Dave Thompson – longtime KSTP-AM talk show host, and now the State Senator for the Lakeville area – wanted to do what a good legislator does; he wanted to reach out to his constituents, even the ones that didn’t likely agree with him.

And so he tried to contact the Education Minnesota (teachers’ union) members in the Lakeville area.  Unfortunately, he tried to do it via the local teachers’ union.

It didn’t work well:

I sent the questions for pre-approval to your union representative, Mr. Don Sinner, in an attempt to work cooperatively. I had also hoped to use his “blast” e-mail list in order to save work for my Legislative Assistant. He refused to allow me to use the list, but gave me no indication he intended to sabotage the survey. We did the work necessary to send the survey to each of your e-mail addresses individually.

And so the emails went out to the teachers – to help their elected representative better represent them.

Right?

What do you think?  Thompson’s a Republican, and this is the Teachers Union:

It has come to my attention that Mr. Sinner sent you scripted responses, so that I will be unable to gain the information I seek. You do not need to send Mr. Sinner’s remarks, but I would very much like to hear from you.

As you may know, I am on the Senate Education Committee, and recently presented a significant piece of legislation to the Committee. I sent the survey to you because I have a sincere desire to understand the viewpoints of educators in my district. I value your judgment, and am frankly shocked that Mr. Sinner does not believe you should have the right to communicate directly with the people who represent you at the Capitol. He obviously does not have the confidence in your judgment and professionalism that I do.

Dave might look a bit naive with that statement – but I’m pretty sure he’s just being civil.  He knows as well as we do that the union has nothing to do with “professionalism”.  It’s about compliance, about turning teaching into a repeatable, factory-like process, and about wresting political power for teachers.

Here’s the email Sinner sent to his subjects (I’ll add emphasis):

The EML Executive Council on Monday Evening respectfully declined to forward this survey from Sen. Thompson to our members. They did however direct me to provide Sen. Thompson with the appropriate information which addresses each of his questions.

If Senator Thompson now chooses to send this survey directly to you, we would ask that you use this information to reply.

Stay Positive, Stay Professional, Stay United.

Because freedom is about unity!

I digress:

Sincerely,

Don Sinner

EM-Lakeville President

1) Do school teachers and administrators currently have the authority to effectively manage classroom behavior and expectations? Yes, there are no statutory issues here. The real problem is adequate, equitable, sustainable, and predictable funding which can provide the conditions necessary for teachers to effectively provide a quality education for all students.

2) Do you believe the current incentive system focusing only on “step and lanes” is the best option for school districts and teachers? Research shows, and most teachers agree, that as a teacher develops over time with effective professional development, they are more effective in the classroom and deserving of a commensurate pay increase. Research also shows that completion of relevant graduate degrees and/or National Board Certification also leads to higher student achievement.

This needs looking into.  I seem to recall that this is fragrant BS.  But I”ll have to check.

3) Do you think that entry-level teachers in different subject areas should all earn the same salary? Yes. there is best- practice research that shows the value of fine arts areas in improving not only the talents of the whole child, but also increasing achievement in the “core” subjects as well. This indicates that all teachers in all fields should be compensated on an equitable basis.

I’m seeing that “there is research” line a lot.  I need to fire off a letter to Mr. Sinner; I suspect that “research” came from reading EdMinn’s policy statement.

Because it’s certainly contradictory.  I nothing against arts and humanities teachers – it was music and German that really got me interested in learning and school, in junior high.  But if a district isn’t getting enough science and math teachers, the market would seem to tell one that the financial value of a math or science teacher is higher, and you need to pay more  for them.  The union, of course, wants the same rate for everyone, which is fiscally absurd.

4) Do you believe that the current two-variable approach (education and years teaching) to teacher salaries is a fair measure of the teacher’s value? The two-variable approach to compensating teachers is just one piece of a multifaceted approach to fairly compensating teachers. There should also be recognition for those who take on increased responsibilities in leadership roles, mentoring, and National Board Certification to name a few.

But the two variables are the big measuares, and Sinner is obfuscating.

