Something for Nothing - 2020 Election Anthem

 It's very rare if even possible to get something for nothing.  The concept of "free" is an arbitrary one.  An action must be taken in order for the "free" to be received.  

If you win the lottery ("free money!"), you had to buy a ticket. 

If you were given a free car wash from the repair shop, you had to take your vehicle in. 

If your coffee was bought by the person in front of you, you had to first join the line. 

It seems that the idea of free or getting something for nothing has become more prevalent over the years. Why? Where did this come from? How did it become part of the fabric?  I see it in many aspects of life. 

My students feel they should just "get" a grade...which technically they do. But if they have not taken any action, the grade is an F.  

My children feel they should just get food and water and shelter...which technically - yes - that's my responsibility as a parent.  But we do require they complete chores and help maintain the household to make the getting of those things easier. 

Where the idea of getting something for nothing has really begun to burn my shorts is in the realm of society - politics, economics, education.  Election season has only made this idea more pervasive. 

In Montana, we are debating the issues of legalizing marijuana, implementing a sales tax, among the usual battles over various state seats. Both sides have augered themselves into their own ideology with very little budging seeming to happen.  We are also dealing with the same issues as most of the rest of the nation - reforming police forces, funding public education, reducing incarceration rates, updating crumbling infrastructure, and many more. 

The left says "make marijuana legal!" The right says "It will kill our kids."

Our Republican nominee for governor says "Sales tax is great" and our Democratic nominee says "Sales tax is the devil's work." (Not verbatim quotes - just the general gist based on the 110 colored pamphlets I've received). 

These cries fall among other ones we've heard around the world - defund the police, increase mental health care funding, expand medical services, make schools great, rebuild our cities, build roads and bridges, make all areas of America accessible to all...and on and on and on. 

So how do we do it?  How do we get all that...for nothing? 

That's right, we can't. 

Most Americans want similar things.  The 'how' is the sticking point.  But what can't be ignored is that most of these "things" cost money.  Again - can't get something for nothing. 

An action must be taken. 

So let's legalize marijuana and tax the shit out of it with all taxes going to mental health services, hiring social workers, increasing training of law enforcement, and updating our justice systems. 

Let's implement a sales tax with exemptions for residents then put all that money towards public schools and updating the infrastructure in the state and investing in parenting programs so we can all become better parents.

Let's tax gambling machines and put that money towards medical funds and systems to help our residents receive incredible services. 

We can't have top schools, top mental health services, top hospitals, top infrastructure, top law enforcement if we don't do something.  You can't get something for nothing. 

No solution is perfect because every solution involves humanity.  So let's get over finding a perfect solution and work on finding solutions period.  Our state has a population that just skims 1 million.  We do not have the ability to fund our programs through property tax alone.  We are causing harm by ignoring the fact that our pie is only so big and more pieces keep getting cut from it. 

So politicians and policymakers reading this - go do something so we can get something. 

Why Educators Should Make Educational Decisions...

It was with great disappointment that I read Commissioner Heather O’Loughlin‘s Letter to the Editor regarding the current SRO debate in our school district (“We must make evidence-based decisions to support community safety”, Helena IR, July 15, 2020). The myriad of issues and discrepancies presented during the public meeting on July 9, 2020 and in Ms. O’Loughlin’s letter regarding the SROs and Helena public schools can be broken into three distinct categories: the anecdotal examples that were given bordered on slander of our professionals, there was a massive group of stakeholders missing from the public conversation, and - most egregiously- the data was skewed/misinterpreted/miscontextualized.

During the token testimonies of the panelists the ACLU assembled, an individual of the school district was named and misinformation was given out on her role in the anecdote shared by the former student. It was the general understanding of the public present that this meeting was called to discuss the role of SROs in the school not the job performance of individual professionals employed by the district. It can be assumed that since it used the anecdote as part of its argument, the ACLU was fully aware of what the young adult would say and therefore blatantly ignored professional standards of not calling out unrelated individuals just to vent past frustrations. Additionally, several times, classroom teachers were entirely disregarded and SROs were elevated to the level as “first responders in a crisis”. Police officers are trained in first-response but they are not the first encounter a student will have in a time of crisis. The vast - almost exclusive - majority of the time, the first responder to students is the classroom teacher. We are trained to identify telling signs of a student’s current mental state as well as building relationships with students so we can be on alert for any deviations in behavior that may indicate trauma or mental health struggles.

