Professional Educators of Tennessee – Page 7

Faith in Public Schools

September 6, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Resources

fa religion

The First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty includes the freedom to believe or not to believe, and to observe one’s faith openly without government interference. The U.S. Department of Education has traditionally provided statements on the role of religion in the public schools. This has included guidance on school prayer, religious holidays, religious songs and religion in the curriculum.

The relationship between religion and government in the United States is governed by the First Amendment to the Constitution, which both prevents the government from establishing religion and protects privately initiated religious expression and activities from government interference and discrimination.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government, but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 required the Secretary of Education to issue guidance on constitutionally protected prayer in public elementary and secondary schools. The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), P.L. 114-95, was signed by President Obama on December 10, 2015. ESSA reauthorizes the 50-year-old Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). It may be time for the United States Department of Education to reissue the guidance offered by then Secretary of Education Rod Paige.

The guidance in 2002, clarifies the rights of students to pray in public schools. As stated in the guidance, “…the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals” such as students. Therefore, “[a]mong other things, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other noninstructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities.” Public schools should not be hostile to the religious rights of their students and their families.

At the same time, school officials may not “compel students to participate in prayer or other religious activities.” Nor may teachers, school administrators and other school employees, when acting in their official capacities as representatives of the state, encourage or discourage prayer, or participate in such activities with students.

Former Secretary of Education Richard Riley wrote: “Students may express their beliefs about religion in the form of homework, art-work, and other written and oral assignments free of discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school.”

Educators are also free much like all other citizens to practice their faith. Public school teachers and administrators should be neutral concerning religion while carrying out their official duties. School officials who wish to pray or engage in other religious activities should do so without students present. For example, if teachers want to meet for prayer or scriptural study in the faculty lounge during free time in the school day or before or after school, they should do it when they have no official duty and without students present.

Under a 1993 Supreme Court ruling, Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches School District, public schools that permit their facilities to be used by community groups are not permitted to discriminate against religious groups. This ruling was reaffirmed in Good News Club v. Milford Central School (2001), in which the context of a religiously-affiliated after-school program that sought to use public school facilities was upheld.

In the age we live in, it is critical to recognize the freedoms we have. Public schools should not be hostile to the religious rights of their students and their families. Policymakers should make certain that school board policy protects privately initiated religious expression and activities from government interference and discrimination.

Surely, it is not hard to fathom the necessity of building a common understanding in regards to the meaning of the First Amendment in the public school setting. Schools should develop their own district-wide policy regarding religious expression and to engage parents, teachers, various faith communities and the broader community. You have the freedom to believe or not to believe, and to observe your faith openly without government interference.

– – –

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. Follow him on social media via Twitter at @jcbowman.

Thanking Those Who Built America

September 2, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Holidays, JC Bowman, Professional Educators of Tennessee

robbie webb — Robbie Webb, my great-great grandfather. Monroe County, TN 1861-1932

Labor Day is a day we set aside for American workers. It also marks the unofficial end to our Summer. Labor Day has many meanings, but one meaning is that we must recognize the incredible effort and work it took to build this great country. It is worth recalling our own history and leadership of President Calvin Coolidge. A man renown for his silence and wit.

Coolidge acknowledged the importance of workers and Labor Day when he stated that “this high tribute is paid in recognition of the worth and dignity of the men and women who toil.” Coolidge actually valued American labor and the spirit of work and his policies led to job creation and economic expansion in America. Coolidge added:

“I cannot think of anything that represents the American people as a whole so adequately as honest work. We perform different tasks, but the spirit is the same. We are proud of work and ashamed of idleness. With us there is no task which is menial, no service which is degrading. All work is ennobling and all workers are ennobled.”

