Misplaced passion
On Saturday, March 10th, the Gazette printed several comments made by readers with regards to the three-part series on drop outs. Although the articles were not about D11 specifically, most of the reader comments were critical of D11. One of the comments was by a parent who said that his/her son dropped out of D11. The parent concluded with this:
My son is brilliant, and he was bored — forced to sit in class after class with teachers expounding on their politics and what they did last summer.
At the elementary level, you probably won't hear of this type of thing very often. Elementary teachers don't tend to push their political views on students. As the student moves up through the middle and high schools, it is possible that he or she will face political posturing. In my opinion, political discussions for older students in classes that deal with social studies is probably a good thing, as long as the teacher allows for fair and even debate. While most teachers even at this level do not push their political views on their students, those teachers who are the labor union activists are the most likely to expect their students to share their left-wing political views.
One of the most vocal labor union activists in D11 is Tom Watson. He is one of the labor union representatives at Doherty High School. He spends countless hours on blogs trashing anyone who disagrees with his narrow views (rarely does he have the courage to use his real name). The purpose of this post is to illustrate that there are people like Watson who are extremely passionate about their politics, to the point that it interferes with what matters most, which is educating kids. While never offering any ideas of his own to improve D11, Watson will attack (with passion) anyone who offers any ideas on education. It seems that as far as he is concerned, there is no room for improvement in our schools.
The following is an excerpt from an email sent to the D11 board by a parent. This is just part of the email, and the parent's name is removed. The rest of the email dealt with math.
----- Original Message -----
From:
To: sshakesd11boe@aol.com
Cc:; ; ; ; ; dlinebaugh@adelphia.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:49 PM
Subject: Math and Political Issues
...In addition, my husband has had letters to the editor published over the last several months stating his political views regarding educational choice/anti-union. Approximately three weeks ago after his letter was published, Mr Tom Watson, who as you know is the union representative in Doherty HS, asked our son who his father was. Our son knowing that the letter was published, stated he didn't know what he was talking about. Mr Watson went back through previous letters to the editor and apparently checked records and told my son that it was his father. I feel that for this to have occurred in the classroom borders on intimidation and bullying...
A concerned parent hoping for change!
Here you have a teacher who will not tolerate anyone having an opinion on education unless it is his own opinion, even if that anyone is a parent. Watson will excuse any behavior by any labor union member, he will make excuse after excuse for low performing schools and teachers, but he will not stand by quietly and allow anyone to criticize his cherished labor union. It would be Watson's style to deny even talking to the student, but he couldn't deny it this time because other kids in the classroom saw and heard what he did. The email exchange on this topic continued:
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Cox [mailto:craigcox@adelphia.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:37 PM
To: martijl@d11.org; THOMAS, SHARON A.
Subject: Fw: Math and Political Issues
The part of this email that particularly bothers me is the part about a teacher harassing a student because of his parents' political views. I look forward to hearing how this will be handled. Thanks.
Craig Cox
219-0032
From: MARTIN, JILL L
To: 'Craig Cox'
Cc: THOMAS, SHARON A.
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 3:19 PM
Subject: RE: Math and Political Issues
Craig,
I appreciate your forwarding this to me. I am very disturbed to read the allegations regarding Mr. Watson and will look into this first thing tomorrow morning. I will get back to Dr. Thomas and you before the end of the day regarding this concern.
I will also address the questions regarding the Math changes last year, and why Mrs. Williams and Mrs. Keller (the other Math teacher not teaching a full load) are assigned other responsibilities.
Again, thanks for bringing this parent's concern to my attention. Jill
From: "MARTIN, JILL L" MARTIJL@d11.org
To:
CC: "THOMAS, SHARON A.", "'craigcox@adelphia.net'" Subject: Math and Political Issues
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:30:49 -0600
(Mr. & Mrs.....),
Thank you so much for meeting with me yesterday evening regarding your concerns with Math in our District, questions about Math at Doherty, and the incident with Mr. Watson and (student) in the Social Studies class. I really appreciated your sincere interest in improving education and your support for teachers. I am writing this to summarize our discussion and to ensure that I understood the issues as well as your needs for resolution.
As I shared, Mr. Watson was very surprised that (student) felt uncomfortable when he asked him what his Dad's first name was. He meant to initiate a conversation, not to intimidate him in any way. However, he understands how (student) (and you when you heard about this) could have interpreted his interest in the letter you wrote, especially when he later confirmed to (student) that the writer was his Dad, as a criticism. As you are aware, he did speak to your son about it earlier this week to ensure that (student) feels comfortable in his class. I talked with Mr. Watson briefly after our meeting, and he will email you, per your suggestion, so that he can specifically address your concerns about your son.
I also shared your discomfort with the examples of persuasive essays/letters that he used in class (Letters to the Editor from the Gazette addressing both sides of the Mill Levy question). While his intent was to find something relevant to the students, he understands how you could have found this unsettling following the question about your letter.
