How It's Done In the Seattle School District

School Board Meeting Wednesday June 27

1hr for Public Comment

8:30 School Board Convenes to Discuss and Vote on Actions

Action #1 Student Enrollment Realignment Plan

Action #2 Allocate $750,000.00 to hire a Curriculum Alignment Consultant





Action #1 Encompasses all of the issues having to do with where students get to go to school based on where they live and the services that must be provided to accommodate them. This means all schools offer inclusive classrooms to accommodate all special education students and all schools offer inclusive classrooms to accommodate ELL students. On the other hand it does not mean that all schools offer inclusive classrooms to accommodate APP students and it does not mean that all schools offer inclusive classrooms to accommodate Spectrum students. These students still get bussed to special service centers. And it grandfathers siblings of students who are already in favorite choice schools no matter where they come from to displace students who live in the geographic regions from which their local school draws.

Steve Sundquist District VI School Board Member was heard saying, "The whole success of this realignment of students to go to their local schools is predicated on every school offering the same high quality education."



Action #2 $750,000.00 of Gates grant money to be allocated to hire a curriculum alignment consultant to supplement and guide the current curriculum alignment team at the Seattle School District office to fully align all high school curriculum to meet "College Readiness Standards" part of the long term strategic plan which provides a common curriculum, with common standards and expectations for all students.



A lone man with a white goatee stands in protest as the school board asks questions about the purpose of the expenditure of these funds.



Director Harium Martin-Morris asks the curriculum staffer why they need to spend this money suggesting that she had already done all this work. The curriculum staffer responds that we've only started it for Language Arts and Math and we are understaffed to do it for Social Studies and World Languages and more. We need some professional to lead us through the process of curriculum adoption, to spearhead our effort to align all of our curriculum so teachers know exactly what we want them to teach and so they can be held accountable for insuring that all students learn what is expected of them without differentiation, the same standard for all. This way we can have accountability to our goal of all students achieving a "college readiness" curriculum. We need some professional to lead us through the process of curriculum adoption to insure that all schools teach from the same materials.

Director Peter Mairer expresses concern that there was a great deal of concern about the Language Arts curriculum adoption. The staffer indicates that her and the superintendantent vetted the program pieces in front of Roosevelt High School and they seemed satisfied that if a teacher wanted to vary from the curriculur demand he/she could bring their lesson plan in front of a committee and argue that it accomplishes the same thing and it could be passed on by the committee.

Director Sherry Carr asks the staffer if in the discussion with Roosevelt there had been any discussion about site based decision making. The staffer appeals to the superintendant without help and answers there wasn't much discussion of this but Roosevelt seemed pleased with what they were hearing. We certainly will be looking for input, none of these things have been worked out yet.

Director Mary Bass asks why only Roosevelt was consulted. The staffer responds that Roosevelt asked for the audience.

Director Peter Mairer asks the superintendant what role the School Board is being asked to play in this. He thought there was a day for curriculum overview to be discussed next Tuesday and here they are already being asked to fund this without being fully clear on what exactly is meant by curricular alignment.

Director Steve Sundquist expresses concern that though he is certainly for alignment what he is uncomfortable with is how far does this alignment range that he would be much more comfortable exploring this in depth then passing this without fully understanding what changes in curriculum we are looking for.


Superintendant Goodloe Johnson explains that all of this discussion about text book adoption while relevant because it will be influenced by this is not the central piece of the recommendation. The central piece of the recommendation is to get a professional in here to help us get our "College Readiness" curriculum aligned so that all students will have access to the same curriculum.



President Michael DeBell making the final profferment suggests that there are too many unanswered questions. What he hears from the conversation that the movement that is being suggested is moving too fast and too far from where schools had been thinking that they were doing something special to curriculum being mandated. That it is in the best interest of the board to attend the full day conference on Tuesday



Director Cheryl Chow speaking out of turn says unfortunately she won't be in town for the conference but as the only educator among them having been a principal that when non-educators hear things like this are having a knee jerk reaction to curriculum alignment, it does not mean that teachers will not be able to bring in supplemental work or be creative.