It seems in this age we may have lost that respect for the worker. Some of that may be connected to public sector unionism. Coolidge won national recognition for his handling of the Boston Police Strike, when he intervened and famously stated that “there is no right to strike against the public safety by anybody, anywhere, anytime.” Many union leaders, not necessarily the union members themselves, continue to embrace political activism over members themselves. These unions support candidates and causes opposed by many of the workers that union bosses claim to speak for. It is why union membership is in decline across the nation.

Does the end justify the means? Perhaps the best answer to that question is from the controversial and radical psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich who wrote: “The meanness and inhumanity of the means make you mean and inhuman and make the end unattainable.” When the means justify the ends, ethical consideration focuses on what you do, not the consequences of what you have done. Results-based ethics means that no type of act is morally wrong. This is a harmful position, for an individual, a business or a nation. As a nation, we understand that there are consequences for our actions. We have an individual responsibility to work to the best of our abilities and we must expect fair wages.

Martin Luther King, Jr., also insisted not just on the ends, but the means. Mahatma Gandhi, like King, understood that for the rational people to survive in revolutionary times that his focus must remain on the means, just as much extremists do by their “do anything” philosophy. Machiavelli who is credited with phrase: “The end justifies the means,” actually wrote, “Si guarda al fine.” This phrase may be better translated as “Pay attention to the result.” As President, Calvin Coolidge created a period of economic expansion and prosperity through his administration’s economic policies, that was a result of focusing on both the ends and the means. It was a period of individual prosperity and economic growth.

Robert Ferrell, in his book The Presidency of Calvin Coolidge, states the results of Coolidge’s philosophy: “Real wages for industrial workers were 8 percent above the base year (1914= 100) in 1921, 13 percent above in 1922, and 19 percent above in 1923. For the next two years, the figure remained at this level and then increased, reaching 32 percent in 1928. The workweek declined from 47.4 hours in 1920 to 44.2 in 1929. This meant a five-and-a-half-day week…All the while unemployment was a low 3.7 percent between 1923 and 1929. This compared with 6.1 between 1911 and 1917, a fairly prosperous time for workers.” Certainly, there is a correlation between a prosperous economy, increasing wages and worker happiness. This is a lesson we should bear in mind.

Coolidge recognized that a thriving economy and higher wages built the middle class. It also depended on following common sense on fiscal matters. Garland S. Tucker wrote that he never lost sight of his belief in a strong work ethic and the spirit of America, as Coolidge declared:

“We do not need to import any foreign economic ideas or any foreign government. We had better stick to the American brand of government, the American brand of equality, and the American brand of wages. America had better stay American.”

This Labor Day we must reminded ourselves of the unique heritage of our nation and the effort so many people who came before us put forth so that we their heirs could enjoy the fruits of our own labors. In a presidential speech, President Coolidge reasoned that he could not “think of any American man or woman preeminent in the history of the nation who did not reach their place through toil.” I am not so sure Calvin Coolidge was as silent as he is portrayed in our history books. It is a good lesson for all generations.

This Is Only A Test?

August 27, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Tennessee Education, Testing

jc ed background

This Is Only A Test? (www.proedtn.org) Are tests in our schools making the grade? JC Bowman from the Professional Educators of Tennessee joins us for an in- depth conversation about challenges with current grade assessment tests and Tennessee Ready. Interview. Listen to iHeart Radio, Tennessee Matters here.

Link: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1021-Tennessee-Matters-28732380/episode/tennessee-matters-29762167/

Why Do People Teach?

August 26, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in JC Bowman, Professional Educators of Tennessee

life focus

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. —JC Bowman

Tone Deaf School Districts

August 24, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Legislation, Professional Educators of Tennessee

“If you don’t understand — from the school district to the superintendents — that we want our teachers held harmless, then I’m sorry, you’re tone-deaf.” ~State Representative Eddie Smith (Knoxville)

tone-deaf-1

That message was heard and understood statewide, right? Apparently not. We are receiving reports from across the state that some districts are denying their teachers their justified and earned bonuses, which harms the educator. The language from the Public Chapter Number 881 reads “LEAs shall not base compensation decisions for teachers on data generated by statewide assessments administered in the 2017-18 school year” Public Chapter Number 1026 adds: “no adverse action may be taken against any student, teacher, school, or LEA based, in whole or in part, on student achievement data generated from the 2017-2018 TNReady assessment.” (emphasis added)