So Watson was "surprised" that a student would feel intimidated that he questioned him on his father's letter to the editor. Just because Watson took the time and effort to look through Gazette files and district records to determine that the writer really was the father of the student, why would the student become upset at what Watson was trying to do? Watson was apparently vocal about his political views prior to this incident or the student would not have become nervous when Watson questioned him about the letter to the editor. Just trying to start a conversation? Come on.
As a member of the labor union's executive committee, Watson's was one of the names that I showed who misses a lot of school. Many of those days missed are for labor union activities. I have publicly commented that Watson is a good classroom teacher when he is teaching his U.S. History topic. Even the parents of the child who Watson tried to intimidate agree with that. The problem is that I question the judgment of anyone like that who cannot separate their private labor union activities with classroom activities. Many D11 employees describe the working environment in the district as "Soviet-like," with labor union enforcers running around making sure that nobody gets out of line with the group-think. If you don't belong to the labor union, you will never get a promotion to administration; if you criticize the administration, you are placed on an informal list. In plain English, you are blackballed. That is the internal dynamic between adult employees of D11. It goes too far when some people try to take that dynamic and use it against parents and students, particularly because it is the parents'school district in the first place.
Watson is not the only labor union activist who pushes his politics in the classroom. Diana Beatty, a math teacher at Coronado High School, also appears to push her political views in her math classroom. Math class does not seem to be the appropriate spot to push politics, but Beatty is the secretary to the CSEA executive board, so everything is politics to her.
Beatty writes the following on her Masooma blog:
Evidence suggests that if the will of the people had truly been carried out, Bush would not have been President in 2000 or in 2004. There is an interesting section in my AP Statistics class that I teach about the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach County, Florida "throwing" the election to Bush when the intent of voters (although apparently they could not figure out the ballot - what a plethora of sad commentary could be said there) would have actually made Gore president. (If you didn't know, the outcome for president in 2000 arguably came down to the results of the single county of Palm Beach.) There's a whole other disgusting problem when the public doesn't bother to educate themselves on use of the ballots, knowing the issues, etc. (Underline mine)
That entry begs many questions, one of which would be, "What kind of statistics are being taught in that class?" Every newspaper in the country counted those ballots, and none of them could find the votes to "make Gore president." Coronado uses new-new math, so accuracy is not all that important, I suppose. There are countless ways to illustrate and teach statistics. It seems a little odd that, coincidentally, this teacher chooses a method that supports her left-wing political views, in a math class no less.
Teachers have no business pushing their political views on students when the class is not about politics, Luckily, the majority of teachers do not do this in D11. The few that do are mainly the labor union activists who will accept no views other than those espoused by their labor union bosses.
My son is brilliant, and he was bored — forced to sit in class after class with teachers expounding on their politics and what they did last summer.
At the elementary level, you probably won't hear of this type of thing very often. Elementary teachers don't tend to push their political views on students. As the student moves up through the middle and high schools, it is possible that he or she will face political posturing. In my opinion, political discussions for older students in classes that deal with social studies is probably a good thing, as long as the teacher allows for fair and even debate. While most teachers even at this level do not push their political views on their students, those teachers who are the labor union activists are the most likely to expect their students to share their left-wing political views.
One of the most vocal labor union activists in D11 is Tom Watson. He is one of the labor union representatives at Doherty High School. He spends countless hours on blogs trashing anyone who disagrees with his narrow views (rarely does he have the courage to use his real name). The purpose of this post is to illustrate that there are people like Watson who are extremely passionate about their politics, to the point that it interferes with what matters most, which is educating kids. While never offering any ideas of his own to improve D11, Watson will attack (with passion) anyone who offers any ideas on education. It seems that as far as he is concerned, there is no room for improvement in our schools.
The following is an excerpt from an email sent to the D11 board by a parent. This is just part of the email, and the parent's name is removed. The rest of the email dealt with math.
----- Original Message -----
From:
To: sshakesd11boe@aol.com
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 8:49 PM
Subject: Math and Political Issues
...In addition, my husband has had letters to the editor published over the last several months stating his political views regarding educational choice/anti-union. Approximately three weeks ago after his letter was published, Mr Tom Watson, who as you know is the union representative in Doherty HS, asked our son who his father was. Our son knowing that the letter was published, stated he didn't know what he was talking about. Mr Watson went back through previous letters to the editor and apparently checked records and told my son that it was his father. I feel that for this to have occurred in the classroom borders on intimidation and bullying...
A concerned parent hoping for change!