President Michael DeBell Calls for the vote



The man in the white goatee respectfully sits down having done his best to show incredible discontent at the suggestion that all of the curriculum decision making be centralized. Thinking to himself, where is the teacher in all this discussion?



The Vote is taken



Peter Mairer Aye

Martin Morris No

Steve Sundquist Aye

Mary Bass No

Sherry Carr No

Cheryl Chow Aye

Michael DeBell Aye



4 Aye 3 Nos



$750,000.00 from the Gates Money was approved to turn curriculum alignment over to a professional educational consultant to work with the district staff to come up with their plan which Tim Ames sent you or can be found at the Seattle School District Sight.



The Man with the white Goatee leaves, throwing all of the papers he had gathered in the meeting into the garbage can to express his disgust at a process where despite the board members own obvious reservations were willing to let this major transformation of how curriculum alignment is to be done and by whom become the order of the day funded by the Gates Foundation, the same group which funded the now failed small schools movement.



The man in the white goatee could only ponder, "What do teachers in the classroom have to do with teaching anyway?"



I will follow this lengthy story with my commentary on the next post. But this is how it is done in the Seattle School District. This is what Gates money does. If it was $750,000.00 of their own. No way No how but since it is free money who needs to consult teachers just pretend that you have a real professional doing it for you and that is what it will make it good. Superintendant Goodloe Johnson said that you know we are just receiving advice from the consultants and we can take what we like and leave what we don't. Just like she kept what she liked in the McKenzie Report which now has been used to justify everything in the "Excellence For All" five year plan.



SHMUEL Aka The Man in the White Goatee. The lone voice silenced by the rules of the school board as the railroad running through the school board members, non-educators, who are clearly outmatched by a Superintendant that can spew out phrases like "College Readiness" like its something new and to which the hapless board members nod in obeisance.

The Coming Summer

If you've become used to my inflammatory rhetoric this post may disappoint you. Sometimes you have to be in the forefront of new ideas and new actions and sometimes you have to realize what you know and what you don't know and when it is time to begin to rely on the people and organizations that are around you to do for us what we have affiliated with them to do for us.



Today, June 15th, at the last meeting of the SEA representative assembly I was about as quiet and unconfrontational as most of you will ever say you have seen me. The meeting was at West Seattle High School which is no doubt a beautiful facility. We were organized into regions as opposed to grade level; the NE part of Seattle instead of Highschool. Each grouping of tables had appointed to it a representative from the WEA who has been brought in from Olympia specifically to help us organize our region for the upcoming General Assembly meeting on August 31st where we will vote either to approve the new contract or approve going on strike September 9th, day one of students back in school.



It was a rather awesome feeling walking into our rep assembly and seeing all these "suits" from the WEA main office in addition to the 8 Uniserve members that have been specifically assigned to Seattle. After months of struggling with the sometimes clumsy dealings of our SEA leadership, who are all new, and unfortunately are being confronted with this major contract negotiation with a totally new administration who comes from a state where there is no union organization, I was somehow comforted to see all of these bargain worn veterans of the WEA, who have been brought in to help us negotiate a better contract. In plain English then, we've got some good people behind us. And there's the rub.



These good people are behind us but they can not stand up for us. They can guide us and provide us methods for bringing about positive negotiations, but they can not do it for us. Sure we have a veteran WEA person at our helm in Glen Bafia, our executive director, and sure we have some old bargaining veterans at the table like Verleeta Wooten and John Dunn but the stakes have never been higher. The new Seattle School District administration has come to the table as if nothing has been going on in the Seattle School District before they got here and whatever was going on was inadequate and not up to the task. This is a different sort of administration from the one lead by John Stanford. John Stanford valued collaboration and valued the give and take between the on the job educators and administration. The union contract under which many of us have prospered if not financially at least professionally in terms of being recognized for the professionals that we are, is being summarily curtailed to be replaced by a contract where all decisions are made at the district level. And the district administration has a one size fits all approach to education code named "Excellence For All" the same plan she put in place at Charlston North Carolina with mixed results particularly in the central urban part of the district. (See the attached article.)http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003659942_charleston10m.html

Well, Marie Goodloe-Johnson, has drawn her line in the sand with her latest offer, "all or nothing" and the union responded "nothing" as there was nothing in the "all" part that was even remotely of interest financially or professionally for the educator. Just a litany of the "Excellence For All" mandates and to the extent that this has to do with the labor contract, it is all about holding the educators feet to the uncomfortable fire. A new time of business organization efficiency model, the next new best thing. And it is being presented as the solution to all even the things that are working because why? Because one size fits all.