The Tennessee Department of Education, anticipating this problem, understood this could negatively impact teachers that did well on TNReady in the 2017-18 school year so they provided this guidance to school districts across the state: “All currently approved alternative salary schedules and differentiated pay plans are based on 2016-2017 school year data and may remain in effect because they are not impacted by the Legislation. Districts should consult closely with their board attorneys to ensure that any other strategic compensation policies do not result in an action being taken concerning a teacher in the 2017-18 school year based on 2017-18 data. As always, teachers may not earn less than they did the previous year unless there is a change in the teacher’s duties or position.” (emphasis added)

However, at least one school district, Greene County Schools, sent an email to all principals. The message to all Greene County Administrators was from Bill Ripley, the Assistant Director of Academics.

Ripley wrote:

This message is in response to questions we have received. Several months ago the state legislature passed an act preventing districts from affecting any teacher’s pay based on 2017-18 test results. Therefore, the Greene County Schools district plan to pay a bonus for level 4 or 5 TVAAS cannot be implemented this year. We realize this is disappointing to the 105 teachers who attained a level 4 or 5 last year, however, this is an action of lawmakers in Nashville, not your local Board of Education.

A first-year law student could probably make the case that any school district that withholds paying a bonus based on actions taken by the Tennessee General Assembly are not understanding the law or the intent of the state law. Denying educators their rightful bonus based on positive student achievement or student growth is indeed having an adverse action on educators, especially their compensation. It can be argued that the legislation that passed is vague and that districts should work closely with their board attorney when making these types of decisions. However, discussion on the floor on the legislation, as well as comments from the Bill Sponsor Rep. Eddie Smith, was clear: that districts could not take adverse actions.

The state issued two very important guidance documents that make clear that message, which was released by the Tennessee Department of Education. Professional Educators of Tennessee, along with many others worked with the Department of Education and added our input. The guidance that the Department developed was a result of thoughtful and collaborative efforts to ensure that our state follows all state and federal laws. The new legislation that states that no adverse actions for students, teachers or schools will result from the 2017-18 TNReady administration. These two key documents, which were shared with districts and schools are posted on the state website, along with a list of initial improvements the state is making to the state assessment program:

Detailed Evaluation Guidance (here)
FAQ that provides an overview of the various areas the new laws impact, including student, education, school, and district accountability (here)

If educators feel that their district is withholding a bonus in which they are entitled, it would be helpful for those educators to write their school district and ask them for a written explanation on why the bonus is being denied. If a school district wants to be tone deaf, I know several state legislators and folks at the Department of Education who would be very interested in why an adverse action is being taken against you. I know that Professional Educators of Tennessee wants to hear if compensation decisions for teachers on data generated by statewide assessments administered in the 2017-18 school year have kept you from receiving compensation, or your bonus. Just drop us an email at advocacy@proedtn.org.

###

Captive Audiences, Captive Minds

August 15, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Bullying, JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Students, Tennessee Education

JC Julia Lennon (2) — Julia Lennon and JC Bowman at Beatles Tribute

I was too young to really appreciate the British Music Invasion. However, I became a die-hard Beatles fan in 4^th grade, a tradition that I passed down to my children. Later, I listened and enjoyed the different directions and songs of the individual members of the Beatles. One of my favorite John Lennon tunes was Mind Games. Lennon nailed it, about how ideologues betray themselves in the clash of competing ideas.

Penny Lane has barbers with photographs, but today trends come with charts and graphs. Pharisees today would rather stifle debate and only present one side of an issue. These are people who would sooner ridicule someone, rather than pushing barriers or planting seeds. In Mind Games, Lennon coined the term mind guerrillas, which was absolutely brilliant. The mind guerrillas are alive and well. They talk a good game. Unfortunately, a few of them are in our classrooms with captive audience and captive minds.

