My concern with Mutual Matching is that, to a certain degree, it becomes a popularity contest; and it also allows principals (and presumably their staff) to reject teachers who are older than them. For example, my job was eliminated a couple of years ago. I am much older than everyone else on the new staff; and in fact, much older than most principals. And with more than 20 years in, my salary is high compared to newer, younger teachers. So, I don’t think I would be very likely to be selected. Because money IS a driving factor in hiring. I know there is some talk of central office financing the salaries, but I’m not convinced that this will happen.

Beyond that, there is the problem of both teachers who don’t get matched AND schools that don’t get matched, because there are many schools where most teachers would rather not work.

The truth is that no system is guaranteed. And the further truth is that many teachers are good, not great, and somehow, as the saying goes, the great has become the enemy of the good. It’s no longer good enough to be “merely” good. Plus, who can say what is good? I have five periods of the same class each day. But every class has a different dynamic, and all of us get more tired throughout the day. Sometimes the same materials, with the same age and general population of students, succeeds wonderfully with some groups and fails with others. Sometimes my most difficult class is totally engaged, though, and my most engaged class is off their stride. So, does this mean I am a great teacher some parts of the day and a terrible teacher other parts of the day? Which is the most true? I cannot reach every student, even though that’s somehow expected. And I myself am sometimes also off my stride. Things happen in people’s lives.

In general, I think this system is broken and serves neither teachers nor students… it worked reasonably for middle-class kids when I was a kid, probably less so lower economic status kids, so even then, it didn’t work for many people. I am frankly kind of fed up with the whole thing, and when I talk to my new, young, TFA colleagues, the truth is that almost all of them plan to leave in a year or two. The job is not sustainable. So even with Mutual Matching, you might get someone whose commitment is about an inch deep.

It’s basically a crap shoot. Someone who seems great might not work out, someone who seems like they wouldn’t work, might be pretty good.

http://www.fatherhood.org/media/consequences-of-father-absence-statistics

http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossstates/Rankings.aspx?ind=107

You would rather blame others for some perceived dictated caste system instead of realizing that personal responsibility and the choice to party or study weighs very heavy on a persons future. You bemoan prop 13 and say the district is underfunded, and yet OUSD receives much more funding per ADA than many local districts yet OUSD performs no better and many times far worse. You are partially right about the prison system, the costs are way out of line because of the overpaid guards(babysitters). The pensions obligations in this state are staggering, and yet they keep climbing because even pensioners get raises, and make more money than those working, and the taxpayer is on the hook for all of it(that’s the union in action.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/02/09/Runaway-Prison-Costs-Thrash-State-Budgets.aspx#page1

http://www.ibabuzz.com/onassignment/2011/09/07/a-closer-look-at-spending-and-test-scores-in-east-bay-schools/#comments

The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity at Ohio State University produced a PowerPoint report in 2004, “Social/Economic Indicators by Race: Disparity 1954 and Today.” Open up the PowerPoint at http://tiny.cc/i408cw

Slide 4 compares statistics from 1957 and 2002 and states, “Since 1957, the proportion of the African American population with a high school degree has increased by 300% (18.4% to 79.2%) and the proportion of the African American population with a 4-year college degree increased by almost 500% (2.9% to 17.2%). The figures were obtained from the U.S. Department of Education. They show disparity, but also show that more improvement has been made than we are typically told. Are they false figures?

The most powerful slide to me is #22. It shows an extremely steep climb in prison admissions (of African Americans esp.) that started in the early 1970′s. The report states that the number of incarcerated African Americans increased 800% since the 1950s.

So is the deterioration you believe that occurred something caused by Oakland’s public school district, or could it be the consequence of other social forces, esp. the onset of an era of rapidly escalating incarceration? Perhaps even in combination with reduced funding b/c of Prop 13, and the post-civil rights era exodus of certain types of families (both Black and White) out of Oakland’s schools? What else?