Here you have a teacher who will not tolerate anyone having an opinion on education unless it is his own opinion, even if that anyone is a parent. Watson will excuse any behavior by any labor union member, he will make excuse after excuse for low performing schools and teachers, but he will not stand by quietly and allow anyone to criticize his cherished labor union. It would be Watson's style to deny even talking to the student, but he couldn't deny it this time because other kids in the classroom saw and heard what he did. The email exchange on this topic continued:
-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Cox [mailto:craigcox@adelphia.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:37 PM
To: martijl@d11.org; THOMAS, SHARON A.
Subject: Fw: Math and Political Issues
The part of this email that particularly bothers me is the part about a teacher harassing a student because of his parents' political views. I look forward to hearing how this will be handled. Thanks.
Craig Cox
219-0032
From: MARTIN, JILL L
To: 'Craig Cox'
Cc: THOMAS, SHARON A.
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 3:19 PM
Subject: RE: Math and Political Issues
Craig,
I appreciate your forwarding this to me. I am very disturbed to read the allegations regarding Mr. Watson and will look into this first thing tomorrow morning. I will get back to Dr. Thomas and you before the end of the day regarding this concern.
I will also address the questions regarding the Math changes last year, and why Mrs. Williams and Mrs. Keller (the other Math teacher not teaching a full load) are assigned other responsibilities.
Again, thanks for bringing this parent's concern to my attention. Jill
From: "MARTIN, JILL L" MARTIJL@d11.org
To:
CC: "THOMAS, SHARON A."
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 08:30:49 -0600
(Mr. & Mrs.....),
Thank you so much for meeting with me yesterday evening regarding your concerns with Math in our District, questions about Math at Doherty, and the incident with Mr. Watson and (student) in the Social Studies class. I really appreciated your sincere interest in improving education and your support for teachers. I am writing this to summarize our discussion and to ensure that I understood the issues as well as your needs for resolution.
As I shared, Mr. Watson was very surprised that (student) felt uncomfortable when he asked him what his Dad's first name was. He meant to initiate a conversation, not to intimidate him in any way. However, he understands how (student) (and you when you heard about this) could have interpreted his interest in the letter you wrote, especially when he later confirmed to (student) that the writer was his Dad, as a criticism. As you are aware, he did speak to your son about it earlier this week to ensure that (student) feels comfortable in his class. I talked with Mr. Watson briefly after our meeting, and he will email you, per your suggestion, so that he can specifically address your concerns about your son.
I also shared your discomfort with the examples of persuasive essays/letters that he used in class (Letters to the Editor from the Gazette addressing both sides of the Mill Levy question). While his intent was to find something relevant to the students, he understands how you could have found this unsettling following the question about your letter.
So Watson was "surprised" that a student would feel intimidated that he questioned him on his father's letter to the editor. Just because Watson took the time and effort to look through Gazette files and district records to determine that the writer really was the father of the student, why would the student become upset at what Watson was trying to do? Watson was apparently vocal about his political views prior to this incident or the student would not have become nervous when Watson questioned him about the letter to the editor. Just trying to start a conversation? Come on.
As a member of the labor union's executive committee, Watson's was one of the names that I showed who misses a lot of school. Many of those days missed are for labor union activities. I have publicly commented that Watson is a good classroom teacher when he is teaching his U.S. History topic. Even the parents of the child who Watson tried to intimidate agree with that. The problem is that I question the judgment of anyone like that who cannot separate their private labor union activities with classroom activities. Many D11 employees describe the working environment in the district as "Soviet-like," with labor union enforcers running around making sure that nobody gets out of line with the group-think. If you don't belong to the labor union, you will never get a promotion to administration; if you criticize the administration, you are placed on an informal list. In plain English, you are blackballed. That is the internal dynamic between adult employees of D11. It goes too far when some people try to take that dynamic and use it against parents and students, particularly because it is the parents'school district in the first place.
Watson is not the only labor union activist who pushes his politics in the classroom. Diana Beatty, a math teacher at Coronado High School, also appears to push her political views in her math classroom. Math class does not seem to be the appropriate spot to push politics, but Beatty is the secretary to the CSEA executive board, so everything is politics to her.
Beatty writes the following on her Masooma blog:
Evidence suggests that if the will of the people had truly been carried out, Bush would not have been President in 2000 or in 2004. There is an interesting section in my AP Statistics class that I teach about the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach County, Florida "throwing" the election to Bush when the intent of voters (although apparently they could not figure out the ballot - what a plethora of sad commentary could be said there) would have actually made Gore president. (If you didn't know, the outcome for president in 2000 arguably came down to the results of the single county of Palm Beach.) There's a whole other disgusting problem when the public doesn't bother to educate themselves on use of the ballots, knowing the issues, etc. (Underline mine)
That entry begs many questions, one of which would be, "What kind of statistics are being taught in that class?" Every newspaper in the country counted those ballots, and none of them could find the votes to "make Gore president." Coronado uses new-new math, so accuracy is not all that important, I suppose. There are countless ways to illustrate and teach statistics. It seems a little odd that, coincidentally, this teacher chooses a method that supports her left-wing political views, in a math class no less.