Anyone who has taught anywhere in this district knows that not one size fits all anywhere, not across schools and not even within schools. There is so much that has to do with the educators professional judgement, because that teacher in the classroom, that is the person in the trenches. That is the person negotiating every new social fad, every new batch of young people being newly influenced by some other part of our free American society which may or may not be condusive to the classroom environment. It's the ground soldiers of education that are fielding the day to day battles, and while generals and presidents may set the agenda, the how to get it done is left to the man/woman in the classroom.

So this new bargaining, these new negotiations are not about money because there is no money. There is no money in the economy and there is no money in the state coffers so it can't be about money even though the continued refusal to pay the middle class a living wage is what has brought the American economy to where it is today. And if it is not about money, what could be so bad that come the end of the summer we will be looking at a contract and being asked to either approve it by our union or to walk away and sit out for awhile until a better contract is offered?

Well, you have always said to me that the teacher is not in it for the money. The teacher is in it for students and the classroom where he/she creates that special nurturing environment to attempt to get the most for every student in their care. So what is the August 31st vote going to be about? It's going to be about nothing less than the "Classroom" itself? These contract negotiations are a battle about who controls the classroom. Will the classroom be controlled by the district and its "Excellence for All" vision or will it be controlled by the educators who are out there every day seeking "Excellence from Everybody"? And which is going to be better for students, the grand scheme "Excellence for All" without distinction, a throw back to the industrial education of the early 20th century, or that "Excellence from Everybody" where that individual teacher is charged with creating as differentiated instruction as they can possibly fashion to appeal to each young and very distinct mind and person that comes under their care. This is what the battle over the summer is going to be about and by the sound of it, nobody is listening to anybody because each side knows what is best.

Well, since Marie Goodloe Johnson has been quoted as saying she never failed at anything while at Charlston County, N.C. I guess she has taken her position. She is right. And I guess that means we are wrong.

So, my friends, we have no choice. The battle lines have been drawn and its a battle over who will control the classroom. Will it be as Marie Goodloe Johnson wants it, "Excellence for All" which in all truth probably means "mediocrity for everyone" or will it be a classroom environment where teachers will feel free and unthreatened to take risks to try to reach every student and try to achieve that lofty and unreachable aspiration of "Excellence from Everybody" where everybody has their own sense of excellence and it is only the educator who sits with them daily who has the true capacity to help them identify their excellence and enable them to achieve it.

These are unnerving times and for my money I am putting my faith in the SEA/WEA to help us through this bargain. I had great conversations with some great WEA people and they said it to me plain; if we are organized and unified behind our bargaining unit and the Seattle School District knows that we are behind them our bargaining unit will have the power it needs to negotiate a contract that continues to resemble the contract we currently have where all district decisions, building decisions and classroom decisions are collaborations of administrative leadership and educational professional. The NEA/WEA/SEA has fought for years to create an environment of collaboration between Employer and Employee. Marie Goodloe Johnson comes to send the pendulum back 40 years, and it is her intent to do it in one bargaining negotiation.

Here's the good news. If we get organized over the summer and the Seattle School District senses our unity and senses the power of our organization and becomes responsive to who we are and what we believe is the right balance between administrative oversight and educator independence, then we will not have to go on strike come September 9th. A reasoned settlement between the many good ideas of Marie Goodloe Johnson and the many good relationships between administration and educators that we have in Seattle will be fashioned into an even better school district. But the line has been drawn in the sand. So we must stand on our side. We must stand strong and unified. Our vision of good education is not in contradiction with Marie Goodloe Johnson and her new administration but how we are to work together to achieve it whether in collaboration or beneathe the strong arm of tyranny in this regard we are as far apart as ever.

