-risk situation with the possibility of dire consequences, including the injury or death of a child, teacher, or a volunteer member (of the security force),” Bentley said.
Last night's meltdown in the Alabama Legislature over the School Flexibility Act has been chronicled exhaustively by the media this morning. But the descriptions of the GOP super-majority's breathtaking arrogance and antipathy towards the Alabama Education Association leaves out an important piece of recent political history.
Here's a sampling of coverage of yesterday's events:
This is happening now because the Republican super-majority in the Legislature sees no need for compromise and listens to nothing outside its own echo chamber. Governor Robert Bentley just goes along for the ride. He really has no choice because Alabama's governor has almost no real power over the Legislature. There's no "separate but equal" power between the executive and legislative branches. The Legislature holds most of the cards while the Governor gets to attend ribbon cuttings, hold press conferences, and rubber stamp legislation that hits his desk.
There's really no point in the Governor vetoing anything because the Legislature has the power to over-ride vetoes with a simple majority vote. And they do. Just last term, the Legislature over-rode Bentley's veto of the Dial/Laird Slush Fund Bill.
So last night, we had the spectacle of Bentley, Hubbard, & Marsh grinning like possums and taking a victory lap on the so-called "Alabama Accountability Act."
The AEA is furious. Executive Secretary Henry Mabry flatly stated: "The Governor lied to us."
Working through back channels with Bentley’s campaign, the AEA pummeled Byrne with a barrage of attack ads and automated phone calls, according to e-mails and telephone records obtained by the Press-Register.
It wasn't just robocalls. AEA ran a slew of negative ads against Byrne, who, Hubbert said "threatened to burn our house down." Once the major parties had their candidates selected - Sparks & Bentley - then-AEA Executive Secretary Paul Hubbert made this announcement:
Alabama political kingmaker Paul Hubbert said he’s staying out of the 2010 governor’s race now that there are two candidates he believes will be friendly to education.
Hubbert, executive secretary of the powerful Alabama Education Association, almost single-handedly defeated Republican gubernatorial frontrunner Bradley Byrne with a series of third-party ads. [...] In an interview last week, Hubbert said either Bentley or Sparks is acceptable to the AEA or at least will listen to AEA concerns.
You have to wonder how AEA feels now. Byrne did pick a fight with AEA, but he also hailed from the "business wing" of the Alabama GOP. That's a group with little love for the social conservatives pushing the Legislature to drop Common Core standards, outlaw abortion and most forms of hormonal birth control, and remove employer's ability to ban firearms on their own property.
A Governor Bradley Byrne might not be able to stop it, but would he be as complicit in the effort as Governor Bentley?
We'll never know that for sure, but one thing is clear: GOP super-majority is intent on "burning down" AEA's house. And Hubbert handed the current governor a big box of matches when it helped him win the GOP primary.
In hindsight, it looks like a very bad return on investment.
Hey, when even someone like Dale Peterson calls you out for being a dick, maybe it's time to reconsider your career choices. Senator Shadrack McGill showed his butt so plainly at the hearing on SB190 (to repeal Alabama's Common Core standards) that even Dale Peterson had to comment......
"Watched several minions today...such as a "Republican" senator by the name of Shadrick McGill from DeKalb County as he acted like a disrespectful mornon by laughing at those who supported ridding Alabama of federal common core standards and then "sharing" with his buddy, "Republican" Ed Henry, - represenative, also a disrepctful jerk. Apparently their job was to act like disrespectful jerks. Both did a great job of being jerks."
Note that we faithfully reproduced Peterson's Facebook typos...
Those of us who have played close attention to McGill's antics since assuming office - particularly his rather awkward public meetings - aren't as surprised by this behavior as Peterson seems to be. Perhaps he was too preoccupied with that horse to pay much attention to his fellow party members....
Peterson went on to discuss how many members of the committee appeared to be woefully ignorant of the legislation and its implications (see the image). Now, that won't surprise many of us who have watched the Alabama legislature debate many topics - like female biology - that they don't understand at all.
