Advocacy – JC Bowman

We Need Innovators, Not Disruptors, in Education

November 19, 2020 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Tennessee Education

Educators have to constantly fight against false premises that our public schools are failing, that educators are the problem, and that outsiders (usually non-educators) should take control of running our schools.

Harvard professor and businessman Clayton Christensen wrote The Innovator’s Dilemma in 1997. In the book, Christensen put forth a notion of “disruptive innovation” as a concept for business theory. Christensen’s theory is based on buying decisions made by businesses, not consumers according to Ben Thompson, a critic of this particular business theory.

Disruption is built on two varieties: low-end disruption and new-market disruption. The essential difference between the two is that low-end disruption focuses on overserved customers, whereas new-market disruption focuses on underserved customers. When it comes to government programs, such as public education, for example, every child is made to conform to the existing business model. When in fact, they may fall within both types of disruption. As we have seen, new technologies to assist educators have been neglected, and our state needs greater access to broadband for communities and schools. Granted, we are making a rushed effort to make adjustments, but during hurried efforts, mistakes are frequently made.

Tony Robbins clarified, “His theory worked to explain how small companies with minimal resources were able to enter a market and displace the established system.” Robbins added, “like most buzzwords, the term quickly took on a life of its own. Suddenly everyone in the workforce was ‘disruptive’ and/or ‘innovative.’” Education is the same way. We welcomed people who were out-of-the-box thinkers or had a business background. However, education is not always a precise science. In business, the bottom line is selling a good or service. In education, that good is someone’s child.

Mark Zuckerberg is famous for telling his Facebook development team, “Move fast and break things.” Phil Lewis in Forbes magazine asked the key questions about the concept of moving fast and breaking things. “What is it acceptable to break? Why? And under what circumstances?” The answers to those questions are critical. In education, moving fast may not always be the best interest of children. You may fix one thing and break three.

For example, in high school, we got a new principal. He believed that by cutting time between classes we could add to the instructional schedule. We went from 5 minutes to 4 minutes. That meant we could add an extra minute to every class. What did that do? It also angered students and teachers. It forced students in our very large high school to forgo a bathroom break, get to class, and then get permission to be excused to go to the bathroom. Rather than add time to class it took away time from class time. The goal may have been well-intentioned, but the end results were predictable. We changed back very quickly. So much for disruption.

Too many people simply bought into the jargon fostered by disruption innovation. They are so enthralled by breaking the rules of the game that they forget what game they are even playing, thus changing the objective of their particular business. Robbins points out that Christensen himself was so troubled with the misuse of his theory that he published a 2015 update in the Harvard Business Review on what the term “business disruption” really should encompass.

Every single attribute of business simply cannot be documented and measured. Lewis points out that “innovation is ultimately a human enterprise, to do with our ability to inspire each other, think creatively and collaborate.” We do not need disruption in education, as much as we need innovation. Education is a pathway to the future. It provides a foundation for life.

In public education we are succeeding, despite the challenges we face. Schools alone can never be fully responsible for the outcomes that our students achieve. Educators are the key to solutions that schools face, but they need more assistance to confront the serious societal problems. We must ask ourselves frequently: What kind of state or community do I want to live in, work in, and raise my family in? What kind of schools do we need? We need more innovators and fewer disrupters.

JC Bowman is executive director of Professional Educators of Tennessee

Next Steps for Tennessee

January 9, 2020 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Leadership, Legislation, Professional Educators of Tennessee

Running Towards Eternity.jpg

Traveling across the state in my role as Executive Director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, I talk with a lot of people interested in public education. One of the most common complaints is a lack of response from Governor Bill Lee or his team on specific education issues. It is problematic, and quite honestly has always been problematic in our state.

Better communication is always needed. I should know – I used to work for Governor Jeb Bush years ago, and communication is always a struggle for the executive branch despite best intentions.

I would still remind people to be patient with Governor Lee and his staff as we are still in year one; however, staff should now be settled into place, with processes and systems clearly established. We should expect better communication in year two.

Governor Lee laid out a fairly ambitious education agenda, and while our organization disagreed with some parts of it, he offered more specifics than his opponent in the election last November. He was clear in his support of vouchers from the day he announced his candidacy. It should have been of no surprise to policymakers or stakeholders. When surveyed, our members did not support vouchers.

His legislative victory with vouchers has yet to be implemented. This may prove challenging, as the program must be proven successful before any other future voucher program is considered. Members of the Tennessee General Assembly will demand proof of unmitigated success before any expansion or similar program is enacted. Cameron Sexton, a voucher critic, has now ascended to Speaker of the House. His track record would indicate that he is a strong supporter of public schools. This helps the governor moving forward on education policy changes needed in public education.

