[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally Blue CA Ad Network

From Anger To Action

by: Robert Cruickshank

Fri Mar 05, 2010 at 09:00:00 AM PST


Yesterday's outpouring of protest against the deliberate decision to destroy California's public education system was characterized by one dominant emotion: anger. And that was exactly as it should be. If you're not angry at the collapse of our schools, colleges, and universities, and the stealing of an entire generation's future, then you're really not paying any attention.

I spent the day at Cal State Monterey Bay, hearing student after student take the microphone to express their anger at what has happened to their dreams. This was not a violent anger, but instead the kind of deeply rooted anger that anyone would quite rightly feel when they have been betrayed. The state of California has betrayed these students, having asked them to work hard to succeed in school and promising an affordable quality education, only to yank that promise away from them in order to deliver tax cuts to huge corporations.

On other campuses, anger was clearly the dominant emotion, such as the students at UC Santa Cruz who shut down the campus, or the students at UC Davis who tried to block Interstate 80 in order to show the rest of the state what it feels like to have your life disrupted by forces beyond your control.

Anger can be a very healthy emotion. It focuses the mind, and can create a sense of determination. That too was on display at the events I attended - a belief that this anger was being expressed in order to build a mass movement of students, faculty, staff, parents, and other Californians who know that this state has no chance whatsoever at prospering in the 21st century if these cuts are not reversed. It is further evidence of how effective and valuable the March 4 actions were.

Students now understand what is happening to them and why. Their education is being gutted and their already meager financial resources are being stolen from them by a state government that believes corporations matter more than students. That propping up the failed status quo matters more than building California's future. Most of the speakers I heard understood this very clearly, almost instinctively. It has been beaten into them these last two years.

The question now facing this nascent movement is how to channel that anger into action. A movement is being built, but what are its goals? And how will it achieve them? It is both easy and right to say "fuck the budget cuts." But unless the movement starts working on the solutions, this moment will be lost just as each preceding moment was lost.

In my own brief remarks to the rally at CSUMB, I noted that we had all been here before. In the late 1960s students protested against Governor Ronald Reagan's fee hikes, but they happened anyway. In the early 1980s students protested against Governor Jerry Brown's and Governor George Deukmejian's fee hikes, but they happened anyway. In the early 1990s students protested against Governor Pete Wilson's fee hikes, but they happened anyway. In the early 2000s students protested against Governor Gray Davis's and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fee hikes, but they happened anyway.

It is time to break that cycle with action.

The core goal for colleges and universities should be to restore the core pledge of the 1960 Master Plan - that a high quality public college education will be free to all Californians who qualify for it. The core goal for K-12 schools should be similar, that a high-quality public education will be free to all Californians, period. In pursuit of that goal, the movement must be willing to pursue actions and policy changes that will provide the new public funding that a restoration of truly affordable and quality public education requires.

One starting point is AB 656. The Courage Campaign, along with Assemblymember Alberto Torrico (author of AB 656), the California Faculty Association, the University of California Student Association, the California State Student Association, and many other groups have come together to support this bill and to launch a campaign to pass it. $2 billion a year for higher education would go a very long way to helping reverse the recent cuts and fee hikes. It would be a downpayment on the full restoration of the Master Plan, and will need to be followed by other methods of collecting the revenue that our state's wealthy and large corporations currently control.

Another starting point would be proposals to roll back the $2 billion in corporate tax cuts given in the February 2009 budget deal, the same budget that slashed $9 billion from public schools and began this present downward spiral.

Still another starting point would be the restoration of majority rule to California, whether it's for the budget in the legislature or for votes to raise revenue at the ballot box, or some combination of these.

These goals must be placed at the core of education movement organizing in the coming weeks and months. Those goals have to be pursued in concert with the necessary defensive actions that have to be fought against people like US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, whose "Race to the Top" program served as bait to lead California to weaken some of its core educational standards. Those who want to privatize education in order to turn it into a vehicle for profit must be fought as well. No Child Left Behind must be reformed, teachers must become better paid and freed from onerous, pointless, and stupid burdens that so-called reformers are trying to place on them.