This is where I think Michelle Alexander who wrote “The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness” is on to something much more important and fundamental than will ever be able to be *fixed* by any amount of so-called education reform. To me it seems that this country tolerates an intentionally-created caste system that keeps our privatized and profiting prison system well-fed. It is causing constant and deep damage to generations of families and kids. Call me a skeptic or a realist, but I just don’t believe that the teachers, their unions, and the district created the situation. And I also can’t see how things are going to be *fixed* by having more and more privately-run charter schools, demoralizing teachers and busting their unions, having more high-stakes testing, or hiring gobs of Teach for America teachers.

However, it is tiresome to read the knee jerk attacks on teachers, their unions, their professional organizations and their professors in teacher education institutions.

Having the rights of teachers taken away with the stroke of the keyboard (acceleration TSAs, mutual matching and other violations of the contract) by people who have little or no training or experience is more than insulting.

Lastly, watching OUSD students, especially the most vulnerable of them, treated as pawns in a giant chess game with power and money as its prizes might prompt one to use the word crass.

There are a lot of good OUSD schools, especially at the elementary level.

Middle and high schools have been and continue to be neglected academically.

I urge parents to go to their chld’s secondary school and interview the teachers, asking the following -

What information, resources or supplies have teachers received that they can use to improve instruction?

What technology, lab materials, art projects, musical instruments, research resources, math explorations, foreign language software, physical education equipment have been made available for use by their children? Can they, the parents, see such in use by students throughout the school?

When was the last time OUSD, not their school site, sent teachers to subject area conferences and courses offered by the University of California subjct area projects in History/Social Sciences, Mathematics, and the Sciences (this is particularly germane for the West Oakland STEM Corridor)?

The successful programs and academies in the middle and high schools are small and isolated. They thrive because of the collaboration of teachers, parents, and in some cases site administrators. The rest of the students get superficial programs that do little or nothing to enhance the academic program. Organizations are a reflection of the quality of its leadership.

I’m not sure what your definition of “a lot” is. Please share details. I’m particularly interested in middle and high schools that are “working.”

Sure, there are schools that need more experienced teachers and there are schools integrating new teachers, but these are issues that many school districts face in medium- and large-sized cities across the country. They do not seem to encounter the problems that we do in Oakland. Perhaps we need to overcome numerous problems that collectively present a unique, difficult challenge. But the bottom line is that this is a significant, serious problem so changes to the status quo, from my perspective, are welcome.

And please, save your crassness for other forums. This is an excellent board so please don’t ruin it. And for the record, I don’t watch Fox, I’m a registered democrat and work hard enough to pay the mortgage on my house that is under water. Gotta love Oakland, crappy schools and all.

“If our budgets weren’t based at the site including salaries and principals weren’t actively harassing older teachers because ‘they cost too much’, more schools would be successful”.

If I remember correctly Results Based Budgeting started fairly recently in 2004(so that doesn’t account for lack of success in the previous 3 to 4 decades), and before that charters started in the early 90′s, but not in significant numbers until NCLB(2000) or thereabout(again this does not account for lack of historical performance).
As for hard work, most teacher do and those teachers that hand out worksheets, don’t return graded work, show movies unrelated to the curriculum, or just don’t give out much work(don’t even us a gradebook) realize that you do not have to work hard if that is your choice. The system is so damaged and full of loop holes that I am at a loss to understand why anyone is surprised by the systemic lack of performance.

Your child, I wouldn’t mind teaching. Dealing with you, I could do without. Your attitude is pathetic. I hope your child didn’t inherit that from you. You sound like you’ve bought the lie from FOX News that teachers are trying to indoctrinate in liberal ideas and that teacher unions protect ‘lazy’ teachers. Most teachers do most in the first hour than you do all day.

There are a lot of schools that are working in Oakland. There are those that need more experienced teachers in addition to those who are new to the profession. If our budgets weren’t based at the site including salaries and principals weren’t actively harassing older teachers because ‘they cost too much’, more schools would be successful.

AND ED. REFORM as we know it in Oakland means taking money from these foundations and lining the pockets of a few with it.