Other parts of the Lee campaign agenda likely won him most of his statewide support, and gave voters more specifics on which to hold him accountable. Candidate Lee suggested it was time to change the way our high schools operate. It was a bold policy suggestion, and as governor, Bill Lee should move forward on that front.

For the last 50 years, the way high schools have educated students has largely remained unchanged. Many business and community leaders believe the traditional high school is disconnected from the demands of the modern economy. They emphasize that graduates need additional skills to be successful in today’s workforce.

The State Collaborative on Reforming Education (SCORE) added: “Across Tennessee, students are learning in high schools using models developed for the needs of the 20th century rather than the workforce opportunities of the future. As a result, most Tennessee students do not graduate fully prepared to succeed in college, career, and life.”

We agree. Some of that is already in the works, through recent legislation. It is time we break down barriers that have held our teachers, school leaders, and school districts back from creative solutions necessary for the unique challenges of their communities. Increasing flexibility at the local level could lead to incredible innovations in our state.

State grants that allow local districts to fund high school redesign would be one manner in which to create change and address challenges schools would face as they transition from traditional models to a more flexible school model.

Another suggestion would be for the state to establish a pilot program for high performing districts by authorizing the State Board of Education to enter into a performance contract with school districts to grant them more flexibility. These high performing districts would be a school district in which a local school board agrees to comply with certain performance goals contained in a performance contract that is approved by the State Board of Education. In return for performance accountability, the district would be granted greater autonomy with both statutory and rule exemptions. This is an idea Governor Lee and his team should explore.

It is past time for the state to make good on its commitment to teachers. The Comptroller’s Office of Research and Education Accountability (OREA) proved that the state of Tennessee invested more than $300 million for teacher salaries in 2015-2018. Most of those dollars did not actually end up in pockets of classroom teachers. Generally, school districts employ more staff than are covered by the funding system utilized in Tennessee, known as the Basic Education Program (BEP). State and local dollars earmarked for salaries during those years were often spread over more teachers than the staff positions generated by the BEP.

The Tennessee General Assembly did address that school districts in the future must now report where salary increases are spent. Governor Lee included a $71 million increase for a “2.5 percent pay raise for teachers” for the fiscal year 2020. It is time to guarantee that teacher salaries, at the very least, match the cost of living increases faced by educators across the state.

Governor Lee has proven he will fight for what he believes in. It is time to come together to focus on the other education ideas that were discussed on the campaign trail. It is time to move forward on these issues to help all children, teachers, schools, and communities. Let the policy discussion begin. Communication is critical.

JC Bowman is executive director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, a non-partisan teacher association headquartered in Nashville.

Be a Bright Spot During a Dark Time This Thanksgiving

November 27, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, Holidays, JC Bowman, Leadership

Thanksgiving3

This year will mark the fact that I have had the opportunity to live through 56 Thanksgivings. I was born on a Sunday, November 24th, 1963, two days after the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Thanksgiving occurred on November 28th that year, the same as this year. It was a time, not unlike today, filled with political uncertainty. My mother told me I was the only child born that evening. Nurses and doctors were still in shock at the Kennedy assassination, but my birth was a bright spot during a dark time. I have always loved that story.

Presidents and Congresses from the beginning of our republic have designated days of thanksgiving and fasting. The Thanksgiving we celebrate annually in November was established by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and made into law by Congress in 1941. It is rooted in a 1621 event where Plymouth colonists and Wampanoag Indians shared an autumn harvest feast that is acknowledged today as one of the first Thanksgivings.

Rather than allowing fear and trepidation to dictate our state of mind here on the cusp of 2020, we should look at the great hope our country provides to the world. This Thanksgiving we need a more civil, honest discourse among ourselves, as families, friends and as countrymen. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was no stranger to political conflict in his day. King reminded us, “Hate is always tragic. It is as injurious to the hater as it is to the hated. It distorts the personality and scars the soul.” Hate breeds more hate, but love conquers all.

Rock singer Bono said in a Rolling Stone interview: “I don’t fear politicians or presidents. They should be afraid. They’ll be accountable for what happened on their watch.” Bono added, “It’s an amazing thing to think that ours is the first generation in history that really can end extreme poverty, the kind that means a child dies for lack of food in its belly. This should be seen as the most incredible, historic opportunity but instead, it’s become a millstone around our necks. We let our own pathetic excuses about how it’s ‘difficult’ justify our own inaction. Be honest. We have the science, the technology, and the wealth. What we don’t have is the will, and that’s not a reason that history will accept.”