And this movement must remain unified as its enemies seek to defeat it through the divide-and-conquer strategy. Attacks on teacher's unions have become all too common, even among Democrats. Others may try to leverage higher education against K-12 education, or leverage education against other budget priorities such as health care and human services. These too must be resisted.

A "grow the pie" ethos must be embraced by this movement. Student speakers at CSUMB well understood that other kinds of budget cuts, including to health care programs, bite every bit as deeply as the education cuts. That should not hold the movement back from pursuing the goals of taking our money back from the wealthy and the large corporations who took it from us in recent decades, and should instead motivate the movement to ensure that battles such as AB 656 and majority rule are to be cornerstones for the campaign to provide the kind of robust and high-quality public services that used to characterize the California Dream during the era of Pat Brown.

For that to happen, the movement must figure out how to channel anger into action. Determining the agenda for battle will help this movement become the vehicle by which we end 30 years of right-wing policy that has destroyed our state and stolen our future from us.

Robert Cruickshank :: From Anger To Action
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Call Your Legislator To Support Senate Bill 969 - The California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010 (0.00 / 0)
Senate Bill 969 - The California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010 - was introduced by State Senator and Lt Governor Candidate Dean Florez only two weeks ago. This bill would, among several things, lock in student costs at a California system college to that paid on the freshman year.

This is what I posted in the Roseville Press Enterprise last week about this new legislations. I also would hope that the COURAGE CAMPAIGN would support this LONG TERM fix of the cost of college here in California, as well as another bill concerning college tuition. Sorta a short and long term solution, is a way to look at bills.

As a parent with a child in Grad School, this proposed legislation to limit yearly tuition costs to 5% will be a huge money saver for parents and students. Better than a big tax cut, perhaps! No matter what your political affiliation is YOU need to make sure this legislation by California State Senator Dean Florez becomes CA law!

The details:

SACRAMENTO - Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez, D-Shafter, who spoke out strongly against the recent 32% fee spike at UC campuses, this week introduced legislation to help stabilize student fees for future generations of California students.

With rates that can remain relatively stable for some time and then skyrocket, it is nearly impossible for parents and students to plan their saving and investments with any sense of confidence the end result will be enough to afford whatever the going rate is by the time they enroll. Even then, the next year may soar out of reach, abruptly ending a dream.

On Monday, Florez introduced Senate Bill 969 - The California College and University Fee Stabilization Act of 2010 -- to remove much of that uncertainty from planning for a college education.

Senate Bill 969 says that the fee you pay your first year of college is the fee you will pay until you graduate, much as degree graduation requirements are locked in based on what was in place in your year of admission. In addition, SB 969 states that the fee increase from one year's incoming class to the next can be no more than five percent, so parents can plan ahead for their children's younger siblings as well.

"It is of benefit to every one of us to ensure that the best and the brightest students in this state are not kept from reaching their potential by unreasonable and unexpected spikes in tuition rates," Florez said. "If we are to build and maintain an economy befitting of this great state, we can not make higher education an unattainable dream."

Author Note: Take Action Now To Support This Bill. Take the following actions starting TODAY.

CALL YOUR Legislator in Sacramento in the Senate and Assembly and let them know of your strong support of this bill.

CALL YOUR High School Parent/Teacher groups and ask them to support this legislation at meetings and any publications they send to parents.

Call YOUR high school/guidance staff and ask them to support the legislation.

College and potential college students still in high school. If you get involved in any issue this year, you really should make sure this legislation by Senator Dean Florez becomes a priority on your campus.

I am sure there are other ways to support this legislation. Use the comment section for your ideas.



This isn't a solution (0.00 / 0)
While this sounds well-intentioned, it does nothing to address the funding shortfalls UC and CSU campuses face. Locking in fee rates doesn't address the currently unaffordable levels of costs, and it won't ensure that there are enough courses and professors to meet demand. This bill would likely lead UC and CSU to cut enrollment, ensuring fewer students have access to higher ed.