Teachers have no business pushing their political views on students when the class is not about politics, Luckily, the majority of teachers do not do this in D11. The few that do are mainly the labor union activists who will accept no views other than those espoused by their labor union bosses.
posted by Craig Cox | 4:13 PM
12 Comments:
Cox, there is no low that you can't stoop to, is there?
The conversation with that student didn't occur during class, and it didn't occur exactly the way described in the parents' e-mail. And the assumption they and you made about checking Gazette files is way off base.
What happened is this: before school one day, I read the Gazette, and saw one letter with a name that sounded familiar. Since I tend to focus on my students' first names, I don't always make connections as to last names. When that student walked into class later that morning (and he was always the first or second kid in the room) it "clicked" and the question I asked him was "Hey, what's your dad's first name?" I never mentioned the letter, initially, and I was only intending to tell the young man that I saw his dad's letter in the paper that morning. Making connections like that with kids tends to make a difference, when they know your interest in them extends beyond the classroom walls. Anyway, in response to the question "What's your dad's first name?" he replied "I don't know." I don't know about you, but that response seemed peculiar to me; most sophomores know their dad's first names. So yes, I checked Zangle later on that day, and put two and two together. And the next day I joked with the student, saying (again, before class, before anyone else was there)"Hey, by the way, your dad's first name is X." (I don't even remember dad's first name today, as it makes no difference to me.)
As to the issue of the "mil levy letters" we were doing a unit about Sand Creek, and the kids had to write a persuasive letter taking a stand, one way or another, about the incident at Sand Creek. Sometimes kids need modeling done for them, so I happened to choose two letters about the mil levy issue that had recently been printed in the Gazette, one pro and one con. Many of the kids pay attention to current events, in part because I encourage their connecting their U.S. History lessons to the cirrent times, to impress history's relevance to us. Anyway, I used copies of the letters to show how persuasive writing differs from textbook writing. We didn't discuss it in class, and I never offered my opinion on the mill levy; I merely provided written copies to the kids and asked them to take a look at it that night, if they had any question in their minds as to what persuasive writing looked like.
Just because (lots of) people disagree with you and your ilk, Cox, it doesn't make them Communists. I happen to be a registered Republican since the day I first registered to vote in 1976. I don't happen to be as staunchly ultra-conservative as some Republicans in this town, so I guess that makes me a "liberal" by comparison, but I don't think D-11 is a Soviet satellite. I have no desire to ever be an administrator, so you're way off base when you head in that direction. I enjoy teaching, and I have no desire to go back to grad school to get an administrator's Type D license. But yes, I'll speak out on issues in public, and you're not going to intimidate me with your nonsense.
As to absences, I think I missed maybe six or seven days last year due to Association activities. I've missed a whole bunch of days this school year, but that's due to the fact that I postponed necessary surgery until Winter Break, to try to minimize my time out of the classroom. It turned out that the surgery was a good deal more extensive than my doctor expected, so I missed over a month and a half at the beginning of second semester. It reinforced for me (if I needed any reinforcement) that I love being in the classroom and I love working with kids. Not so that I can brainwash them, but because I get really excited about our future when I see some of these kids in action. If you could only find something that you could do for a living that makes you feel good about yourself, you might understand.
Please note that I am using my name so that we can bury that accusation about people not using their namesand get to the heart of the matter.
I have to wonder, Mr. Cox, did you ask permission of Jill Martin, National Principal of the year, before you used her email publicly? Are you asserting that a National Principal of the year would continue to employ a "union thug" that espouses his political views to students? She invistigated the matter, but that wasn't enough. I think you have a grudge, myself, and that you believe that your former position(resigned board member that you are) gives you the ability to publish any and all emails, and comndemn your adversaries. Well, as a teacher,a parent of D-11 students, and a tax-payer I resent you using private emails in a one-sided attempt to get at Tom. Did you stop to think about how the student might feel about having his private issue used in such a fashion? He was embarassed enough that his parents made such a fuss about it when Tom spoke to him personally and apologized about causing him any discomfort. You acknowledged that Tom is a good teacher, but your venom causes you to attack because of Tom's association ties and his recall success. It's fortunate that you don't teach our children, because I fear that you'd do more than ask them the name of their father.
The bond issue was done in conjunction with Willie Braezell, and served to inform kids about the current event in their own district. Willie spoke to the class and Tom had students write their views to Willie so that Willie could address their comments and concerns. Have you asked Willie if this was a slanted "union" pushing maneuver? I'm positive that Willie would tell you how much he enjoyed discussing this with the kids, but that would not fit with your commentary, would it?