Poor and starving people are not particularly appealing news stories, but fighting poverty is and should be a moral imperative for citizens in our cities, state, and nation. Teachers are often on the frontlines fighting battles with children who go to bed hungry and wake up starving. Theological apathy, just like political apathy, is not an acceptable excuse. Yes, “the poor will always be with us.” However, Jesus, in his first sermon said, “The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor.”

This Thanksgiving we should be thankful for both the small and large blessing in our lives. And just as in years past, we should seek with grateful hearts the political, moral, and intellectual blessings that make self-government possible. However, we must recognize what is truly essential: faith, family, and friends. Embrace others. Treat everybody with dignity and respect. If you want to touch the heart of God, take an interest in the things that interest God. Let God love others through you.

Every great nation should include the recognition that every child is created in the image of God, and that fact means we will use our resources to meet the most basic needs of all citizens, especially the vulnerable. Think of those less fortunate this year before your Thanksgiving prayers, remind yourself of those in poverty whose plates are often empty. We are incapable of breaking the cycle of poverty without all of us working together to address poverty and hunger.

We must endeavor to understand our nation’s place in the world. And while some Americans may believe we have lost some of our luster, the truth is that we are still the greatest beacon of freedom on the planet. We do not get our rights from the government but from God. The government exists to protect our rights. I would remind people, don’t fear the politicians. Hold them accountable.

Our nation is an exporter of dreams, and we must cast a vision of an exceptional America to the world. Do we have problems as a nation? Yes, we do. So does every civilization that has ever flourished. This Thanksgiving let us count our blessings, and be truly grateful for an opportunity to be alive at such a time as this and call ourselves Americans. The most important thing you can do is be a bright spot this Thanksgiving for someone going through a dark time.

JC Bowman is the Executive Director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, a non-partisan teacher association headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and the association are properly cited.

The Problem with Restorative Justice

November 15, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, JC Bowman, Leadership, School Safety, Students, Tennessee Education

principal-office

I grew up in the idyllic town of Cleveland, Tennessee. Nestled on the foothills of the Great Smoky Mountains. I was fortunate to be from a town that valued faith, family, and education. It was a quintessential life for an American boy.

I lived on Sycamore Drive growing up. I look back and see the kids I grew up with are all successful and thriving adults. It is an amazing story. It didn’t happen by luck.

I know most of the kids I grew up with had two-parent homes, both their parents worked jobs, and all of us lived in modest homes. Most went to church somewhere on Sunday. We were very much a blue-collar community. If there drugs and alcohol, we never saw it. (Although some of us had the occasional beer in high school.) The drinking age was 18 at that time. We listened to rock music. The go-to radio station early on was WFLI until KZ106 came along. The disc jockey we all listened to was Tommy Jett, who is now in the Tennessee Radio Hall of Fame.

Education was a large part of our lives. The big question was: would you choose to go to high school in the city or the county. It was Cleveland or Bradley. That was the choice. No matter the choice, you were going to get a quality education. There was a high school in Charleston, on the northern end of the county. But that was not a choice for us. Besides, who would want to be a Panther, when you could be a Blue Raider or a Bear.

The teachers in our community schools shared the values of our community. You would see teachers at the grocery store or church on the weekends. The last thing you would want would be for Mrs. Miller or Mrs. Painter to see you at the grocery store with your mom and give a behavior report that was less than flattering.

That didn’t mean we didn’t get in trouble. We just knew that somewhere there was a line you didn’t cross, and if you did then your teacher and your parent would meet at the school or in public and the outcome would not be pleasant for you when you got home. Parents supported teachers. Teachers reinforced the values that we learned at home. It was a tag-team effort.

When we look today, we see so many teachers, parents and children disconnected. Society is being torn apart. Our culture is changing before our eyes. Children are raising themselves. Parents are out of the picture. Parents do not trust schools, and teachers are not supported by parents. Children do not listen to parents. Children do not listen to teachers. It is a problem.

The latest trend to tackle the issue in schools is Restorative Justice. If you listen to “experts” the objective is to reduce the number of suspensions. However, in these efforts to reduce suspensions, other students and teachers are left suffering. Often, Restorative Justice is not concerned with rehabilitating offending students, the objective is to merely reduce suspensions and avoid punitive consequences for student actions.

A frequent pattern of disruptive children being endlessly returned to the classroom without any actual change in their behavior is emerging. Schools have to be able to remove continually disruptive students from classes. Ideally, chronically disruptive students should be placed in high-quality alternative education settings where they can receive long-term, intensive interventions. We especially need to strengthen the authority of teachers who manage defiant students. The concept of Restorative Justice may be noble, but the implementation is often flawed and harmful.