Additionally, through their own ignorance or lack of preparation, the organizers of the meeting made the assumption that all stakeholders had access to the Internet and email necessary to jump into the Zoom meeting in order to participate in the public comment time. They neglected to consider our most impoverished stakeholders and those allegedly most negatively impacted by the presence of SROs. What measures were taken to ensure that everyone who wanted it had access to the meeting? Was there concerted effort by the commission or the ACLU to notify all stakeholders and to provide the easiest access possible to the meeting? Were there community hotspots established to ensure connectivity for those who don’t have Internet at home? Was there access to public computers for those who don’t have computers at home? The city commission and ACLU neglected to involve those parties who were held up as the subject of the meeting in regard to the SROs. Given the circumstances of how we ended our school year, the school district could have been tapped as a resource and partner in how to reach as many stakeholders as possible. But that “oversight” forced a large group of our community to be left out.

Finally, the data cited at the meeting and again in Ms. O’Loughlin’s letter was faulty at best and given through an incredibly biased perspective. In Ms. O’Loughlin’s letter, she states “the [data shows] disproportionate levels of discipline that Black, Indigenous, and other students of color face in the Helena School District...students of color represent 11.5% of total student enrollment, and yet, they face 25% of our-of-school suspensions.” She continues on citing ACLU Montana’s 2019 report “Empty Desks...” staying the aforementioned groups of students “are more likely to be disciplined in school" with the report concluding that this leads to thousands of days missed for those groups of students. This is where the opponents of SROs’s argument breaks down. The police officers present in our schools do not discipline the students according to district discipline policy. They enforce the law and would do so whether physically present in the school or not. If a law has not been broken or if protective custody is not needed, the officers are not involved.

Furthermore, in ACLU’s own report, they recommended various strategies to combat the connection between frequent discipline in school and incarceration rates later in life that range from “banning zero tolerance discipline policies at the state level to arranging classroom desks in a circle, rather than rows” (“Education leaders respond to ACLU Montana report...”, Great Falls Tribune, January 20, 2020). Those recommendations are a far cry from removing SROs with no plan as to what happens next. Concerns have also been raised about the report regarding its scope. The report gathered one year of data, which is not best practice in research, because individual years could have had a myriad of specific issues. For example, in the same article cited above, it was reported that Flathead High School had a senior prank that “went bad” (according to Superintendent Flateau) resulting in 21 students facing two criminal citations each. This was construed in the report as “42 arrests” giving Flathead a total count of 50 arrests instead of a more realistic number of 8. The report also disregarded the fact that the district worked with all 21 of the students to ensure they graduated with their class (low graduation rates was one of the major detriments (according to the ACLU) that suspensions and/or citations can have). The superintendent also stated that the recommended practice of Restorative Justice was being implemented in the district already. Further quotes in the article from various individuals recognize the issue in inconsistency and therefore misreporting of data between the districts and the Office of Civil Rights. 

Ms. O’Loughlin seems to disregard the issues with the report and take the data at face value, which is not how “evidence-based decisions” should be responsibly made. The data contained in the report is also becoming quickly outdated since it is from the 2015-2016 school year and many schools have already made efforts towards minimizing the number of suspensions and moving towards Restorative Justice systems and educating teachers to have more trauma-informed classrooms as well as implementing MBI programs and bringing in CSCT counselors (all recommendations by the ACLU).

Another key fact missing from the ACLU's presentation and Ms. O’Loughlin’s reiteration is that the report does not contain a full picture of all schools in Montana and therefore should not be used as a blanket statement for the entire state. As reported in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on December 6, 2019 (“Bozeman schools prefer a kinder approach...”), “Bozeman isn’t mentioned in the report, which focused more on problems at schools on or near Indian reservations.” In fact, as part of its efforts to help create safer and more equitable school environments, Bozeman is using a 2019 law to raise $418,000 to go toward four new SROs. And most indicative is that in the actual report that serves as the entire foundation for ACLU's argument against SROs in the Helena school system, under the section titled “Schools With Arrests”, Helena does not appear on the map or in the charts.

