Showing posts with label Green Dot. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Green Dot. Show all posts
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Locke to fly flag with a Green Dot?
In a 5-2 vote, the LAUSD's BOE voted to allow Locke to bring it's charter petition in front of the board. It's not a Green Dot outpost, but soon could be. Interestingly enough, the LA BOE uses ward type representation, rather than at-large which is what I think is better.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Green Dot Contract Highlight!
As you know, Green Dot and the UFT have recently announced plans of their partnership to open a school together. I've stayed out of this one simply because I'm still in catch-up mode; I need to do more reading about it before I form a public opinion.
I was looking through their 2003-2006 contract (PDF) made availible on the EdWize website a few weeks ago, and found this nugget:
Personal property, which is to be used within the classroom for instructional
purposes, must be registered in the school office and authorized by the administrator
in charge before being brought onto the campus. All such items must be insured by
the unit member. The Board will be responsible for damages or theft to said items up
to the amount of the insurance deductible.
It brings to mind the possible permutations that could happen. Picture it, at the beginning of the school year, Dr. Homeslice is now teaching in a Green Dot school. He is setting up his room, as the Principal walks by with Green Dot founder Steve Barr on a surprise inspection.
"Dr. Homeslice, can I have a word with you?"
"Yes?"
"I noticed that you have some Garfield posters on your wall."
"Yes?"
"Did you fill out the requisite triplicate form for them in the school office?"
"Uh, no."
Steve Barr frowns.
"I see, Dr. Homeslice. You do have proof that these posters are insured, don't you?"
"Um...my insurance agent's been outta town."
"Dr. Homeslice, please report to my office immediatley and bring everything in your desk with you. You may have an AMU representative accompany you to this meeting."
I was looking through their 2003-2006 contract (PDF) made availible on the EdWize website a few weeks ago, and found this nugget:
Personal property, which is to be used within the classroom for instructional
purposes, must be registered in the school office and authorized by the administrator
in charge before being brought onto the campus. All such items must be insured by
the unit member. The Board will be responsible for damages or theft to said items up
to the amount of the insurance deductible.
It brings to mind the possible permutations that could happen. Picture it, at the beginning of the school year, Dr. Homeslice is now teaching in a Green Dot school. He is setting up his room, as the Principal walks by with Green Dot founder Steve Barr on a surprise inspection.
"Dr. Homeslice, can I have a word with you?"
"Yes?"
"I noticed that you have some Garfield posters on your wall."
"Yes?"
"Did you fill out the requisite triplicate form for them in the school office?"
"Uh, no."
Steve Barr frowns.
"I see, Dr. Homeslice. You do have proof that these posters are insured, don't you?"
"Um...my insurance agent's been outta town."
"Dr. Homeslice, please report to my office immediatley and bring everything in your desk with you. You may have an AMU representative accompany you to this meeting."
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
From Green Dot to Tom Green...
Yes, you know...the guy who had the show on MTV a while back (years ago, actually). Survived a bout with testicular cancer, and has....dropped off the radar? I don't know where he is now, but I do remember his stirring rendition of the "bum bum song". Heh.
Anyhow, I'm trolling YouTube to see if there's any new Hayward stuff (there isn't) and I come across this great clip of him. I think it's from his younger days, though it could have been from the Canadian teachers strike from a while back (yes, Tom is a Canuck). He's trying to "interview" striking teachers and they had no clue who he was...and then he does his Tom Green thing.
I think some hard-core unionists might be offended by it; I think it's just plain funny. It reinforces the idea, however humorously portrayed in this clip that if you're going to go on strike, you need to be able to articulate why you're on strike-- so does your rank and file. You need to be able to explain why you're on strike in a way for a person who knows nothing about the intricacies of your situation can understand and sympathize with you. You've gotta do it quick; soundbites are getting shorter and shorter, pretty soon there won't be much of anything left.
A great example of how not to act is the guy that they interview towards the end of the clip; I even started thinking he was a jerk, and I'd never cross that picket line in a million years.
Anyhow, I'm trolling YouTube to see if there's any new Hayward stuff (there isn't) and I come across this great clip of him. I think it's from his younger days, though it could have been from the Canadian teachers strike from a while back (yes, Tom is a Canuck). He's trying to "interview" striking teachers and they had no clue who he was...and then he does his Tom Green thing.
I think some hard-core unionists might be offended by it; I think it's just plain funny. It reinforces the idea, however humorously portrayed in this clip that if you're going to go on strike, you need to be able to articulate why you're on strike-- so does your rank and file. You need to be able to explain why you're on strike in a way for a person who knows nothing about the intricacies of your situation can understand and sympathize with you. You've gotta do it quick; soundbites are getting shorter and shorter, pretty soon there won't be much of anything left.