The only way out of this is to find more revenue for higher ed.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
reform gov't but not education? (0.00 / 0)
By all means, we should do whatever we can to help out our schools whose performance has been declining. That's why this Fall I'm entering the UC Davis teaching credential program. However being ignorant of the clear benefits of educational reform will not help students. No matter what democratic party ideology asserts, the interests of teachers unions and even local school boards are often opposed to the interests of students. There is a clear trade off available where students get a better education (eg KIPP schools), but it requires teachers to work harder and be more accountable for their actions. Sure, go ahead and increase school funding, but only do so after we have made vital reforms in the effectiveness of our educational and political systems. Being principled about the interests of students will only give the democrats more cred when they oppose foolish "reforms" such as electricity and financial deregulation.  

No evidence backs your proposals (0.00 / 0)
None whatsoever. You're merely doing the work of the right-wing in trying to pit students against their teachers. California had a very high quality education system under the current rules and methods, including tenured teachers, back in the 1960s and 1970s when we properly funded education. I am a product of California public schools in the 1980s and 1990s and also received a very good education without ANY of these silly, pointless, destructive reforms you call for.

The difference was my school district, in Orange County, was well-funded (though not nearly as well-funded as others). Money really is all it takes.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
evidence and history do actually... (0.00 / 0)
Policy isn't good or bad because merely because some party has endorsed it. Check out what SRI and the hewlett foundation say about KIPP in the Bay Area: http://policyweb.sri.com/cep/p...

In the good old days of the 50s, 60s, and 70s, the US was a different country on many fronts including better income distribution, better education performance, and more manufacturing jobs. Changes in these factors since then have been driven not primarily by politics but by the evolution of the global political economy. There will always be scattered bubbles of wealth that flourish in a more competitive economy, but we cannot base national or state policy on the fact that districts like the OC can spend their way through their problems. No matter how much we'd like to, we cannot recapture the past, but through reforms we can better match up our institutions with the present and future. The sooner other democrats get on board with this, the more progress the 21st century will bring.


[ Parent ]
The state absolutely can spend our way through the problem (0.00 / 0)
These "education reforms" are all due to the collapse in funding for schools that was initiated by the passage of Prop 13 in 1978. Local districts found it nearly impossible to increase funding through taxation, and Sacramento was similarly limited in what it could do. Prop 13 forced a series of school budget cuts in the '80s, '90s, and now here in the '00s and '10s.

Had those cuts not occurred, and had the same level of investment of the 1960s and early 1970s been maintained with the same rate of increase, I suggest that we would not be seeing a need for reform in K-12 schools, as the experience of wealthy districts such as Carmel and others proves.

In the absence of public funding, there's an effort to try and undermine what made education successful and effective in the name of privatizing schools and/or applying the same failed neoliberal market-based theories that didn't work for the economy to schools, where they will also cause failure (as has happened in Chicago, where Arne Duncan's reign of terror began).

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
from a more structural point of view (0.00 / 0)
I agree that neoliberal market-based ideology has f-ed up a lot of America. However, education is not one of those areas. Look at the financial sector,  at the sale and distribution of electricity, at corporate behavior in general--neoliberal reforms in these areas have been so disastrous because they have opened up windows for large profit making at the public expense. Charter management organizations like KIPP and Aspire that are promoting a lot of these education reforms are hardly cash cows. In fact, 90 percent of education reform can be carried out while maintaining the public status of our schooling system. Our school system would actually be more "public" because these reforms are going to disproportionately advantage underserved students. I don't like being a pessimist, but the experience of other wealthy countries during their rapid growth phases suggests neither California nor the US is going to invest in educational or physical infrastructure on the level that occurred during the mid 20th century. Once passed the "investment" phase, it is left to democracies to make their delivery of a roughly constant quantity of public goods more efficient and equitable.  

[ Parent ]
Again (0.00 / 0)
You haven't shown any reason why these neoliberal reforms are necessary. I've shown that with proper levels of funding, students excel. We can have good schools with more funding. So if you're so interested in reform, why not do the simple and proven thing and give schools the money they deserve?

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
oh but I have (0.00 / 0)
Because of factors largely beyond the control of our national or state governments, there isn't enough money to buy our way out of our education problems. What money there is had better be leveraged through a system of comprehensive reforms, or else nothing is going to happen.  