The arguments being made to remove SROs are not about our officers at all. They are arguments against systemic racism, broken school systems, and generational poverty as well as arguments against current district administration and practices. The former realities are far too big for one group of city commissioners to tackle, and the latter is far beyond the scope and reach of the City Commission’s duties. Change is absolutely necessary on the former and discussions in the appropriate venues occur on the latter. However, stating SROs create a racist environment does detract from a more reasonable and achievable argument to remove them - the city can’t afford to pay for them.

Why isn’t the commission arguing it from that perspective? It’s been reported that the City of Helena is in a budget crunch/crisis with a nearly $18 million shortfall for proposed projects (“Financing slip-up delays $18M in Helena infrastructure projects”, Helena IR, May 11, 2020). The timing of removing SROs and thus not spending $292,000 on them is convenient. But no one is stating that the City can’t pay for it, which would be a logical and reasonable argument. No one in the educational world would argue finding funds is difficult and not everything we want can be paid for. But budget cuts is not the stated reason SROs should be removed. The stated reason most poignantly made by those opponents (including the ACLU) is that the presence of law enforcement officers in a school promotes a school-to-prison mentality and compounds racism. To solve it, they argue, the funds should be reallocated, not cut.

Certain members of the City Commission are promoting a removal of the SROs from our school in hopes it will resolve the incredibly difficult and complex societal issues that plague our schools, community, state, and nation. They are misleading the public as to the role SROs play in our schools and using them as a scapegoat to avoid addressing the real problems of budget issues and inherent impacts poverty has on our schools and community.

The behavior of the City Commission directly contradicts what they argue. For some reason, the commission feels that it has the right to determine who belongs in our schools and who doesn’t. They are also neglecting the viewpoints of the people who put them in their chairs.

Very few, if any, educators would disagree with the nature of the argument that there is racism present in our societal systems including education and that having students arrested from school is heartbreaking and should be minimized, preferably eliminated, but to paint our educators and officers as being racist and disregarding the mental health of our students is insidious. Very few, if any, educators would disagree that schools need more experts in the skilled arena of mental health issues and crisis management, but to remove one of our only tools without any plan to subsidize that created hole is irresponsible.

If the ACLU would like to work with the district to combat the massive problem of chronic absenteeism which contributes a widening achievement gap, worsening health issues, and higher incarceration rates, they are more than happy to have more partners guiding our students. If the City can’t afford to pay for the SROs because too many projects were approved before the budget was balanced, then the commissioners have a responsibility to acknowledge that. As with most other situations, our district professionals will do our best to fill in the gaps and provide the most cohesive, caring, and safe educational environments for our students regardless of the limitations or unforeseen circumstances.

Parents want to get paid. Let's do it.

Well...I've pretty much had it.  I've tried channeling all the compassion and empathy I could but I'm over it. 

After the third or fourth email/social media post from a parent suggesting they should get paid my salary for the last three months of homeschooling/remote learning and that I should not get paid because the parents are doing my job for me, I just couldn't bite my tongue any longer.  Now - keep in mind that I, too, am a parent of three school-age children.  I get the struggles of keeping kids on task with remote learning and trying to help them complete the work and attend the daily meetings, etc. while also trying to complete my job (though - apparently - some parents would argue I actually haven't done my job. But that's not the point).

But I feel the need to address the pervading underlying issue that is a plague of our educational system.  The system was designed to be broken.

Read that again.

The system was designed to be broken. 

The establishment of our educational system was and is not sustainable.  It does not keep pace with our ever-changing society. Our tax structures weren't built to fund the expanding system (and, thanks to our Secretary of Education, the expanding private school system as well).  But through it all, teachers and support staff try to make it work.

But since the parents want to get paid, let's do it.  Here would be the breakdown.  Note that I'm using the high school level as the example since that is my personal experience.

As a teacher with six years experience, I make around $45,000 per year.  I also have my Master's degree, which adds $2000 to that.  So a total of $47,000.  If we break that down per month (on a 12-month cycle since I opt for that), it is about $3900 per month.  Now, this is before taxes and union fees and insurance costs, etc.  So let's deduct those things and that leaves me at right around $2900 per month.

Now, since it has been /will be almost exactly 3 months since we closed down, we'll use that as our base number.  I also have a student load of 90 students.  So if I figure the amount paid per student per month, it would be $32 per student. 