A great example of how not to act is the guy that they interview towards the end of the clip; I even started thinking he was a jerk, and I'd never cross that picket line in a million years.
Monday, April 09, 2007
Green Dots in LA.
I've been reading up a bit about the craziness in LA regarding Green Dot charters.
Reader's Digest Version: GD wanted to open 8 new schools in the Watts area, had to ask permission of the school board to do so. Green Dot's academics are sound, as are their finances; these are the two benchmarks the school must meet in order to be granted permission to open. Heck, the schools are even unionized-- not with UTLA, but through CTA. (I'd love to see a copy of the contract.) LAUSD SB voted no, 3 to 3 (one member abstained 'cause he worked for Green Dot). The criticism that's being leveled at the three nay-sayers is that they are supported by UTLA, and are even in their pockets-- which is why they voted no. The three no-voters were blasted by the LAT in an editorial a few days ago.
My take?
Well, it's easy to comment on a situation that isn't happening in your school district. It's easy to say, well the board should have done this, and the union shouldn't do this, nor should these people do this. So I enter into this post understanding that I could say the way things should be; but then I'd say something completely different if it came to my neck of the woods. It's not, so here goes.
The main reason that unions exist is for job protection of the members; this includes maintaining and enhancing the current salary, benefits and working conditions of the rank and file. Union leadership that failed to protect the jobs of its current members would quickly look around to see few, if any supporters and lose the next election, if a recall election were unable to be called due to the bylaws.
Very few substantive, lasting things in the edu-world these days are done without the involvement of someones legislature; therefore unions have transformed from organizing animals in the 60's and 70's to become political animals; therefore, unions understand the importance of organizing politically, supporting and funding candidates that agree with and support the issues that are important to them.
Having said that, let me analyze the Green Dot "event" that happened in LAUSD.
Quite simply put, whether you like it or not, UTLA (and its political support system) worked as it should have.
Charter schools = loss of money for public ed.
Loss of money for public ed= loss of jobs of teachers.
Loss of jobs of teachers= bad thing for the union (action must be taken).
Action needing to be taken / Sympathetic LAUSD School Board Members = Zero Green Dot Schools
When individual citizens elect or unseat SB members based on their interests, it's called democracy. When unions (democratic organizations, mind you) help elect or unseat SB members based on the issues that are important to them and they actually represent you, it's called bribery, "buying a school board member" or "being in the union's pocket".
Reader's Digest Version: GD wanted to open 8 new schools in the Watts area, had to ask permission of the school board to do so. Green Dot's academics are sound, as are their finances; these are the two benchmarks the school must meet in order to be granted permission to open. Heck, the schools are even unionized-- not with UTLA, but through CTA. (I'd love to see a copy of the contract.) LAUSD SB voted no, 3 to 3 (one member abstained 'cause he worked for Green Dot). The criticism that's being leveled at the three nay-sayers is that they are supported by UTLA, and are even in their pockets-- which is why they voted no. The three no-voters were blasted by the LAT in an editorial a few days ago.
My take?
Well, it's easy to comment on a situation that isn't happening in your school district. It's easy to say, well the board should have done this, and the union shouldn't do this, nor should these people do this. So I enter into this post understanding that I could say the way things should be; but then I'd say something completely different if it came to my neck of the woods. It's not, so here goes.
The main reason that unions exist is for job protection of the members; this includes maintaining and enhancing the current salary, benefits and working conditions of the rank and file. Union leadership that failed to protect the jobs of its current members would quickly look around to see few, if any supporters and lose the next election, if a recall election were unable to be called due to the bylaws.
Very few substantive, lasting things in the edu-world these days are done without the involvement of someones legislature; therefore unions have transformed from organizing animals in the 60's and 70's to become political animals; therefore, unions understand the importance of organizing politically, supporting and funding candidates that agree with and support the issues that are important to them.
Having said that, let me analyze the Green Dot "event" that happened in LAUSD.
Quite simply put, whether you like it or not, UTLA (and its political support system) worked as it should have.
Charter schools = loss of money for public ed.
Loss of money for public ed= loss of jobs of teachers.
Loss of jobs of teachers= bad thing for the union (action must be taken).
Action needing to be taken / Sympathetic LAUSD School Board Members = Zero Green Dot Schools
When individual citizens elect or unseat SB members based on their interests, it's called democracy. When unions (democratic organizations, mind you) help elect or unseat SB members based on the issues that are important to them and they actually represent you, it's called bribery, "buying a school board member" or "being in the union's pocket".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Counters