Some of the other problems for this form of discipline to work include that all participants have to buy into the process. That is never going to happen. Schools, parents, and students are never going to be on the same page regarding student discipline. The concept is not supposed to be an alternative to punishment, which it has become. The objective should be behavior change, not just a reduction in student suspensions.

Student discipline should be designed to improve behavior. In that regard, there is not just one victim. It is not a student versus a teacher scenario, but rather a chronically disruptive student interrupting an entire class of fellow students. Should parents be made aware when their child’s class is constantly interrupted? Many educators think so. These other students are victims, as is their education. Restorative Justice proponents are seeking to make educators take even more time away from instruction to put in effort and time to deal with a chronic behavior problem. The modeled misbehavior could have a negative impact on other students who are deprived of instruction time. They may emulate this negative behavior for attention.

Perhaps I look at life in the simplest of terms. Where I grew up, misbehavior and defiant conduct would not be acceptable. Parents and teachers would work together to address any behavior problem. My parents would not be as concerned with my opinion of my behavior as they would be of a teacher’s opinion. There would be unpleasant consequences for continual misbehavior. I suspect all the children on Sycamore Drive in Cleveland, Tennessee all had similar experiences. We all turned out alright. That is real justice.

Critics Should Offer Solutions

October 23, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Bullying, Educators, JC Bowman, Leadership, Legislation, Parents, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Reading, Students, Unions, Workforce

save the earth

Need a quick headline in the media? Attack public education. Want to gripe about something in government? Attack public education. Have a business venture that needs cash influx? Attack public education. Attacking public education is becoming a hobby to some, and a profession to several others.

I have been critical over the years of many things in public education. From lack of focus or poorly defined goals, disagreement with curriculum, to self-serving unions. However, I have always tried to do what my mother always advised, “If you are going to criticize, offer a solution.” Teddy Roosevelt blatantly made it clear, “It is not the critic who counts,” but rather “the man who is actually in the arena.”

Too many people want to simply condemn ideas, people, or society and offer nothing realistic in return. Let’s be clear, there will never be a one size fits all model for public education and no single academic model can work in a diversified population in a state or nation. That is why it is critical to have collaboration among educators, parents, citizens, and businesses to transform education at local levels based on the needs of each community. That is real local control.

Students will always need to learn basic skills such as reading and writing, and education stakeholders and policymakers must help students understand the changing world around them. That will mean many different things from the community to community, and state to state. There is no debate that evolving technology is changing how we teach and learn.

No single method can accommodate all student learning needs. Through technology, we can enable educators to provide to the unique needs of individual learners based on their readiness levels and student ability, which simply expands direct instruction to a more flexible and personalized approach to content delivery. All instruction, including differentiated instruction, must be structured, sequenced, and led by teachers “directing” the instructional process.

A broader student-centered strategy built around personalization should increase the learning growth of all students. The one-size-fits-all or teach-to-the-middle approach, expecting all students to do the same activity, work at the same pace, do the same homework, and take the same test hurts a significant portion of our students, especially when students lack the prerequisite skills. In addition, personalization better serves the best and brightest students in our classrooms. Technology must be an ally for modern educators in classroom instruction.

A degree in education should never be the basis for deliberating public education or offering an opinion. However, common sense must prevail. Too many critics of public education are focusing on the wrong things, using faulty information or do not have complete information. More importantly, many critics are treading into areas in which they know little to nothing about, except by hearsay. This is dangerous.

That does not mean that public education is free from faults, or should not continue to transform and change. We must avoid the condition described by Alexander Pope about being “too vain to mend.” All citizens should root for the success of public education if for no other reason than 90% of the children in our nation are educated by public schools. We want our children to succeed and our economy to flourish in this changing world. That message would make for much better headlines.

Next Steps for Tennessee Education

October 4, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, JC Bowman, Leadership, Legislation, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Resources, Students, Tennessee Education

1 innovation.jpg

Traveling across the state in my role as Executive Director of Professional Educators of Tennessee I talk with a lot of people interested in public education. One of the most common complaints is a lack of response from Governor Bill Lee or his team on specific education issues. It is problematic and quite honestly has always been problematic in our state. Better communication is always needed. I should know, I used to work for Governor Jeb Bush years ago, and communication is always a struggle for the executive branch despite best intentions.

I would still remind people to be patient with Governor Lee and his staff as we are still in year one. However, staff should now be settled into place, and processes and systems clearly established. We should expect better communication in year two.

Governor Lee laid out a fairly ambitious education agenda, and while we disagreed with some parts of it, he clearly offered more specifics than his opponent in the election last November. He was clear in his support of vouchers from the day he announced his candidacy. It should have been no surprise to policymakers or stakeholders. When surveyed, our members did not support vouchers.