I look forward to your comments. You know you can say your piece any time and liven up this blog. Have a great summer educators. You deserve it.

SHMUEL Willner

Wild Cat Strike

Dear Friends,
If you are paying attention to the emails coming furiously back and forth, you can't help but notice that the current Superintendant is intent upon breaking the union and has no interest in negotiating in good faith. She uses her office of public affairs communications through the email to explain her anti-union activities to teachers and staff who may or may not understand the contract in an effort to supersede the union. If you have gone to the Seattle School District's website and evaluated the current proposals by the Seattle School District, they are intent on clumsily gutting the previous contract and inserting willy nilly language about the 5 year strategic plan and the District Improvement Plan and the Continuing School Improvement Plan while till leaving in the language about Academic achievement plans and transformation plans. If you took the time to evaluate our WASL scores over the past 10 years you would also see continued improvement year after year which would suggest that there is no reason to be gutting the contract and starting over in the way the Superintendant intends. These are not friendly or collaborative rumblings from the district and they are certainly being done without the consent of our collective bargaining agency or meaningful input from BLTs. As we look forward to the coming negotiations it appears that the Superintendant is intent upon steam rolling over the union and based on their preparation and the SEA's lack of preparation for what was coming their way, it is not hard to imagine that the SSD will be getting its way in these negotiations. We will get nothing except reduced wages and more liability for improving student performance, while the district will get a sense of limitless power. Perhaps it is time to let the superintendant know that we, the employees of the Seattle School District, are out here and we have not only been doing a good job based on improving test scores but that the way we work in Seattle is through collaboration not confrontation. Perhaps, we should consider a wild cat strike and leave our posts right now and let the Superintendant figure out how to run her school district without us. Perhaps if she sees that her confrontational ways are non-productive now and will actually honestly invite our Collective Bargaining Agency to the table to have meaningful input, we might avoid an extended Strike at the open of the new year. Based on how things are going, she simply doesn't care what we have to say.

SHMUEL

Top Down Management Destroying Site-Based-Management

Dear Hale Teachers,
Earlier in the year I reported that Bellevue went on strike over not only salary but the idea that the district would determine the curriculum and all teachers would be required to teach the same thing. The Bellevue strike was successful.
Not more than a month ago, the Seattle School District without any consultation with the Leadership Committee, composed of themselves and representatives of the SEA, went forward and decided without any consultation with the BLT's of any of the schools that they were going to mainstream all of special education into the regular classrooms. Most recently the Language Arts department has been informed that all of the High Schools must use the same books. Our union was late in responding to the inclusive SPED program and the Union was not even aware that there was an agenda to make the LA curriculum offerings common across the district.
I communicated with the SEA president to find out if they were going to file an unfair labor practice action against the district for being in clear violation of Article II of our Collective Bargaining Agreement which institutes site-based management leadership system under which we are organized. The SEA's response was that they were not informed of the LA move but that the BLT's of each school should do everything they can to assert their rights under the contract.
I have informed the Hale Senate president that these intrusions upon the BLT's authority are grievable violations of the contract and that we at Hale should file a grievance and seek exemption from the District driven agenda's because we have accomplished the goals of our academic achievement plan and are showing continued progress in these efforts.
The SEA informed me that a similar grievance was brought on behalf of West Seattle High School and that, it was not successful.
What is happening here is that the superintendant's office is making programming decisions with total indifference to the terms of our contract. The SEA believes that the only way we will be able to stop this encroachment upon our Contracted rights to determine our curriculum offerings is through grass roots level organizing and real resistance to the change, whether that means work stoppage as it turned out successfully in Bellevue or negotiated settlement with the district that requires that they reestablish our organizational structure and that all actions that have been taken outside that structure be made null and void.
It is clear that if we don't start standing up for our indepence in knowing what is best for kids at the local level then soon everything will be offered from down town not for the benefit of the kids but for the benefit of the district to save money and to commoditize teachers and what they teach.
At the end of the day, if we don't start speaking up now to both the district and the SEA, that we will not be able to speak up for anything to preserve what little autonmy we have as teachers and a site.
Bellevue struck over these matters and won. Is it time to start talking strike around the Seattle School district and see how much longer they are going to act without the involvement of the Teacher in their decision making process?
It's a valid question. It begs the question is there anything left at Hale that we should try to preserve, like CES principles, or is it just time to throw out what we have done and start once again with the latest in remedies to fix "all the problems with School."