On both the political right and the left, academic freedom is sometimes erroneously confused with complete autonomy, with thought and speech freed from all constraints. There are definitely limits, and educators have responsibilities. Students have the freedom to form independent judgments on subjects. In education, as in life, we must engage differences of opinion, evaluate the evidence, and then form our own individual opinions. Students have the right to hear and assess diverse views, as long as they are age appropriate and not merely propaganda disguised as information. American’s have debated the issue historically. Because of this, in 1840 the Massachusetts Legislature debated the increasing government control over education.

We often see in the media egregious examples of taxpayer dollars being used in ways that seem more in line with indoctrination, rather than mere encouraging independent thought. We suggest to teachers to be careful in their lessons, unless they are not afraid of it appearing in the local newspaper or nightly news. In fairness, most educators never have to worry about this issue. However, let me give you an example of one instance, paraphrased and sent to me by a well-respected classroom teacher:

A local high school was registering students to vote. This in of itself is a positive step. It was designed for students to get informed and vote. However, the person promoting the event didn’t stop there. She went on a rant about the electoral college system and she said that she thinks it is archaic. She then proceeded to talk about medical marijuana and said that Tennessee is still Tennessee and that medical pot legalization won’t happen anytime soon. Then, she further highlighted a specific political race between a conservative and a liberal candidate. Pointing out the virtues of the liberal candidate, and criticizing the conservative.

The teacher closed her email by saying: “I could give many more specific examples, but, again, my goal is not to get anyone in trouble, just to make sure parents aren’t entrusting their children to an institution that is going to push their beliefs in one direction only.” She then added: “Obviously teachers are going to have diverse political opinions, even strong ones, about all types of issues. My problem is with them pushing those opinions on public school students and the one-sided nature of it.” That is the heart of the issue, whether it is conservative or liberal.

As educators, it is often hard to keep private personal views out of our public lives—yet we should exercise restraint. Our education system is not intended for political goals and political purposes, it is intended so that all students are equipped with the knowledge and skills to successfully embark upon their chosen path in life. We benefit as a society when we develop children with independent critical judgment. Martin Luther King Jr. poignantly stated: “The function of education, therefore, is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically.”

Chinese leader Mao Zedong wrote: Politics is war without bloodshed, while war is politics with bloodshed. When it came to education, Mao stressed that students should have a “correct political point of view.” That collectivist thought sounds like indoctrination. John Lennon had a message for that in Revolution, “If you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao, you ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow.”

Educators are entitled to their own political opinions. However, when they are performing official duties they should remain politically neutral. The youngest citizens of our state and nation who walk through our classroom doors each day deserve to develop their own opinions, be taught to discuss issues respectfully, and not be ridiculed for have a different political or religious belief. There is a fine line between a teacher sharing their view, or forcing their view on students. It is not the job of the educator to force their point of view on anyone in a classroom or school.

A Few More Thoughts on Testing in Tennessee…

August 14, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, Educators, JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Resources, Tennessee Education, Testing

Tennessee Commissioner of Education Candice McQueen soundly responded to Metro Nashville Schools Director Shawn Joseph and Shelby County Superintendent Dorsey Hopson very bluntly in a straightforward letter yesterday. It is doubtful that either Joseph or Hopkins actually wrote the letter, which called for a “pause” in testing and convene a statewide working group of educators to look at testing. McQueen stated that neither she or Governor Bill Haslam received the letter that got widespread media coverage. She also pointed out that “both state and federal law require an annual statewide assessment.”

Some may argue that states have more flexibility, which is true to an extent. We should take a hard look at Tennessee’s ESSA plan and certainly make necessary adjustments. But we identified our own measures of progress and agreed to take certain actions in order to receive federal monies. Like that or not, it is how the game is played. When Tennessee was touting Race to the Top money, the state certainly jumped through even more hoops to get those dollars.