His legislative victory with vouchers has yet to be implemented. This may prove challenging, as the program must be proven successful before any other future voucher program is considered. Members of the Tennessee General Assembly will demand proof of unmitigated success before any expansion or similar program enacted. Cameron Sexton, a voucher critic, has now ascended to Speaker of the House. His track record would indicate that he is a strong supporter of public schools. This actually helps the Governor moving forward on education policy changes needed in public education.

Other parts of the Lee campaign agenda likely won him most of his statewide support, but also gives voters more specifics in which to hold him accountable. Candidate Lee suggested it was time to change the way our high schools look. It was a bold policy suggestion, and as Governor, Bill Lee should move forward on that front.

For the last 50 years, the way high school has educated students has largely remained unchanged. There are many business and community leaders that also believe the traditional high school is disconnected from the demands of the modern economy. They emphasize that graduates need additional skills to be successful in today’s workforce. The State Collaborative on Reforming Education (SCORE) added: “Across Tennessee, students are learning in high schools using models developed for the needs of the 20th century rather than the workforce opportunities of the future. As a result, most Tennessee students do not graduate fully prepared to succeed in college, career, and life.”

Governor Lee stated, “It is time to embrace new, flexible school models to support new opportunities for career and technical education, work-based learning and apprenticeships, and dual-enrollment courses for students preparing for their career.” We agree. Some of that is already in the works, through recent legislation. It is time we break down barriers that have held our teachers, school leaders, and school districts back from creative solutions necessary for the unique challenges of their communities. Increasing flexibility at the local level could lead to incredible innovations in our state.

State grants that allow local districts to fund high school redesign would be one manner to create change and address challenges schools would face as they transition from traditional models to a more flexible school model. Another suggestion would be for the state to establish a pilot program for high performing districts by authorizing the State Board of Education to enter into a performance contract with school districts for the purpose of granting them more flexibility. These high performing districts would be a school district in which a local school board agrees to comply with certain performance goals contained in a performance contract that is approved by the State Board of Education. In return for performance accountability, the district would be granted greater autonomy with both statutory and rule exemptions. This is an idea Governor Lee and his team should explore.

It is past time for the state to make good on its commitment to teachers. The Comptroller’s Office of Research and Education Accountability (OREA) proved that the state of Tennessee invested more than $300 million dollars for teacher salaries in 2015-2018. Most of those dollars did not actually end up in pockets of classroom teachers. Generally, school districts employ more staff than are covered by the funding system utilized in Tennessee, known as the Basic Education Program (BEP). State and local dollars earmarked for salaries during those years were often spread over more teachers than the staff positions generated by the BEP.

The Tennessee General Assembly did address that school districts in the future must now report in where salary increases are spent. Governor Lee included a $71 million increase for a “2.5 percent pay raise for teachers” for fiscal year 2020. It is time to guarantee that teacher salaries, at the very least, match the cost of living increases faced by educators across the state.

Finally, we must update our school funding formula to reflect changing 21st century needs. We need a plan and a funding formula that reflects our modern educational mission, priorities, and strategies. The plan should support teachers, fund facilities, and facilitate innovation and technology, while striving to better connect K-12 education with workforce needs. Governor Lee has proven he will fight for what he believes in. It is time to come together and focus on the other education ideas that were discussed on the campaign trail. It is time to move forward on these issues to help all children, teachers, schools, and communities. Let the policy discussion begin. Communication is critical.

JC Bowman is the Executive Director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, a non-partisan teacher association headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and the association are properly cited. For more information on this subject or any education issue please contact Professional Educators of Tennessee.

Are You “Called” to Teach

September 26, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Development, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Professional Learning, Tennessee Education

Unterricht

Why do people teach? The major reason someone says they teach is the ability to make a real difference in the lives of children. There are other reasons, including the fact that someone believes they are “called” to teach. Almost all teachers are linked together by a passion for educating children. The passion is innate and has to come from within.

Former Commissioner of Education in Tennessee, Candice McQueen, reminded a group of educators in a presentation that we were set apart in our mission. She pointed out the gifts that educators have are special talents and abilities. Educators are born for the mission that is being given for us. Dr. McQueen emphasized the profession is a special calling. She is correct.

We are all on a search for significance. We desire to make a difference. Educators are making a huge difference. That is why it is important that we honor them. It is the English social critic, Os Guinness, who stated: “Calling is not only a matter of being and doing what we are, but also of becoming what we are not yet but are called by God to be.” He then adds: “Deep in our hearts, we all want to find and fulfill a purpose bigger than ourselves.” Education of the next generation is one of the most important occupations we could ever do. The belief that one is “called to teach” keeps women and men in education, even with all the unwanted public scrutiny.