As to the black-balling that you refer to, it's a lot of conjecture with very little validity. I've yet to walk into an interview and have to state whether I'm an association member or not. Infact, there is back-balling done on personal likes and dislikes by principals (with no regard to ability) far more than anything having to do with membership/ non-membership. Finally, the non-members of this unit receive the same exact benefits as the members in this district, so I think you are way off in your absurd accusation.
I honestly thought that the "big bad union" talk would die once the recall was over. No one fell for it in the election and the majority(75-80%) of our teachers are association members. Not because they are forced to (out of fear or a lack of ability to get out) but because they CHOOSE to. There are legitimate gripes about the association (no entity is perfect) and we do our very best to please as many members and non-members as possible. Making up accusations about back-room, in-the-night negotiations and scare tactics is childish and our public knows the truth. I don't know what attacking our members gets you, but I think that it makes you look petty and takes away from your legitimate commentary. Just an opinion from another "union-thug" and I'll sit back and wait for the publication of emails about me and another character assassination.
Wow, Tom and Lori, you used your names. That must have been a tough decision for you.
As I read through your responses, my first thought was that you could not possibly be so out of touch that you don't see, smell, and feel the hypocrisy in your writings. Then I realized that you do see the hypocrisy, but you place yourselves on such a lofty pedestal that you are somehow untouchable, while anyone and everyone who disagrees with you or has one negative thing to say about your labor union is fair game for any of your attacks and outright lies.
Lori, this is a legitimate topic. It is a very legiimate topic when teachers attempt to bully students because of the student's or parent's political views. One of your battle cries for the three years that I was on the board was that we were "politicizing" the school board. You griped and complained when we, who were politicians, would debate each other at board meetings because we were being "political." While you were out there drumming up opposition to a board that was not purchased by your labor union dollars, your labor union leaders were busy squashing any opposition within the teacher ranks and Tom was apparently trying to do the same with a parent through that parent's student. Yes, that is a huge issue, Lori, and that is why you are so upset about the fact that I published it.
Tom, did you really accuse me of "going low?" Are you a sensitive little teacher who just wants to shuffle around and teach children? Is this quote from you "low" or is it considered "high?"
"Don't fall for Christen and Cox's "1% raise" lie. It's 1% across-the-board, plus steps and lanes, plus a few more incidentals, so the package as a whole is in the range of 5%. Which is exactly the same neighborhood of other area districts -- which Cox and Christen said got much better deals without CSEA's help!
They're both scum, Mike, and I'd be glad to help you go dumpster diving to find out more about Christen! Just drop me a line.
Posted by: Tom at May 12, 2006 09:25 PM
This is from the "Drinking Liberally" blog."
Scum, Tom? I have never publicly referred to you in that manner, have I? Would you really go dumpster diving to find out more about someone simply because you disagree with their political views? I guess you would because you said you would, and you are an honest man, aren't you? How about this email that you sent to teachers, Tom - low or high?
"From: TJWatson4@aol.com [mailto:TJWatson4@aol.com]
Subject: Nov. 1 election
I've heard that some staff members are willing to walk for the Mill Levy Override piece of the campaign, but they're leery of walking for John Gudvangen, Tami Hasling and/or Sandra Mann. That's your prerogative, and if you're only willing to distribute MLO literature, then that's what you can do. I would ask you to keep this thought in mind, however: if 3B (the MLO) passes, but we don't get a majority of pro-public education BOE members, it is very likely that they'll simply choose not to issue the bonds. Huh? How can they do that if the voters OK it? Simple: all the voters can do is give their OK to issue the bonds; the BOE can still choose to not issue the bonds. That's what the "fiscal accountability" means in the campaign literature of the "other guys." So we'd be in the unenviable position of having our voters OK the issuance of bonds for the Doherty expansion, but the school board says "thanks, but no thanks."
If you can help in any way, please speak with Dave Fisk or me before/after school, or during lunch.
Thanks, Doherty!
Tom Watson"
Such integrity, Tom. Did "fiscal accountability" really mean that, or did you just make that up for political purposes? You wouldn't lie about or trash citizens simply because they disagree with your labor union views, would you Tom? That would be low, right? How about this letter to the pro-reform candidates in 2005?
"From: TJWatson4@aol.com [mailto:TJWatson4@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 7:41 PM
To: Carla4kids@adelphia.net; perry_reginald@hotmail.com; boblathen@hotmail.com
Subject: School board candidate forum
Dear Ms. Albers, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Lathen:
As a taxpayer, voter, and teacher in D-11, I encourage you to rethink your position and agree to participate in the October 17th Candidate Forum.
If you're not out to destroy public education, this is your opportunity to express your views to the public and let us all know that you're not posing that kind of threat.
Otherwise, you will clearly show the community that you all are, indeed, "stealth candidates" who are counting on party politics (in a "non-partisan" election) and ungodly sums of campaign contributions from outside Colorado Springs to win you seats on the Board of Education.