[ Parent ]
There is plenty of money (8.00 / 1)
but reckless tax cuts and and loopholes have ensured it is increasingly concentrated into fewer and fewer hands.

You can find a measure of income distribution for different countries on line in the CIA World Fact Book. The Gini index measures the degree of inequality in the distribution of family income in a country. The more unequal a country's income distribution, the higher its Gini index.

In 2007, the US Gini index was 45 (in 1997 it was 40.8).

In 2006, the German Gini index was 27 (in 1994 it was 30).

In 2008, Mexico's Gini index was 48.2 (in 1998 it was 53.1)

Camaroon 46.1, Sweden 23, China 41.5.

from the CIA Factbook: "The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world...."

Don't yap about "not enough money" it's a question of allocation. Will we believe in and support excellent public education or not? Perhaps you'd prefer to live in a Banana Republic, which is where California and the U.S are headed if we don't get our collective heads out of our butts and do a reality check soon.

Guess I still have San Francisco hippie values, although I'm an engineer


[ Parent ]
succinct (0.00 / 0)


I'm union staff, but not a spokesperson for my union - all posts represent my views solely.

[ Parent ]
KIPP is a great program, but it won't scale (0.00 / 0)
I am very pleased with the progress that KIPP schools have made for many kids, but it's hardly the case that making every school a KIPP school would solve all our problems. KIPP depends on very high involvement and support from parents, for example, which I heartily support - but what should be done when the parents won't follow through? What should be done when the kids don't follow through?

I would love to see every school have class sizes of 20 with longer school days and longer school years. We can't do that in an environment where the school budgets are being cut 10% per year. It's not a matter of KIPP vs. traditional.

As far as teachers' unions go, it's conflicts that make the news, not the times when everything is going smoothly or where teachers and administrators are getting along well.

My experience is that most teachers want to succeed, and they want the satisfaction of high performing students. They need the tools to do this, which include enough money to pay the mortgage, control to use their professional judgement about what and how to teach, opportunities for collaboration with peers and professional training, and parents and students who are willing and ready to learn. They want to be valued and appreciated as professionals.

Often the conflict is about these other issues rather than a naked grab for cash.

Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!


[ Parent ]
This is a good story about accountability (8.00 / 2)
http://www.jamievollmer.com/bl...
The Blueberry Story: The teacher gives the businessman a lesson

"If I ran my business the way you people operate your schools, I wouldn't be in business very long!"

I stood before an auditorium filled with outraged teachers who were becoming angrier by the minute. My speech had entirely consumed their precious 90 minutes of inservice.  Their initial icy glares had turned to restless agitation. You could cut the hostility with a knife.

I represented a group of business people dedicated to improving public schools. I was an executive at an ice cream company that became famous in the middle1980s when People Magazine chose our blueberry as the "Best Ice Cream in America."

I was convinced of two things.  First, public schools needed to change; they were archaic selecting and sorting mechanisms designed for the industrial age and out of step with the needs of our emerging "knowledge society".  Second, educators were a major part of the problem: they resisted change, hunkered down in their feathered nests, protected by tenure and shielded by a bureaucratic monopoly.  They needed to look to business.  We knew how to produce quality. Zero defects! TQM! Continuous improvement!

In retrospect, the speech was perfectly balanced - equal parts ignorance and arrogance.

As soon as I finished, a woman's hand shot up.  She appeared polite, pleasant - she was, in fact, a razor-edged, veteran, high school English teacher who had been waiting to unload.

She began quietly, "We are told, sir, that you manage a company that makes good ice cream."

I smugly replied, "Best ice cream in America, Ma'am."

"How nice," she said. "Is it rich and smooth?"

"Sixteen percent butterfat," I crowed.

"Premium ingredients?" she inquired.

"Super-premium! Nothing but triple A."  I was on a roll.  I never saw the next line coming.

"Mr. Vollmer," she said, leaning forward with a wicked eyebrow raised to the sky, "when you are standing on your receiving dock and you see an inferior shipment of blueberries arrive, what do you do?"

In the silence of that room, I could hear the trap snap....  I was dead meat, but I wasn't going to lie.