Matthew Lynch writes about teaching as a calling: “A calling implies a deep-seated belief that teaching is the only profession that makes sense for you to pursue…” Dylan Fenton, an English teacher and writer does not like the term “calling,” as it creates to him an “idea that good teachers are born, not made and, as a result, allow themselves to stagnate.” I would argue that Lynch is more accurate than Fenton, as a passionate teacher never stops honing their craft. John Hunter, an award-winning teacher and educational consultant wrote: “I used to think teaching was a job. And then I thought it was a profession. And now I’m of the opinion that it’s a calling. It’s a very noble calling.”

Henry David Thoreau said, “Most men lead lives of quiet desperation.” John Keating, in the movie Dead Poets Society challenged his students to not be resigned to that type of life. Yes, John Keating was subsequently fired, and probably never taught another class the rest of his life. However, he taught his students to find their own voice. It was his calling. If you have a profession that brings you passion, gives you someone other than yourself to care for, and is something that makes you want to get up in the morning to accomplish, you will not live a life of quiet desperation.

Teaching is indeed an imposing, self-sacrificing, but also a magnanimous calling. Going through the process to get certified, whether through traditional means or an alternative route is sometimes difficult. The creativity aspect of the profession has slowly been eroded. There is persistent negativity by some lawmakers and the media of public education. Compared to other professions, educators can expect a modest salary and sometimes extremely difficult working conditions. However, if you are called to teach, you will never find a happier place than in a classroom or serving students. Educators are set apart to make a difference. There is no other profession, except perhaps the clergy, that can change lives like a public-school teacher.

JC Bowman is the Executive Director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, a non-partisan teacher association headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and the association are properly cited. For more information on this subject or any education issue please contact Professional Educators of Tennessee. To schedule an interview please contact Audrey Shores, Director of Communications, at 1-800-471-4867 ext.102.

The Educator and the Classroom

August 30, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Leadership, Legislation, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Tennessee Education

Unterricht

Former President Theodore Roosevelt gave an often-cited speech about citizenship in a Republic called The Man in the Arena at the Sorbonne in Paris, France on April 23, 1910. Roosevelt, a remarkable man of great accomplishments declared: “There is little use for the being whose tepid soul knows nothing of great and generous emotion, of the high pride, the stern belief, the lofty enthusiasm, of the men who quell the storm and ride the thunder.”

I often think of modern educators as “The Man in the Arena,” although in this case, a better title might be “The Educator and the Classroom.” I love this descriptor of those who quell the storm and ride the thunder. Educators do quell the storm and ride the thunder in educating the public. Too often our critics mistake cynicism for critical thinking, and vice-versa. We must never fear to critically analyze our profession or our performance. Roosevelt would likely remind us “It is not the critic who counts” but those who are actually “in the arena.”

On August 21st, the 2019 Tennessee Educator Survey report was released by T ennessee Education Research Alliance and the Tennessee Department of Education, Over 45,000 educators responded to the survey, representing 62% of the state’s teachers – an all-time high response rate. Lots of positive feedback, as well as some gloom and doom.

The positive feedback includes:

Three out of Four teachers report feeling positive about the way things are run at their school.
Three out of Four teachers agree that teacher evaluation improves their teaching.
Nearly 90 percent of teachers say they would recommend their school to parents.

Among the negative conclusions:

Four in 10 teachers feel less enthusiastic than when they began in education.
One in three Tennessee teachers reports they would choose another profession in hindsight.
As well, one in three also says they would leave teaching altogether if they could find a higher paying job, according to a report released TODAY on the opinions of teachers statewide.
Teacher opinions are split on how much planning time they have in schools.
Teachers are also spending many hours creating instructional materials, with feedback showing educators are divided on whether instructional materials are adequate.
About half of all teacher says they need to modify or create instructional materials.

Policymakers and stakeholders need to take those negative findings very seriously. A third of Tennessee teachers wish they had gone into another profession, and they lack the time and adequate instructional materials to teach the children, which they have been assigned. This does not bode well for Tennessee schools moving forward. Merely increasing teacher salaries does not solve the issue of self-respect, time, or resources.

There is a lot of information for all of us to digest. Education is changing. We need increased educator voices to make Tennessee the best state in the nation for education and in turn, the best place to raise a family. We must proactively address the issues raised by educators, with real and attainable solutions. The philosopher Bertrand Russell often discussed the importance of using our imaginations in constructing our world, which was the inspiration for this point by Sharon Ann Lee: “There are people who build things and people who tear things down. Just remember which side you are on.”