It's reprehensible that people seeking public office should go out of their way to avoid speaking at a public forum. Even Eric Christen had enough nerve to do so in 2003.
Tom Watson"
Wow, out to destroy public education? Pretty high-brow stuff there, Tom. By the way, what did you think about all of that outside money coming in to help your union candidates. You wouldn't act in a partisan manner by failing to criticize that, would you? You are a pretty honest guy, right? The debate that you were worried about was set up by Citizen's Project, which already endorsed your union candidates. Would that not have been a "slanted" debate? What did you say when your union candidates skipped the debate during the recall election? Someone with your level of integrity must have been pretty upset with your guys, right?
Watson: "Last Sunday's front page Gazette article clearly shows why Christen and Shakes should be recalled, and it just as clearly shows why a "debate" with a pontificator like Christen wouldn't prove anything...The problems with Christen go far beyond what can easily be described in a 45 second sound byte. The Gazette painstakingly recounted every detail of his personal agenda, and it took the better part of three newspaper pages to print it all."
A little different take that time, huh? And what did the Gazette use to recount Eric's agenda? They used private emails. What say you about that, Lori?
Sorry, Tom, but your story on attempting to intimidate one of your own students is pretty sophomoric. The parents lied, the student lied, I lied, but not Tom; he's a real straight shooter. If they are such liars, maybe they are not telling the truth about you being a good teacher.
If you only knew your students by their first names, Tom, then it would make no sense for your curiosity to have been piqued by the LAST name of the author of the letter to the editor, would it? And if you so care about making connections with your students, maybe you would have recognized that this student was not interested in being "connected" on the issue of his father's first name. Instead, you made the effort to check the Zangle records and to push the issue even though the student was not interested in talking to you about that topic. There had to be an obvious reason that the student knew what you were after when you asked his father's name, didn't there, Tom? You didn't just tell the student that his father's name was "X," you told him that his father wrote the letter to the editor, a letter that you did not like.
Lori, thank you, as a mother and taxpayer and teacher, for resenting me using private emails. Oh wait a minute, you didn't say that you resent me using private emails, but that you resent me using private emails to attack Tom. And oh wait a minute, I guess that I did not send any private emails, because I sent emails that were sent in a chain to the entire school board. I believe from my days on the board that this would make them PUBLIC emails. By the way, as a tax payer and mother and teacher, did you resent the fact that someone sent private emails from Eric to the Gazette and the Independent, and that there were a couple of different articles in each paper about these emails? Do you resent the fact, as a tax payer and mother and teacher, that I have seen some of my private emails on D11 Watch? Did you, as a tax payer and mother, resent the fact that Tom sent private emails from board members around to other labor union members and citizens to support his call for a recall? Did any of this cause deep resentment within you, or does that resentment only apply when it comes to Tom? My wife is a tax payer and mother and she teaches training classes for her company, and I'll bet that she resented it when she saw my private emails splattered around in different venues around town. I'll ask her if she resented that or not. She can be pretty resentful sometimes.
Lori, no identifying information was used at all to give the identity of any students. The only way anyone would know who is being discussed is if Tom has talked about this student at school. He would not have done that, would he? Tom cares about students, right? In fact, he cares so much about students that he actually ran to the aid of a fellow Doherty teacher after she used a racial slur against a Doherty student. I wonder why he didn't run to the aid of the student. I wonder if there is anything to resent there.
Tom, you claim that you have no desire to become an administrator. I never said that you did. Lori points out that you had a big hand in the successful recall effort against Eric and Sandy, which leads to the fact that your true desire is to become a labor union big-wig. To gain that "status," you have to show a ruthless disregard for honesty and an attack-dog mentality. From all accounts, you are well on your way to labor union stardom. I find it interesting, though, that on her blog, Diana Beatty pointed out how Lori was causing a huge commotion at the labor union executive board meeting when Tom did not get the labor union position that he craved. Lori felt that Tom was "owed" something for his loyalty in constantly attacking the reform members of the board. I guess if you keep uping the antics, you will receive the recognition to get you to where you want to be.
Lori wrote: "It's fortunate that you don't teach our children, because I fear that you'd do more than ask them the name of their father."
As a rule of thumb for writing, one should have an idea of what a sentence is supposed to mean before one writes the sentence.
No, Lori, the black-balling is not conjecture, it is a well known fact around D11. The fact that you even admit that it has "very little validity" tells me that you know that it is true. No, the non-lanor union members do not receive the same benefits as members. I already pointed that out in a prior post. As a classic example, remember when your labor union leaders had a hissy-fit when a non-labor union teacher tried to get on the merit pay committee? I remember.
Lori, if you are so sure that membership in the labor union would remain steady if members were not forced to join, then voluntarily remove the "opt-out" clause from the contract and make it "opt-in." Put your money where your mouth sits.