I first realized something was amiss when I heard "WHAT THE HECK IS THISI!?!?!" from across the room (OK, so she didn't say "heck"; for that matter, she didn't say "hell", either). My wife, who's a teacher, had stumbled across this article. Here's the meat of it:
Huntsville Superintendent Casey Wardynski on Thursday spoke out against a proposed bill that would repeal the state's adoption of the Common Core State Standards for curriculum and limit how student data is shared and used.
Wardynski said that Senate Bill 190, introduced earlier this month by a group of 15 Republican senators, would set back public education in Alabama and hinder the ability of new students coming into the state to have a smooth transition to their new curriculum. [...]
"Folks see this as a state's rights issue," Wardynski said. "I see it as a kids' rights issue."
State school board members Mary Scott Hunter of Huntsville and Tracy Roberts of Mobile last week co-authored an editorial supporting the Alabama College- and Career-Ready Standards, saying that a return to previous standards would send the wrong message to the rest of the nation and would frustrate teachers who have been working hard to teach the new standards.
So, it isn't enough to strip services away from the poor, it isn't enough to put women at risk, now they want to ensure that our children get an even worse education?
Amendment 4 is the latest really awful choice inflicted on Alabama voters by our legislature. Do we keep the (no longer enforced) segregationist language in our constitution, or do we get rid of the right to a public education?
What imperils Alabama’s future is not language. It is chronic under-funding of public schools. It is an increasingly large pool of indigent students, an unprepared labor force unable to compete successfully in a global economy, a frightful high school drop-out rate, high school students not prepared for college and many of our brightest college graduates who leave Alabama for better careers elsewhere as soon as they graduate.
After often switching sides during the past six months, I finally decided to vote against Amendment 4, though I agree with its intent. I vote “no” because we need to have a serious conversation about the pernicious policies of our racial past, not about its hateful language.
Flynt also has an interesting comment for the amendment's author, Sen. Arthur Orr (R, Decatur) who has made much of the "offensive" nature of the language he now wants to remove from the Alabama constitution:
But I do find it curious that Orr only finds the language offensive, not the racist policies which gave rise to the language. Furthermore, I find it amazing that he has endorsed Roy Moore as Supreme Court chief justice, the very Republican who mobilized a coalition that defeated the last attempt to remove the same racist language.
Alabama Arise, an extremely effective progressive organization and long-time supporter of constitutional reform, is now advising Alabama voters to reject Amendment 4 because the current amendment retains troublesome wording regarding public education. Specifically, it says "nothing in this Constitution shall be construed as creating or recognizing any right to education or training at public expense."
This is via email from Arise:
At first Alabama Arise supported Amendment 4 with reservations. Of course we agree that the racist provisions should be removed from the state constitution, but we were disappointed that the amendment does not restore the state's responsibility to provide public education to all students, as the original 1901 Constitution did. Alabama voters rescinded that right with passage of Amendment 111 during the segregation era.
In legislative floor debate last spring, the Black Caucus fought to restore the education right to the amendment. When that effort failed and the amendment was scheduled for the November ballot, we joined other groups who planned to support the imperfect Amendment 4. Our reasoning: It would not be good for Alabama's reputation if we reject an amendment to remove racist language, as we did in 2004.
Over the last week, we became wary of this sentence in Amendment 4: “Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed as creating or recognizing any right to education or training at public expense. . . .” It’s a sentence from Amendment 111, and some say it wouldn’t have any practical effect. After lengthy discussion of the pros and cons, Alabama Arise has decided it’s not wise for voters to approve an amendment that re-states a provision that was intended to protect racial segregation of schools.
Alabama Arise now recommends a “No” vote on Amendment 4.
This is a good call. Yes, the racist language needs to go; it undoubtedly does hurt Alabama's image and recruitment efforts, but consider how hard it will be to recruit new industry to Alabama if the state declares it will no longer provide public education to all children -- and there are still people in this state who believe that is a good idea. Some of them may even be serving in our legislature.