Roosevelt added: “Well for these men if they succeed; well also, though not so well, if they fail, given only that they have nobly ventured, and have put forth all their heart and strength.” If you want to see passion just visit a classroom in Tennessee. There you will witness our educators zealous to see our children educated to the highest level possible. So, choose to be one who builds, not a cynic who merely criticizes the work of others. Offer hope, ideas, and support to those in the classrooms. Then criticize, if you must after you made that effort to quell the storm and ride the thunder.

*********

JC Bowman is the Executive Director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, a non-partisan teacher association headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and the association are properly cited

Union Politics Hurts Public Education

July 31, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, JC Bowman, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Students, Unions

Against the wishes of their own membership, teachers’ unions often embody hyper-partisanship. Reiss Becker detailing research on teachers’ unions at the California Policy Center reports that, “in the 2016 election cycle over 93% of union campaign spending went to Democrats.” Many union members are unaware that political spending by their union tends to support liberal political candidates and left-wing causes, when 60% of their membership has identified as Republicans or independents

Writing in a USA Today editorial, Jessica Anderson and Lindsey Burke gave a more detailed historical analysis: “Since 1990, the NEA and the American Federation of Teachers have made over $140 million in direct political contributions. Over 97% of that went to liberals. That kind of political bias isn’t at all representative of the unions’ membership.”

Education Week pointed out that the National Education Association passed “several measures that seemed to move the union in an even more progressive direction.” This was in reference to “social issues as abortion and reparations, protested immigration policies, and, above all, pledged to defeat President Donald Trump in the 2020 election.”

Factor in that quite a few of these “issues” they espouse are typically classified as non-education issues. Members are rightfully being lambasted over the actions of their own delegates to the 2019 National Education Association Representative Assembly due to the passage of Business Item 56, which stated: “The NEA vigorously opposes all attacks on the right to choose and stands on the fundamental right to abortion under Roe v. Wade.”

Anderson and Burke then added: Why would the NEA go out of its way to stake out extreme stances on hot-button issues so far removed from the very real problems facing our nation’s schools? It appears as though the union is more concerned with promoting the political objectives of the left than serving the nation’s teachers and students. The answer may be as simple as federal law does not require union leaders to get their members’ authorization before spending their members’ money on non-educational, social issues.

Members of the union must ask themselves questions about their direct campaign contributions and independent spending at the national, state and local level. Journalist Leah Mishkin blatantly asked union officials: Why are some members unaware that part of their membership dues are helping to foot the bill? Many educators simply do not want their dues used for endorsing or supporting political candidates, or social issues.

For too long union members at the state and local level have stated they disagree with their national union and their agenda, while sending in their hard-earned money in support. Writer and researcher Mike Antonucci has correctly pointed out when state and local union members try to hide behind semantics: “All of its members are NEA members. They all send dues to NEA. You can’t wash your hands of your affiliation when it’s convenient.”

That is a critical point, and one that their own members must understand; if you join the local union you are also supporting the national union. NEA Executive Director John Stocks resigned in June 2019 to chair the Democracy Alliance. Antonucci gives us the rest of the story about the musical chairs involving Stocks, his replacement, and the Democracy Alliance:

He (Stocks) concurrently serves as chairman of the board of the Democracy Alliance, a network of wealthy progressive political donors. He will continue in that role while acting as a senior adviser at NEA until after the 2020 elections. His successor as NEA executive director is Kim Anderson, a longtime senior staffer at the union who for the past three years has been executive vice president of the Democracy Alliance.

The assumption of many educators is that teachers’ unions are choosing ideology over their own members. That is why state-based professional associations who offer liability and legal protection, professional development, and member benefits are growing nationally. Most teachers, either on the left or the right, do not choose education as a career choice because they enjoy politics. They just want to teach while leaving political pursuits to their personal lives, not their professional ones. Unlike a recent NEA delegate vote, most educators—including union members—actually value student learning as a priority.

Alexandra DeSanctis, a staff writer for National Review, suggests in a recent article that the National Education Association must think that as an “influential left-wing organization, the group must necessarily champion the entire progressive agenda.” She then submits that there is “a growing tendency on the Left, as ‘intersectional’ thinking takes hold — the idea that each interest group within the broader progressive movement has a responsibility to embrace and advocate the particular interests of the rest.”

Union politics often hurt public education and educators with an agenda that many parents and taxpayers are baffled by, and members are left to explain. Marching in lockstep in any political direction is always a mistake. As former classroom teacher Larry Sand, currently president of the California Teachers Empowerment Network, writes about teachers’ unions: “the choice between unions becoming more ecumenical or more radical has been made.” At this point, there is no turning back, as some union leaders merely seek to build a militant minority to revive the labor movement. Sadly, teachers have become pawns in this game. They are pawns in the union political agenda.