Sorry, I'm not "attacking your members;" I am simply pointing out some of the long standing issues in D11, a major one being that the labor union leaders place their politics ahead of the best interests of the parents and students (and even the teachers) of the district. They have always done so.
I don't plan on publishing any of your emails right now, Lori. For integrity purposes, though, I will ask you how the green water looks over at East.
Tom, you actually missed 18 days of school last year, and many more this year. Students can be brought to court for missing 10 days. Just keeping you straight.
Your post once again points out how Orwellian our whole "education" system is in America. We force kids to go to school using threat of government force (even Watson understands how well that (government force) has worked through history) and assign them to schools using their bloody zip code. Can anyone name any other country in the world that does such a thing? Certainly none of the countries kicking our fannies in every conceivable subject. Then we unionize our teaching force forcing them into a one size fits all pay system that guarantees the best and brightest never enter that workforce (what was it Steve Jobs just said the other day about unionizing teachers?). Finally what we are left with are the rift raft (for the most part, with a few exceptions) who couldn't make it in the real world, most of whom cling to the authoritarian worldview that their whole education system exists within in the first place! And we are surprised that these kids feel intimidated by these intolerant imbeciles? These are the most insecure group of aparatchiks alive today (outside of Cuba).
I would have no problem with Watson or any of his commisar friends teaching kids so long as the parents were sending their kids to the school of their choice. As it is, these kids are stuck in these failing gulags and forced to be bullied by these bottom feeders.
Keep it up Cox, I'm sure Watson and the others who couldn't deal intellectually with you guys while you were on the board, just sit in front of their computers now full of bravado as they curse your name and continue to get confused by all these facts.
Well, I about fell off my chair reading Tom Watson's post and was going to write a response, but I see you've already taken care of it, Craig. For the record, when I ran for the school board in 2005, I was on the record at several forums as being in favor of the mill levy override - even though I believe the district has been incredibly, financially irresponsible - because I know how great the needs are at some of the buildings. Then Union Tom writes an email to teachers saying I will not issue the bonds if the override passes and I'm elected.
Tom - that's called a lie, L, I, E. Not only did I never say that, there was no evidence, no statement, no writing anywhere, to allow you to "mistakenly" make that claim. (Pull out your dusty law books. It's also called Libel.) You and the other union thugs involved in the 2005 election are nothing but liars, plain and simple. From push polls to television ads comparing me to a dog peeing on a fire hydrant, you guys showed clearly that you are afraid of the facts, you are afraid of people who actually care about kids and want to clean up the mess that is this district, and that the only way for you to participate in the political arena is to lie about those who won't bow down at the union altar.
As to Lori and her reputation for truthfulness or lack thereof, let's check out one of her letters to the editor back in September of 2005:
"Board correct to not give parents special treatment
It never ceases to amaze me how The Gazette can twist or delete facts to support its editorial agenda. The Sept. 2 Our View, "The tutor tax," was full of half-truths concerning the recent District 11 board of education decision to charge private tutors rent. Not only were parents and certain board members asking to be allowed to tutor within the buildings during the regular school day, they were requesting it be done during core subjects and wanting it to be paid for as well.
The parents (a very small, select group) were asking for a policy change to accommodate their own busy schedules and those of their tutors. It's never been board policy to change policy to fit the needs of small groups looking for privileges, nor should it be. This new policy was aimed at parents who could afford tutoring if the district wouldn't pay for it. If this need were voiced by more parents than Carla Albers and a few of her cohorts, I'm sure the board would have worked to find a reasonable solution. As it was, the meetings between parents and administration were reaching impasses in requests and needs on both sides.
Whatever happened to parents taking on the responsibility for the special needs of their own children on their own time, instead of insisting the school do it because they pay taxes? My parents paid taxes as well, but never expected the schools to meet all of my needs.
One last issue the editorial neglected to address was the fact that the suggested policy would cause a huge issue about the responsibility of learning. As a teacher, I am accountable to the district for the learning of children under my charge. When a tutor removes a child from my class, I am still responsible for the learning and yet I am not a part of it. How do high schools give credit for a class that was unattended because a tutor removed the student from class?
This issue was a lot more complicated than The Gazette made it seem.
Lori Watson
Colorado Springs"
Truth or lies? Were we just "a small, select group of parents speaking out?" No, actually, we were the parents who weren't afraid of being blackballed by school officials for speaking up, speaking on the behalf of many parents, unable to readily afford tutoring, but unable to speak up on their own. And while the inaccuracies in the above letter are numerous, let me comment on just a few.
"It's never been board policy to change policy to fit the needs of small groups looking for privileges, nor should it be. This new policy was aimed at parents who could afford tutoring if the district wouldn't pay for it."