So for the last three months, our parents have made $128.  Multiply that by however many students in the home.  For example, I have three school-age children, so that would mean I deserve to get paid $384 total for the last three months. 

However, I have also acted as an educational consultant providing materials for our new parent-teachers to use.  Since this is America and our President truly believes in all avenues of business and entrepreneurs and getting paid what you are worth, I gladly will change my job title from teacher to educational consultant.  So - my (former) teaching salary can go to pay the 90 parents of my students.  I will also receive money since I've educated my own children (the $384).  But, in addition, as an educational consultant, I will also earn the starting salary (since this was my first experience with it).  This is between $59,000 and 65,000 per year so let's take the average from there.

If the average is $62,000 per year, that means I would make $5166 per month. Deduct money for insurance, taxes (but not union dues since I'm no longer a teacher!), and we'll say about $3875 per month.  Multiply that by the three months I've been doing it, and that'll be $11,625. 

Direct deposit is fine.

The Fear for the Forgetfulness of Fall

I have a fear for the fall. I want to be back in my classroom with my students welcoming them to the new year. We all know these last few weeks have been hard - hard on our parents, our kids, our teachers, our nurses and doctors, our essential workers, our small business owners, etc. Hard on everyone. No one has not been impacted by the shut-downs and distancing and rules and regulations. We've also seen a lot of heartwarming and hilarious messages about the importance of teachers.

And there lies my fear.

My fear is the human ability to forget.

We will go through 3 months of summer with rules being loosened up a bit (maybe).

New rules will be made.

New blended curriculum will be developed.

New funding structures to pay for the estimated $41 billion need will be written.

And we will be forgotten. If history tells us anything, it's that teacher input will be minimal at best.

For all the celebrity calls for "Teachers should make a billion dollars" (Thanks Jimmy Fallon and Shonda Rhimes) and every other parent out there clamoring for pay raises and expressing empathy for teachers, it will fade after the summer season.

The crisp fall air will welcome a new school year, and after doing it for 2-3 months a summer ago, online learning could be seen as the new "norm" which means the assumption will be teachers can do it.

And we will. Because it IS what we do. We teach. We don't do it for the money or for the accolades or to be celebrated. We do it because we want to play our small part in making the world better by teaching future citizens. It is a calling, a vocation for many of us.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a say.

And we shouldn't be forgotten.

We don't need a raise of a billion dollars (though the bottomless wine would be sweet!). What we need is this:

1. Smaller class sizes or more qualified aides [if we ever needed to focus on essential skills and closing gaps one-on-one with our students, next school year will be it.]

2. More school counselors and school psychologists [our students have been traumatized; these individuals will be ESSENTIAL next year].

3. Better school funding structures [this isn't about giving teachers raises; this is about creating sustainable funding structures within our state governments so the education systems can grow without the restraints of fluctuating budgets and political volleyball].

4. Investments in technology and technology systems that WORK, particularly in rural areas [remote learning has only magnified the massive gaps in access to basic services like internet and cell phone service].

5. Investments in education and food programs for families [food poverty and gaps in sustenance and accessibility is real and - again - magnified by the closing of our schools; in addition, parents are not always equipped to address the basic needs of their children so parenting classes and support groups are essential].

Not one of these five things is beyond reach. They are not impossible. But the process gets interrupted by personal agendas and political games.

This fall, please don't forget the teachers. Remember how frustrating it was to sit with your child who was truly struggling because they were confused or felt isolated or were missing the routine of school. Remember how frustrated you were when you didn't understand what the math problems were asking and therefore had no idea how to help your child. Remember how unnerving it was to hear that reports to CPS went drastically down the day the schools closed and what that meant for the kids who no longer had others looking out for them. Remember how truly depressing it was to hear that proms and concerts and sport seasons and graduations were canceled - along with all the memories that accompany that.

Remember how your child's teacher read to them and tutored them and checked in with them (and you) and participated in a parade and developed creative assignments that were outside the box to help teach essential skills. Remember how they turned their in-person classrooms around in (sometimes) less than 48 hours to full on remote learning classrooms with no training or clue it was going to occur.

This summer and fall, when decisions are being made and input is being sought from the community, remember the true, essential needs of our schools and our teachers for our students.