A Primer on Collaborative Conferencing in Tennessee

July 22, 2019 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Tennessee Education

Seemingly every year we have to revisit the issue of collaborative conferencing for stakeholders and policymakers. The initial training in the principles and techniques of interest-based collaborative problem-solving for use in collaborative conferencing pursuant to this part was initially to be developed by the Tennessee Organization of School Superintendents (TOSS) in conjunction with representative organizations of school leaders and administrators and professional employees’ organizations. The Tennessee School Boards Association (TSBA) subsequently conducted the training in 2011. Representatives of Professional Educators of Tennessee, TOSS, TSBA, and the teacher’s union all participated in this training. A detailed report was sent to the Tennessee General Assembly on the activities of the training and participants in 2012.

Collaborative Conferencing is the process by which local boards of education and their professional employees meet, either directly or through representatives designated by the respective parties, to confer, consult, and discuss matters relating to certain terms and conditions of professional service as specified by the passing of the Professional Educators Collaborative Conferencing Act (PECCA). The process of collaborative conferencing includes the exchange of information, opinions, and proposals among the conferencing parties, as well as the use of the principles and techniques of interest-based collaborative problem-solving (IBCPS).

The term “interest-based collaborative problem-solving” is not defined by the new law. However, interest-based collaborative problem-solving is an increasingly popular method of multiparty consensus-building negotiation. It is based upon mutual interests and respect among the parties, jointly identifying problems, the open, free exchange of information, nurturing creativity in the generation of options, and a good-faith, non-adversarial approach to solving problems using agreed- to criteria. This is intended to lead to an agreement between the parties based upon consensus and mutual gain. In the perfect world all parties work together, and all members of the collaborative conferencing teamwork toward a common objective in unity. In education, that concept may not work, if one side chooses not to engage in consensus building and the other side decides to file unnecessary lawsuits. Professional Educators of Tennessee fervently supports the right of educators to discuss working conditions and salary with their employers.

In collaborative conferencing local boards are required to address: Salaries or wages; Grievance procedures; Insurance; Fringe benefits (not to include pensions or retirement programs of the Tennessee consolidated retirement system or locally authorized early retirement incentives); Working conditions, except those working conditions that are prescribed by federal law, state law, private act, municipal charter or rules and regulations of the State Board of Education, the Department of Education or any other department or agency of state or local government; Leave; and, Payroll deductions (except with respect to those funds going to political activities).

Subjects prohibited from conferencing include: Differentiated pay plans and other incentive compensation programs, including stipends, and associated benefits that are based on professional employee performance that exceeds expectations, or that aid in hiring and retaining highly qualified teachers for hard-to-staff schools and subject areas; Expenditure of grants or awards from federal, state or local governments and foundations or other private organizations that are expressly designed for specific purposes; Evaluation of professional employees pursuant to federal or state law or State Board of Education policy; Staffing decisions and State Board of Education or local board of education policies relating to innovative educational programs under § 49-1-207; innovative high school programs under Title 49, chapter 15; virtual education programs under Title 49, chapter 16; and other programs for innovative schools or school districts that may be enacted by the general assembly; All personnel decisions concerning assignment of professional employees, including, but not limited to, filling of vacancies, assignments to specific schools, positions, professional duties, transfers within the system, layoffs, reductions in force, and recall. No agreement shall include provisions that require personnel decisions to be determined on the basis of tenure, seniority or length of service; and, payroll deductions for political activities.

The law was very clear on deadlines and specific dates. The submission (by fifteen percent (15%) or more of the professional employees) of a written request to conduct collaborative conferencing with the board of education, must be done not before October 1 and no later than November 1. The selection and appointment of the professional employee and board of education representatives must be done no later than December 1. The transmission to the board of the confidential poll results and the names and positions of the appointed representatives must be done by January 1. This is the law. If the law needs to be changed, all groups should work together through the Tennessee General Assembly to make the appropriate changes.

All educators and all professional employee organizations have the same rights under PECCA. The school board does not have to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), and the MOU should be “prepared jointly” according to the law. We would suggest that putting some of these items into Board Policy might actually lead to more consistent policy and better working conditions than an MOU that would expire on a specific date. The law also mandates that any items that require funding cannot become effective “until the local funding body has approved such funding in the budget.”

The Tennessee General Assembly was clear in 2011 that they wanted to get politics out of our public schools while supporting teachers’ rights to fight for higher wages and better working conditions. The PECCA legislation made clear that directors may communicate with teachers on the subjects of collaborative conferencing through any means, medium or format the director chooses. Legislators had anticipated that increased collaboration would benefit the women and men in our classrooms with better working conditions, improved dialogue and mutual respect thus benefitting all of our students. There is still work left to do to accomplish this challenging objective.

– – –