Dr. McQueen, who serves at the pleasure of the Governor, must follow state and federal laws. Joseph and Hopson have their own Boards of Education they must listen to on policy issues. Policy analysts TC Weber and Andy Spears have both weighed in on the subject, as has Sharon Roberts. Professional Educators of Tennessee added our opinion on the subject. All stakeholders want to get testing right. However, the emphasis on testing misses the bigger issue: student academic growth measured by flawed testing. Then the results being used in educator evaluations. This is certainly more problematic to educators than the actual tests themselves.

Once the Tennessee Department of Education gets testing corrected, then we, as a state, can refocus on discussing what should or shouldn’t be included in teacher evaluations. It is clear: flawed testing equals faulty evaluations. This is no way to measure the success or failure of our students, teachers or schools. This issue isn’t going away. Stay tuned.

Thoughts on Testing

August 14, 2018April 22, 2021 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Leadership, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Tennessee Education, Testing, Unions

tnready1

In April, 2018, Professional Educators of Tennessee raised the issue on Testing, with a hard-hitting editorial called the Trouble with Testing. Now the Superintendents of two low performing districts, Shelby County and Metro-Nashville Public Schools are eliciting media attention by challenging testing across the state. Welcome to the club.

Testing has taken a wrong turn in public education. I have always tried to keep it simple: testing is like your school picture; it is what you look like on that particular day. Kids go in to take a test. Teachers show up to make sure kids are taking their own test. Parents encourage their children to do their best. However, like Ozzie & Harriet, Leave it to Beaver, and the Lone Ranger, those days are gone.

With an infusion of $501 million federal dollars of Race to the Top money we hurried to increase standards by adopting Common Core, which was soon corrected by moving back to state standards. We then increased testing, changing both format and frequency. Tennessee also adopted new evaluation methods. The teachers’ union supported the incorporation of TVAAS data into the state’s teacher evaluations, which landed Tennessee $501 million from the federal Race to the Top grant in 2010. Professional Educators of Tennessee did NOT support the use of that data on teacher evaluations, nor did they sign a support letter on the original grant submission.

Not everything Tennessee tried was damaging, but it is not debatable that, thus far, the Age of Accountability has failed students, teachers, parents and taxpayers. Since 2012, Tennessee has had one misstep after another in testing. In 2013, our tests were not aligned to our standards. In 2014, the issue was transparency, notably quick scores and test score waivers for final semester grades were the major issue. In 2015, the new TNReady online tests had issues in the post equating formula. In 2016, we fired the vendor, Measurement, Inc. because after the online platform was botched, they were unable to get out a paper version of the test. In 2017, we were again plagued by issues due to scoring discrepancies. This year 2018, had issues related to testing, including the belief by the testing vendor, Questar, that the Questar data center was under attack from an external source, although it is never thought that any student data was compromised.

At no point since 2012 were any of the testing issues the fault of students or educators. However, for educators, they are often the ones who bear the brunt, quite unfairly, of parental anger. Students also suffer, with everything from loss of instruction time to not understanding their educational progress. When we make education decisions on the basis of unreliable or invalid test results, we place students at risk and harm educators professionally. This is especially unfair to the hardworking teachers in our state. To policymakers and stakeholders alike we must ask these questions:

Why are we relying so heavily on test scores to make important educational decisions about students, teachers or schools, especially when the process is flawed? For example, when officials thought the Questar data center was under attack from an external source, there should have been no greater priority by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation to identify and prosecute those individuals guilty of this activity and confirm that no student data was compromised. Fortunately, there was no attack.
Should we question the reliability, validity, and accuracy of testing in Tennessee since 2013? Especially when shifting between online to paper tests? Note: Reliability relates to the accuracy of their data. Reliability problems in education often arise when researchers overstate the importance of data drawn from too small or too restricted a sample. Validity refers to the essential truthfulness of a piece of data. By asserting validity, do the data actually measure or reflect what is claimed?