Really? So let's use a few facts, something which are in short supply in Lori's letter. My daughter is dyslexic. She was not identified by D-11 as being dyslexic. My husband and I paid for private testing. My husband and I paid for several years of intensive tutoring. Not once did we ask the district to reimburse us for the monies we spent in teaching our daughter to READ. In fact, at the time I started going to the BOE to raise awareness on behalf of parents who don't have the resources to help their children, my daughter had not been tutored for over a year. I was doing something to help other parents get help for their children. (One parent I spoke to would save money, pay for tutoring sessions for his child, suspend them while he saved more money, restart a few more tutoring sessions, etc. Is he one of that "small, select group"?) Perhaps you classify teaching children to read as a privilege. I myself call that a necessary function of the public school system.
Lori states, "Whatever happened to parents taking on the responsibility for the special needs of their own children on their own time, instead of insisting the school do it because they pay taxes? My parents paid taxes as well, but never expected the schools to meet all of my needs."
Guess what, Lori? I expect the schools to teach kids how to read. I don"t expect schools to make money off tutors (by charging them "rent"), who are being paid by parents to teach their children to read after the school has failed to do so. I also expect teachers to get more than 18% of their students to proficiency in math - which I think is the record at your school and of your math students. Do you really want to suggest that parents are insisting on "privileges" when all they want is for their kids to be able to read and do math? That's scary.
The Statistics teacher must be the College Board AP-approved text Stats Modeling the World by Bock Velleman and Deveaux. What you underlined is a lesson from that textbook; I recognized it because I have taught from it myself many times. It is a very good, reputable text - definitely not "new math". Incidentally, I have a cousin whose kids attend Coronado - and they do not use "new math". I suppose you are referring to the IMP math program, which is a program I seem to remember was written specifically to align with math standards and funded by the National Science Foundation and which most data has shown does not result in worse performance by students - but anyway, that is a moot point, because Coronado no longer offers IMP - I looked at my cousin's course description book.
Anonymous,
Thank you for clarifying the math situation at Coronado. If that is truly the College Board AP approved text, they are certainly showing their political bent, which is well known among college educators, I suppose.
It is good to hear that Coronado is no longer offering IMP. I disagree with you on the statistics. I have seen plenty of data that shows problems with constructivist math, particularly when students who take it do not have a solid foundation on math facts. That has been a problem in districts that have pushed kids from elementary through high school on constructivist math programs (ie, D11). Although I live in the northeast, I live in the Coronado corridor. I know of many parents who still have a problem with the math at Coronado because the focus is on writing at least as much (if not more) than it is on the math. Another big problem seems to be that the math teachers don't want any part of meeting with the parents to listen to their concerns. That seems wrong to me.
Thanks for writing and clearing up the IMP issue.
Wow, I had heard about the Watson's but those posts from them speak volumes. They really do live in their own little delusional world. Scary that they interact at all with kids. So glad my kids are not in D-11.
When you see stuff like this, you always hear the sympathy for the teacher, as in, "Oh look, you're picking on teachers again." At what point is anyone going to begin worrying about the poor kids? I think that todays's article about Rogers highlights a huge problem in this district, and that is that the administration will always bend over backwards to cover for wrongdoing or protect bad people, but it never seems to come out on the side of kids. I guess that I don't get it.
Although this is a little off topic from the original post, I wanted to clear up something written by Anonymous re: the IMP math program at Coronado. IMP is not aligned to NSF (National Science Foundation) standards. IMP is aligned to the 1989 NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) standards. The relationship between the two is that the NSF has awarded countless millions of dollars in grants to companies/groups developing curricula aligned to NCTM standards.
A couple of problems with this. The 1989 NCTM standards were not written by mathematicians - which explains why the standards recommended decreased attention to, e.g., pencil and paper calculations (use calculators instead), long division (!), or even memorization. The NCTM has finally had to back away the 1989 standards as of last fall, when it issued its Focal Points document, which document notes that it actually is important for kids to learn basic math, something completely minimized in the 1989 standards. Finally, as one university mathematician suggested to me, open up an IMP book and try to find the math. So, I did at the Coronado Open House. It looks like an English text. It was astonishing. Kids are graduating from high schools without the necessary skills to pursue higher level math. IMP is a prime example of one of the reasons why.
Carla,
I guess the good news, if Anonymous is correct, is that IMP is no longer used at Coronado. The bad news, according to parents, is that math is still "taught" in the constructivist manner, ie, get into a group and see what you can learn together. It sounds more like a step sideways than a step forward.
"Sick of it," a lot of people don't get it. A school district, like any government entity, is supposed to exist to serve the public. The D11 administration is very good at serving itself. Do nothing boards, such as currently exists, add to the problem.
After opening up that can of whoop ass on tom and Lori can I make a prediction? You will never hear form them again (using their real names.) Ouch!
Post a Comment
<< Home