What do you think?

DO SEATTLE SCHOOL TEACHERS HAVE TENURE?

Does the term "tenure" apply to the public school teacher in the state of Washington? The answer is unequivocably "NO". We have NO contracted rights to "tenure". "Tenure" is a term applied to the ranks of University professors and there, indeed, they get "tenure". In the case of university professors "tenure" is an important piece in enabling Universities to hold on to top quality professors (not necessarily top quality teachers) and it enables professors to focus much more on their research and the things that they do to bring dollars into the university while not being at risk every year of looking for a new teaching position. But what about Public School Teachers?

Perception and Reality are absolutely different in this case and any time, at least, the Seattle School District wants to show the Seattle Stakeholders that it can remove ineffective teachers it can do so within the construct of the way the contract is written today. As a matter of fact a teacher in the professional growth cycle (PGC) has much less contracted protections then does a teacher on the performance growth cycle, which is effectively a probationary period for new teachers with less than four years experience. As the contract is written, an administrator can place a teacher on the PGC with nothing more than an informal assessment. This is not the case with a teacher on the performance growth cycle who must have two formal observations and post observations before they can be put on probation.

The public perception that it is the NEA or WEA or SEA, these monolithic union enterprises, which are protecting incompetent teachers is a misapprehension of the facts at least in the state of Washington. Both the School Districts and the Union are conscribed to conform with the laws of the state of Washington as set forth in the common school manual. Under Title 28 of the common school manual section 28A.405.100, the state is very specific as to the minimum criteria upon which a certificated employee must be evaluated. "For classroom teachers the criteria shall be developed in the following categories: Instructional skill; classroom management, professional preparation and scholarship; effort toward improvement when needed; the handling of student discipline and attendant problems; and interest in teaching pupils and knowledge of subject matter." If a teacher is able to show competence in these areas then they are not subject to probation and their contracts are automatically renewed. This automatic renewal of contract is both a convenience to the district and the employee and insures a consistent teaching force year after year. This is the reality of what is the teachers' "tenure".

The laws of the state of Washington put the burden on the employer to prove that a teacher is incompetent in any of these areas before they can be put on probation and terminated. It is the state of Washington that has put up protections for the classroom teacher and it is the obligation of the District and the Union to conform their evaluation system to those protections. As these are the minimum standards, it is within the purview of the District and the Union through the collective bargaining contract to add other reasons for which a classroom teacher can be evaluated, put on probation and terminated. In our last contract the district and the union without a vote of the membership added to the evaluation criteria something like "incompatibility". If a teacher is "incompatible" with the Seattle School District program, or building they can also be terminated. This additional clause has already given the SSD extraordinary latitude in being able to terminate teachers and with the new Mackenzie report pointing out the deficiencies in administrative oversight of its teaching staff, it is most certain that, all of the clauses will be used to begin to move underperforming and problem teachers out the door.

In our email discussions, the case of the Superintendent of the Washington D.C. schools put out the challenge to her union and her teachers that if they would automatically subject themselves to probation then she would make the effort to raise their salaries to 100-130k securing funding from private sources. Our Collective Bargaining Agreement, already enables the district to put teachers easily on probation. Our district need not offer us any improvement in our salary schedules to begin to take action against underperforming teachers.