In Tennessee we appreciate straight talk and candor. We unquestionably detest hypocrisy. We understand mistakes are made by individuals, by companies and even by our government. We are not pointing fingers, just stating a fact. Clearly there is a problem with testing in Tennessee. It isn’t our students or our educators. It is a flawed testing system.

Shawn Joseph and Dorsey Hopkins timed the announcement of their joint press release well. A sitting group of mostly outgoing legislators were at the Capitol at the time to discuss education. It is also political season. Their joint letter will momentarily take the attention away from their own issues. However, we welcome the discussion. Unfortunately, simply offering the much-ballyhooed solution of another “blue ribbon” panel to discuss the testing issue is a mere diversion. For teachers, thank Race to the Top which was supported by the previous Superintendents of Shelby County and Metro-Nashville Public Schools and the teachers’ union. I wish both men had offered a solution. We will help you out- Eliminate TVAAS data from teacher evaluations. That would an enormous leap forward.

Time to Separate PACS from Lobbying

August 13, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Leadership, Legislation, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Tennessee Education

How is it possible to separate organizations’ campaign contributions from their lobbying activities? It may not ever be possible. Political Action Committee (PAC) is a term for a political committee organized for the purpose of raising and spending money to elect and defeat candidates. Numerous groups that have a PAC do not have a lobbyist, and many groups that have a lobbyist do not have a PAC. Perhaps it should be an either/or option and get the political donations completely out of policy issues.

The prevailing opinion is that campaign contributions are integral to lobbying efforts and buying access to elected officials. Have we really sunk to that level in America? Nashville? Lobbying and contributing to political candidates should be completely unrelated activities. Perhaps the state comptroller should investigate the relationship between PAC donations to specific legislators and the amount of time their lobbyists spent with those legislators. It should reveal interesting findings. It should also be clear how much lobbying effort was directed at the legislative branch and how much was directed at the executive branch, and those political donations as well. This would be the only way to measure the extent to which contributions really affect the way that policymakers allocate their time, and whether money as a political resource magnifies and perpetuates political inequalities.

Even though it is an ugly secret, there is little doubt that some organizations obtain votes by making campaign contributions. Thus, lobbying strategies become dependent upon campaign donation strategies. What transpires in the meetings between legislators and interest groups with PACs can be a matter of inference and speculation. However, what is not supposition is that legislation favored by those who contribute political donations succeed on a regular basis. Many politicians also form PACs as a way of raising money to help fund other candidates’ campaigns. A common occurrence is money gets funneled to Candidate A via Candidate B, by other special interests or PACS through this method. Follow the money.

In reality, groups that command non-monetary resources valued by policymakers —policy expertise, access to voters, and influence may be more important than a campaign check. As labor unions have seen their influence decline, they could likely discover it to the fact they are spending less on lobbying, and more on political giving. There are smaller victories, and they are having to write bigger checks to secure even those. It will only escalate and union dues will increase. The lesson here is obvious.

Clearly, we believe issue advocacy is good, and it is a First Amendment right to express an opinion to policymakers. We also have no problem with people making political contributions to the candidates of their choice. What we would like to see is a clearer separation between these two activities, with better monitoring. Are political campaigns on behalf of candidates engaging in illegally coordinated activities with PACS? Nobody can be certain. Should PACs be forced to immediately disclose their donors and campaign expenditures? Should people who have PACS be required to register to lobby? It is essential that citizens know who is financing policymakers’ elections.

Professional Educators of Tennessee will continue to lobby for public education. However, we will never endorse political parties or candidates as an organization on behalf of our members. We also do not have a PAC, nor do we plan to ever start one. It would harm our effectiveness. We must advance public education without the divisive tribalism of partisan politics, and we will only get involved in education related issues.

