[Fwd: [bay-resisters] Fwd: Rewards]

[Susan Harman <susanharman@IGC.ORG>]

Good news from sunny CA.]
Susan

TGFletcher@aol.com wrote:
> 
> Dear Bay Resisters,
> 
> The following is a letter that was signed by ALL of the teachers at
> Jefferson
> Elementary School in Berkeley, one of the schools designated to
> receive the
> ~$700/staff person "rewards."
> 
> It might be a good idea to circulate something like this district-wide
> and
> try to get people to sign on to it.
> 
> I've also proposed to to the local union president that we hold a
> membership
> meeting to discuss blood money, as _most_ schools in Berkeley will be
> receiving it.  I like the fact that these teachers pointed out that
> the
> "rewards" undermine collective bargaining.
> 
> Terry
> 
>     ---------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Rewards
> Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 09:33:00 -0800
> From: Judi Doyle <jazzerjud@earthlink.net>
> To: tgfletcher@aol.com
> 
> Jefferson Staff Position
> 
>  We, Jefferson teachers, are upset and outraged at the proposed plan
> to reward teachers for the improved test scores of their students.  We
> do not want to support  or give credence to a competition, of
> questionable merit, against other schools.
> 
>  Such a competition is  inappropriate for the following reasons:
>   We are professional teachers. We do our best daily    to teach our
> students; we know other teachers do, too. It is an insult to    our
> integrity to suggest that we would work harder for ?prize money?.
>    The Academic Performance Index (API) is a poor basis for comparing
> or  rewarding public schools. Standardized test scores are only one
> (and by no means the best) measure of a given student's abilities or a
> school's performance. These tests are flawed in their assessment of
> basic skills because of a limited scope, cultural and gender bias, and
> time constraints. Additionally, the API does not assess  many of the
> important skills and concepts integral to a well - rounded education
> .It is exactly this well - rounded curriculum which earns the
> designation of California Distinguished Schools Award.
>   Tying API scores to monitory compensation is potentially harmful to
> students.  Creating a situation in    which teaching underachieving
> children becomes an economic liability for the  teacher is
> unconscionable. In addition, manipulation within    school
> infrastructure could create environments in which teachers are    put
> at odds with each other.
>   Giving monitory rewards for test scores undermines the concept and
> practice of  collective bargaining, and replaces it with a ?merit? pay
> system. Merit pay bonuses make meaningless    the union struggle to
> unite and arrive at an equitable and fair salary    schedule. This is
> a ?divide and conquer? tactic that will  make fighting for   and
> receiving substantial pay increases more difficult.
>   There are better uses for this money. This money should be used to
> provide programs and support services for our students.  Including
> intervention for at-risk students,  nutritional lunches, on-site
> nurses, school psychologists, and counselors. All this should be
> provided in clean, safe, aesthetically-pleasing learning environments.
> 
> 
>  Rewarding teachers for test scores is an unacceptable way for
> politicians to respond  to the needs of California public school
> children.
>  Let us come together as a union and decide how best to respond to
> this threat to our  students and our union.
> 
> 
>  Shall we refuse the money?
>  Is there a way to accept the money as a district and distribute it
> equitably?
>  Are there other possible responses?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.