5) Have students in your school benefited from the implementation of the “No Child Left Behind” law with its statewide standards, testing, and reporting?Yes and NO. Yes in that we are now focused on individual student data in making instructional decisions to meet their educational needs. No, because it has caused an unnecessary narrowing of curriculum which ignores the needs of the whole child. It has also caused a higher focus to be placed on facts rather than critical thinking skills and creative thinking. It has also caused an unnecessary diversion of limited resources into simply administering the mountain of testing that is required.

Dave and I may or may not agree on NCLB – I think it’s been a disaster, and for some of the same reasons Sinner cites.   The remedies, of course, are where we differ.

6) Is the current “needs based” funding formula equitable?Yes, there is a proper place for “needs based” funding. We must recognize the fact that not all students arrive at school ready to learn. We must provide the added resources to level the playing field for those students who come form a disadvantaged background such as poverty, no access to early childhood education, or english language learners.

This makes sense, if  you don’t read too far into it.

The problem is that the teachers union substitutes “resources” for “results”.  We’ve been pouring “resources” into all of those areas for decades; the unions’ results have fallen as fast as resources have risen.

7) Is there too much, too little, or the correct amount of federal government involvement in Minnesota’s education system? Too little in the fact that there is not full-funding of IDEA mandates. Too much in the area of NCLB and its’ punitive actions towards schools attempting to improve or in its’ model of measuring student growth.

“Give us the money, and don’t hold us accounable for spending or results”.

8) Do you support an increase in the compulsory school attendance age from 16 to 18? Yes, as long as there are options for students who progress quickly through the system to access PSEO, early graduation and options in a post-secondary institution.

This is just idiotic; it forces districts to fund educations for kids who are just taking up space, as well as forcing counties to waste money trying to chase them back into a classroom that, in some cases, they’re just not ready for, and in some cases never will be.  It’s a sad but true fact; there are kids that just aren’t temperamentally, mentally or socially tuned to classroom education.  There are many, many more that are cured of any interest in it by the hamfistedness of the “sit your ass in a chair and learn what we tell you” model of education.  Some of them will get an interest in it later in life.  Some will educate themselves.  Some won’t.  And keeping them jammed into seats in the classroom benefits nobody – not the kids who want out, not the kids who will be stuck in classrooms with a bunch of kids who are there because if they aren’t they’ll run afoul of their probation officer, and not the county taxpayers who have to pay for more county workers to chase the most difficult cases into the classroom (or into what passes for juvenile detention these days).

9) Should Early Childhood programs be given more attention, less attention, or be eliminated? Early Childhood needs to be funded equitably across the entire state to ensure all students enter school ready to learn. A plethora of research shows that the groundwork of early childhood and primary education (K-2) is necessary if children are to achieve at high levels throughout their academic careers. This research also shows that most students are unlikely to overcome a poor start.

There’s that “research” again.  There’s plenty of research that disagrees!

10) Should Early Childhood programs be given more attention, even if it means K-12 education funding grows at a decreased rate? The question is not whether ECFE funding should have a higher priority than K-12, it should be how can the state adequately fund both of these areas as well as Higher Ed. in order to support a vibrant economy and allow Minn. to compete in a 21st century global economy.

“Give us ALL the money we ask for, or the kids get it!”

11) Is teaching in Minnesota public schools a better or worse career than it was five years ago? Working with children is as rewarding as it always has been. However, due to the financial conditions and the “blame game”, teachers are no longer provided the necessary resources to effectively accomplish their goals, nor are they rewarded for positive outcomes. Can schools do better, yes, are they a categorical failure, no. Without adequate support of public education, we will lose our best and brightest teachers to other fields and ultimately our students will suffer.

“Pay us what we ask, and quit criticizing us!”

12) In an average Minnesota public school classroom, what should be an appropriate number of students?

Best-practice research shows:

15 in primary grades (K-2)

18 in intermediate grades (3-5)

20-25 at the secondary level (6-12) with no more than 28 before student achievement begins to decline.

Good luck, Dave.

This entry was posted by by Mitch Berg on Friday, January 28th, 2011 at 7:25 am and is filed under Education. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.