Gordian Knots & Godfathers

August 10, 2018 by JC Bowman, posted in Advocacy, JC Bowman, Professional Educators of Tennessee, Unions

When the Janus Decision came out we knew that the unions would pull out all the stops to keep from losing members. This is very much true. In Tennessee, the National Education Association (NEA) affiliate is one of their least profitable and losing members the quickest according to this 2016 article. The latest tally may even bode graver for the union affiliate. In Tennessee, the union affiliate has lost a self-reported 34.3% of their active members.

The NEA employs more than 500 people at its Washington, D.C., headquarters; the average salary is $123,613 plus benefits. All told, NEA’s payroll for 2016 was just over $68.6 million for 555 employees — an average of $123,613 per worker. By comparison, the average 2016 teacher salary of $58,353. Tennessee teachers earn much less than their national counterparts. It is unknown what teacher union bosses earn here in Tennessee, or how lucrative are their benefits.

Mike Antonucci, the foremost expert on teacher unions in the United States wrote a detailed article The National Education Association — a $1.6 Billion Enterprise With a Red-Ink Problem. Antonucci wrote: “NEA and its affiliates are cumulatively in what accountants call balance-sheet insolvency. In consumer terms, it’s as if your mortgage and credit card debts are larger than your net worth, but you can still make your monthly payments because you haven’t lost your job.” Whether or not that is the case in Tennessee is not known.

Recently, two candidates for Governor, Beth Harwell and Craig Fitzhugh were endorsed by the National Education Association affiliate in their parties primary. Both lost decisively at the bottom of their primary. In fact, the union squandered significant dollars in losing efforts across the state. This is very problematic for all teachers who get painted with the liberal brush of union politics across the state. The candidates who won will likely not look favorable upon public education after being targeted by the teacher union. And it makes our jobs even more difficult.

The Tennessee Star correctly pointed out at the time of the Harwell endorsement: “high opposition to TEA money and influence among likely GOP primary voters, Republican candidates who have accept financial support and endorsements from TEA can certainly expect their opponents to use that information in campaign attack ads — if they are considered to be competitive.” Republicans like Barry Doss and Tim Wirgu who took the teacher union money lost, and Gary Hicks narrowly won. State Senator, Ken Yager, received $5,000 to his political action committee, Keypac.

However, political donations only tell part of the story. In Tennessee, high priced strategists and companies also were paid significant dollars from the union PAC: Counterpoint Messaging, Spry Strategies, Direct Mail Services, DirectFX, Graphic Creations were among them. The Heartland Accountability Project in Mt. Pleasant, Iowa received $44,000. Heartland targeted Senator Brian Kelsey, Senator Todd Gardenhire and Senator Reginald Tate in the past. Heartland Accountability Project is listed as a client of Evolution Strategies, along with the National Education Association and Phil Bredesen. It is an interesting circle. Follow the money. Then draw your own conclusions.

Teachers unions consistently rank among the top spenders on politics. Their goal is not improved public education, but rather power, money, and influence. Leo Doran a reporter for InsideSources wrote in How Liberal Politics and Teachers’ Unions Got So Entangled: “Experts long active in the upper echelons of education research and policy-making say that the politicization of the teachers’ unions has gotten more intense in recent years.” Doran then adds about the teacher unions that the structure of the unions “make their lobbying platforms susceptible to mission creep. The end result, however, is a Gordian knot of politics and labor battles that have ensconced the teachers’ unions…”

For groups like Professional Educators of Tennessee, it is simple. We must advance public education without the divisive tribalism of partisan politics, and we will only get involved in education related issues. The union never stops in its quest for power and control over public education. We must keep that from happening. In the movie, The Godfather, Don Vito Corleone lets someone know that the man is now in the Godfather’s debt. He tells the man, “Someday, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to do a service for me.” If a candidate for political office takes political donations from the union, assume they are bought and paid for. The question is: when will the politician have to pay the debt?