SHMUEL

Show Me The Money

So the district and the union are already beginning to position themselves for this year's contract negotiations and I have already gotten the one-two punch as to why there will be no effort to substantially change our compensation in this year's contract negotiations. The right hit to the side of the head was a mind numbing announcement that the SEA-SSD at the conclusion of our five year contract had finally arrived at the agreed upon goal for raising educators salaries in the city of Seattle to be among the top five highest paid districts in the state. The announcement was that this year between the 4.4% state increase in the coming year and the 5.1% increase that the Seattle School District tagged on to our salary this year, that the SEA and SSD could claim a total success in their negotiations showing that we are now the highest paid district for beginning teachers and the 5th highest paid district for veteran teachers. Woo Hoo SEA-SSD. A promise made is a promise kept. But WAIT let's take a look

AT the GOOD FAITH EFFORT

So after the applause at the SEA's first representative assembly died down, I had time to think about just how significant was this raise. There were two points that were also discussed that made me a little less enthusiastic then the rest of my colleagues at the meeting. The first point was that fully 1/3 of the growth in our salaries over the past five years to bring us up from 12th in the state to where we are now was provided in this year alone. This means that for the first four years of our negotiated contract we still floundered around at the lower end of the district comparisons. What we can see here is not a real good faith effort. A good faith effort would have shown meaningful and sequential growth in our salary schedule, not the waiting till the last possible year to come up with 1/3 of the money. Along this same line when the question was asked where we were on the comparative pay scale with other districts it turned out that we are getting paid exactly $1.00 more than the sixth highest paid teachers (Lake Washington). Again this doesn't seem to me to be in the spirit of what is meant when we negotiate that we will be in the top five when we are just slipped over the sixth place group just to say we made it. And for my money, I just want everyone to know that SEATTLE is the richest district in the STATE, has on average the hardest teaching environment in the state, has the highest cost of living in the state and educators in this district should always be number one when it comes to being in comparison with other districts around the state.

So I'm not so excited about the good faith effort on the part of the SSD to come through on what we negotiated but lets look simply at what they have done in terms of going into this year's coming compensation discussions. What can the district and the SEA tell educators when they come in force and say it is time to pay us what we deserve? Well they can go to the papers and everywhere and tell the world that Seattle Teacher's are just plain greedy. "When the world is in a major financial melt down the teachers want another raise after they just got 9.5%." That is great PR for the district and great PR for the union but it is not so good for educators who know that they remain highly underpaid and they have to sit down and negotiate a new salary schedule for not just the coming year but for however many years they want to make this next contract for. PLEASE DON'T LET THEM NEGOTIATE ANOTHER FIVE YEAR CONTRACT. If this had been a 3 year contract which is the normal length of contracts we would have been negotiating at the top of a economic market cycle instead of the bottom.

Ok, that was mind numbing blow to the head punch one, but I hope you have unnumbed yourself so we can unbend you from the strike to the solar plexus from punch 2. But first let's take a look

Inside the Numbers

So I got my first pay check, and I have been working for 9 years and my monthly take home pay never eeks its way out of the 3,000.00 plus something category. So I was figuring with my new step 10 and 9 years experience and being on the highest track (except phd) available and this new 9.5% raise I would really finally crack the $4,000.00 mark but no such luck. The actual numbers are in 2007-08 my take home (net after taxes and before and after tax deductions) salary was $3,241.61 per month calculated off of an hourly salary of $35.43 for a grade 900 and step 09. My 2008-09 take home salary with all of the same deductions is $3,588.10 calculated off of an hourly salary of $38.36.

So let's look at the numbers. Remember we are looking for my normal step increase and my 9.5% addition to my salary.

My step increase from 35.43 to 38.36 is an 8% increase in salary from the state. (So I am looking for a total increase of 17.5% to my take home.)

The incremental difference in my monthly salary from one year to the next was $341.49 or a 10.5% increase. Wow, that's great but wait of that 10.5% increase 8% has to be accounted to my step increase on the statewide salary schedule. That only leaves 2.5% increase from whatever wages I had last year. 2.5% is way less than inflation, particularly this year. So what happened? SHOW ME THE MONEY.

Well it turns out that the cost of my medical has gone up 58% and my tax burden has gone up 22% and my union dues have gone up 3% (that's an interesting number. If my wages have gone up 9.5% how come my union dues have not gone up proportionately)

So the facts are the facts. After all of the confetti and balloons come down the facts are that our wages have increased no more than 3% because the rest has been eaten up by medical costs and taxes. And this number even includes the 4.1% increase provided to us by the state. SHOW ME THE MONEY.

So now for that hit to the solar plexus I was promising you. Well have you been reading your emails from the superintendent over the last couple of days. The first one congratulated us on our magnificent raise in wages but that we shouldn't expect to see that repeated. The second one came with a cry about the financial weakness of the district and that they want to hold 17.5 million dollars in reserve. This email was accompanied by a not so obscure allusion to the possibility that we might have a riff this year. Ouch, right to the groin area.

Well, educators, if you have made it this far you are now informed and you are seeing the sides lining up. The SEA is claiming victory for teacher salaries and will be focussing on raising wages for parapros. The SSD is claiming to have given teacher's an enormous salary boost, not acknowledging that most of that boost has gone to cover increasing medical costs and taxes. And the teacher's, WHERE ARE YOU? WHERE IS YOUR VOICE?

Well, I'm a teacher and here's what I have to say about it.

In the volume II letter of the HaleSeaOrganization newsletter I sent you a comparison of professional salaries across the country and what you saw was teachers can expect beginning salaries of 30-40k while any other professions that require anywhere near the education, ongoing training and expertise that teachers have are commanding 60k in their first year. (60k is what we teachers top out at after 15 years).

So what do I have to say.

SHOW ME THE MONEY.

I DON'T WANT TO HEAR YOUR PROBLEMS. JUST FIND THE MONEY AND IF YOU CAN'T FIND THE MONEY THEN I GUESS YOU'RE RESERVE FUND WILL JUST HAVE TO GO WAY DOWN. RESERVE FUNDS ARE FOR WEALTHY DISTRICTS THAT PAY THEIR EDUCATORS AND WHEN THEY ARE DONE FULFILLING THAT OBLIGATION THEN THEY CAN CONSIDER HAVING A RESERVE FUND. SO DON'T TELL TEACHER'S YOU DON'T HAVE THE MONEY WHEN INFLATION IS 7 TO 8% AND THE SALARIES THAT THEY ARE GETTING ARE AN EMBARRASMENT TO ANY PERSON WHO SEEKS TO CALL THEMSELVES A PROFESSIONAL. IF TEACHERS ARE NOT RESPECTED IN OUR SOCIETY YOU MIGHT LOOK AT THE FACT THAT IN OUR SOCIETY RESPECT COMES WITH INCOME. WE WANT RESPECT, WE DESERVE RESPECT AND WE SEEK TO BE RESPECTED AMONG THE AMERICAN COMMUNITY. PAY US OUR WORTH. PAY US FOR THE PROFESSIONALS WE ARE AND PAY US COMMENSURATE WITH THE SERVICE WE PROVIDE TO OUR SOCIETY.

SHOW US THE MONEY

A PROFESSIONAL WAGE FOR A PROFESSIONAL

SHMUEL

Bellevue Teachers Victorious for the Teaching Profession

Hey All,
Just a quick note to extend a hand of congratulations to our fellow teachers in Bellevue who look to be getting a 5% raise over three years but even more importantly the right to utilize their professional and creative skills as teachers when it comes to constructing and delivering lessons in the classroom. The idea that the Bellevue School District had to standardize the teaching day was an absolute assault on the profession of teacher. We have to be proud of our fellow teachers in Bellevue who took the risk and the cost of a work stoppage to prevent a movement towards standardization in the classroom which takes away all identity from the teacher and makes him a mindless deliverer of some canned curriculum. We are professionals. We are professionals. We have master's degrees and hours upon hours of continuing education to improve upon our skills. Our degrees and our ce requirements are far more exacting then what is required from most professions in the business world. We are the consummate professionals. Bellevue teachers took a stand for our Profession. We must applaud and thank them for their valour and their victory. We are in their debt. Thank the next Bellevue Teacher that you meet. Go BEA.
SW