"I send them back."

"That's right!" she barked, "and we can never send back our blueberries.  We take them big, small, rich, poor, gifted, exceptional, abused, frightened, confident, homeless, rude, and brilliant.  We take them with ADHD, junior rheumatoid arthritis, and English as their second language. We take them all!  Every one! And that, Mr. Vollmer, is why it's not a business.  It's school!"

In an explosion, all 290 teachers, principals, bus drivers, aides, custodians and secretaries jumped to their feet and yelled, "Yeah! Blueberries! Blueberries!"

And so began my long transformation.

Since then, I have visited hundreds of schools. I have learned that a school is not a business.  Schools are unable to control the quality of their raw material, they are dependent upon the vagaries of politics for a reliable revenue stream, and they are constantly mauled by a howling horde of disparate, competing customer groups that would send the best CEO screaming into the night.

None of this negates the need for change. We must change what, when, and how we teach to give all children maximum opportunity to thrive in a post-industrial society. But educators cannot do this alone; these changes can occur only with the understanding, trust, permission and active support of the surrounding community. For the most important thing I have learned is that schools reflect the attitudes, beliefs and health of the communities they serve, and therefore, to improve public education means more than changing our schools, it means changing America.



Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

[ Parent ]
That's a fantastic story (0.00 / 0)
One that should be repeated more often.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

[ Parent ]
One more thing (0.00 / 0)
I think most people believe in accountability. Most people want to do a good job.

One of the biggest problems in education today is that the tools we use for measurement are deeply flawed. In California, we compare this year's 3rd graders to last year's 3rd graders, and if this year's crop isn't doing better, it must be the teacher's failure.

The test themselves are designed not to be a steady bar that each child must cross, but as a normed test, where if too many students get a question right, no one cries, "Hooray, our teachers are teaching and our students are learning." Instead, what happens is that that questions is deemed to be too easy and it is removed from the test, to be replaced with a question that generates more wrong answers.

Never mind the whole issue of whether you get a good snapshot of a child's learning from a timed scantron multiple choice test during one high stakes week in April.

Figure out a way to measure accurately and objectively a teacher's true worth, and you'll do a great service for education.

Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!


[ Parent ]
Check out Oakland Small Schools (0.00 / 0)
My daughter teaches at a small public school in east Oakland situated in the middle of the most terrible poverty and crime. Most of the children start with limited or no English and murders have happened in sight of the school. Yet they maintain class sizes of 20, and 85% of her class tested proficient or advanced in math. The parents are poor and speak little English, but they are just as involved in the school as middle class parent are.

This school was made possible by an initiative passed by Oakland voters to raise taxes to fund the small schools. As a follow-up, the Oakland Small Schools Foundation has raised $10 million for these schools in the past 7 years. The success of the school is based on the commitment and dedication of the principal, teachers, parents and the kids themselves. The foundation for that success was money.

Funding cuts are impacting this school as well as all the others. But think about it, this is OAKLAND, where according to conventional wisdom nothing good ever happens. This success is a matter of expectations, commitment and CASH.

Guess I still have San Francisco hippie values, although I'm an engineer


[ Parent ]
Privatization (0.00 / 0)
Robert, thank you for support of March4 actions.  Indeed students were impressive.

I would, however, like to share my concern about KIPP.  Yes, test scores of KIPP students are relatively high compared to low performing schools.  But this is to be expected because the comparison is biased.  KIPP parents and students select the school and in the process make a commitment to above average effort.  Also, studies show that many underperforming students drop-out and are removed from the test population.  

Beyond this, there is concern that instructional methodology is closer to testprep than the enriched learning environment of Obama's Sidwell School.

But, to return to the greater question, the assumption that U.S. public education needs revision, I pose: How can the U.S. Asian subgroup (many of whom are not fluent English speakers) score as high on international comparisons as monocultural, monolingual Japanese or Korean students?  My answer is that U.S. public education is actually quite good and, given the diversity and poverty of U.S. students, U.S. public education is the best in the world.  

Cheers!
Marc  


Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Get discounted bestsellers at Barnes & Noble.com!

Advertisers


-->
California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox