Here’s a golden oldie. See if you remember it. “Teachers shouldn’t complain about their pay. They make more than the average worker. When they retire, they live off their generous state pensions. And look at all that vacation time they get. Their cushy pay and perks come courtesy of the teachers union which squeezes money out us taxpayers while it protects bad teachers and doesn’t give a damn about the kids.”
Did I leave anything out? I don’t think so. I know the talking points by heart. I heard them every year when teacher contract time rolled around. The anti-teacher rhetoric grew louder and more frequent over the years as conservatives ramped up their anti-tax, anti-teacher, anti-union, anti-government agenda. The bashing of high paid teachers and their mercenary union became a year round mantra.
Funny though. I haven’t heard those talking points much during the past few months. You’d think if there was ever a time to pull out the big “lazy, overpaid teachers” guns, it would be now, what with the demands for higher teacher salaries rolling from West Virginia to Oklahoma to Kentucky to Arizona. Why did all the conservatives stop using what had always been a sure fire winner?
It looks like they got the memo. Literally. A three page memo titled “Messaging Guide: How to Talk about Teacher Strikes” was put out by the State Policy Network, an umbrella organization that pulls together ideas from conservative think tanks and disseminates them to member organizations in all 50 states.
The memo begins by telling conservatives to ditch the “pampered teacher” line.
“A message that focuses on teacher hours or summer vacations will sound tone-deaf when there are dozens of videos and social media posts going viral from teachers about their second jobs, teachers having to rely on food pantries, classroom books that are falling apart, paper rationing, etc. This is a time to sympathize with teachers.”
In other words, “We’ve been out-messaged. We’re busted!” All the lies about pampered teachers don’t work anymore. Those crafty teachers took unfair advantage by using actual evidence to prove they’re underpaid and schools are underfunded. Bummer!
Oh, and don’t bring up school choice, another standard conservative answer to anyone who complains about public school salaries and funding.
“It is also not the right time to talk about school choice — that’s off topic, and teachers at choice-schools are often paid less than district school teachers.”
Ix-nay on the Oice-chay, got it?
So how should conservatives go about bad-mouthing schools and teachers?
Here are the three approaches the memo suggests:
1. When teachers go on strike, they hurt kids, especially low income kids.
2. Red tape and bureaucracy eat up money that should be going to teacher salaries.
3. Only good teachers deserve to be paid more (but don’t use the term “merit pay”).
Gov. Ducey is on message. Here he is on talking point number one, that a teacher strike hurts kids: “No one wants to see teachers strike,” he said recently. “If schools shut down, our kids are the ones who will lose out.”
Compared to Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin, Ducey’s comment is understated. Bevin began by bashing every teacher who went out on strike. “Real teachers…want to teach their children.” Then he went in for the kill. “I guarantee you somewhere in Kentucky today, a child was sexually assaulted that was left at home because there was nobody there to watch them.” Bevin was forced to apologize for that last comment.
Before #RedforEd got going, Ducey liked to use talking point number two, that the state has given school districts plenty of money, they just decided not to spend it on teacher salaries. A recent article in the Star quotes Ducey using that argument early in his governorship.
[Ducey] used his first State of the State speech in 2015 to blame school districts for spending “far too much on administrative costs” instead of directly on instruction.
The article goes on to debunk the idea that there’s a direct link between administrative costs and teacher pay.
Ducey used it again in early 2017, when he blamed superintendents for not putting enough of the generous allotment they get from the state into teacher salaries. But now that he admits teachers deserve a 20 percent raise, he’s stopped saying districts just don’t know how the spend the money they’ve been given.
Two weeks ago, Matthew Simon, director of education policy at the Goldwater Institute chimed in on talking point two in a long post on G.I.’s blog asking “Who Is Really Responsible for Teacher Pay?” His answer: Local school boards and superintendents. They have plenty of money to pay teachers but decide not to. Blame the districts, not the state.
I haven’t heard people using the third talking point much lately, that only the best teachers deserve raises, but for me, that one’s the most fun, because that’s where I found out that some of the players in the memo are from Arizona.
The merit pay section begins, “Rock star teachers deserve rock star pay.” I only know one guy who loves the phrase “rock star teachers.” That’s Matthew Ladner, who coined it when he was the education guy at the Goldwater Institute. From there he moved to a research position at Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education, then to his most recent position as senior research fellow at the Charles Koch Institute.
Back when he was at G.I., Ladner had a great idea. He said, let’s get rid of all the mediocre-to-bad teachers. We’ll hire “rock star teachers,” give them six figure salaries and let them teach 40 to 50 students at a time. He figured every student would get a top flight education from the super teachers, who, said non-teacher Ladner, could handle all those kids no problem. Kind of like a superstar rock band takes charge of a fan-filled arena.
When I saw the phrase “rock star teachers” in the memo, I thought, there must be a Goldwater Institute connection somewhere. Sure enough, one of the two people responsible for the memo is Starlee Coleman. She is Senior Policy Advisor at G.I., and she was around in Ladner’s day. I know that, because she had to justify an absurd statement Ladner made back then, which I ragged him about mercilessly.
Ladner stated there is “an almost 1-to-1 teacher to bureaucrat ratio” in Arizona school districts. He arrived at that figure by saying every non-teacher is a bureaucrat—every bus driver, every custodian, every cafeteria worker. They’re all bureaucrats according to Ladner. I wrote post after post laying into his “Bus drivers are bureaucrats” statement. Finally I wrote to G.I. to find out if it stood by Ladner’s assertion. I received a letter from Starlee Coleman—then Starlee Rhoades—standing by G.I.’s man. According to Rhoades/Coleman, “We believe the term bureaucrat accurately describes many of the employees in question and is a fair use of the term.” Thereby proving that the very intelligent, highly paid people at the Institute will say anything, then double down on it, if it “proves” their point.
Ladner’ assertion made it into the memo, though in a less ridiculous form. Under the heading, “Ideas for customized messaging,” the memo tells people how to “Address the role of red tape and bureaucracy”:
“In most states, administrators and other non-teaching staff vastly outnumber teachers, and the numbers have been sharply on the rise in recent years [INSERT STAT ON ADMINISTRATIVE BLOAT IN YOUR STATE.] We need to take a long hard look at all these jobs and make sure that the majority of our school funding is going to teachers and students — where it belongs — not red tape and bureaucracy.”
State Policy Network, which put out the memo, gets funding from a number of donors ranging from conservatives like the Koch brothers to corporations wanting to use its network to spread their message, like Philip Morris, Kraft Foods and GlaxoSmithKline. Not surprisingly, the Goldwater Institute is an SPN member.
This article appears in Apr 19-25, 2018.
“Two weeks ago, Matthew Simon, director of education policy at the Goldwater Institute chimed in on talking point two in a long post on G.I.’s blog asking ‘Who Is Really Responsible for Teacher Pay?’ His answer: Local school boards and superintendents. They have plenty of money to pay teachers but decide not to. Blame the districts, not the state.”
Where DOES the power to set salaries reside in Arizona, David? At the state level or at the district level?
Related questions:
***What is TUSD’s average annual wage for fully credentialed teachers? What is its average annual wage for long term subs filling the many classrooms where the district has not been able secure permanent, salaried, fully credentialed teachers? How many of those classrooms are there now? What then is the adjusted average wage for TUSD “teachers” (adjusted to include “teachers” who are actually subs paid at a much lower rate)?
***What is TUSD’s per pupil funding rate?
***What is Flowing Wells’ average annual wage for teachers? For subs? How many long term subs are they employing? Adjusted annual wage, to include subs filling “teacher” roles?
***What is Flowing Wells’ per pupil funding rate?
When you start dealing with the realities and specifics of funding allocation decisions made in various districts and how they compare with one another, it gets a little harder to wave your magic ideology wand and POOF! make all those silly concerns about administrative bloat and district-level decision making disappear. But it’s the realities of funding allocation decisions and the specifics of Board politics that almost never get addressed in the local media, except when the decisions and characters of TUSD Board members the local Democratic establishment loves to hate are being disparaged (Stegeman & Sedgwick — Hicks is proving useful know and then, so for the time being Mr. Magic Burrito gets a pass).
The fact remains that it has been unclear in the media’s discussions to date how the state level action on salaries relates to the extremely variable salary and hiring practices between districts. Is Ducey proposing to grant money to districts on the condition that it be used only to produce 20% raises over and above what the current (district-set) rate of pay is? And (always a good question in Arizona) how will the proper application of those funds be monitored and enforced? Tracking the uniform application of 20% raises in every district, to every teacher on every rung of the salary and seniority ladder would seem pretty complicated, accounting-wise and auditing-wise — and altering the allocation and application of those funds every year when teachers come and go — when you think about it.
But not many people DO think about it, so the cycle seems to run like this:
1. The poor schools, the poor teachers! Pass Prop 301! Oops, in TUSD the 301 money didn’t get applied for teachers.
2. The poor schools, the poor teachers! Pass Prop 123! Oops, in TUSD the 123 money didn’t get applied for teachers.
3. The poor schools, the poor teachers! Force a 20% raise across the board! Oops…
Do we begin to see a pattern? Perhaps paying attention to what is happening in the schools and on the district boards and perhaps talking in specifics, not generalities might be a good idea if we actually care about improving the quality of education, not just winning a propaganda war or flipping an office.
Strong arm union tactics will always fail. Shame on the teachers for falling for it. Please children, look the other way. This is nothing more than political hackery.
Teachers are shamefully underpaid and have been for years. They’ve done everything *but* strike and politicians have ignored them. What option is left? Of course they should strike.
Kids won’t suffer by missing a few days of school. Parents who rely on schools to raise their children for them should rethink having children.
Well and properly stated, David. I am particularly amused by the “rock star teachers” who will gladly and successfully teach 40-50 kids at a time!
” Parents who rely on schools to raise their children for them should rethink having children.”
Really? Is it possible that the schools have so enveloped the whole child life thing that they made parents lazy? I had not heard this complaint by teachers.
By the way the public elementary school by my house has movie nights, chili cookoffs, egg hunts and winter solstice gifts for the kids.
What are they lacking? God.
Move your kids away from the problem and take back control.
Gov. Ducey is on message. Here he is on talking point number one, that a teacher strike hurts kids: No one wants to see teachers strike,” he said recently. “If schools shut down, our kids are the ones who will lose out.”
David, maybe you hadn’t noticed but the Governor said something that you hadn’t. he actually cares about the kids and you disparage him for saying what you should have.
Black Kettle, A teacher’s strike hurts kids? No, what’s hurts kids is having competent teachers leave the education profession because of low pay and lousy working conditions.
And yeah, missing a few days of school is going to have a monumental effect on the kids’ future. I don’t think so.
No one “lacks God”–or, if we’re speaking realistically, “a god”, since there are many different ones beyond just the one you choose to capitalize.
Having access to a god is not a necessity to live a healthy and happy life. Public schools are all about giving every kid an equal chance to grow intellectually, emotionally, and yes, spiritually, without trapping their brains in the constricting, suffocating box of religion. This institutional foundation of our nation and its democracy has been essential in helping us to move past ignorance, patriarchy, sexism, racism, educational inequality, and many other ills that pervade society in general and religions in particular.
The fact that we still have a long way to go on those issues does not diminish the fact that we have already come a long way. Our public schools have lit that progressive path for generations–it is no time to abandon them now.
In America, the term “public schools” covers such a wide variety of funding levels, degrees of governance responsibility, transparency, and professionalism within and between school districts and states: it is essentially meaningless when used in policy discussions.
When you compare what goes on in Arizona with what goes on in other states, you notice many things: Arizona schools (private, charter, and public) are underfunded and the teachers are shockingly, shamefully underpaid. The problems this causes in recruiting and retaining teachers is compounded by how ill-supplied the classrooms are. Teachers won’t be keeping even the low salary they earn: they will either be spending a good part of it to ensure their students have appropriate learning materials or they will see their students’ needs go unmet.
But there are other problems in this state that increasing funding won’t clear up. Arizona has a lack of appropriate forms of state-level oversight, lack of meaningful and constructive regulation, widespread lack of citizen awareness of the kinds of behaviors it takes to keep democratically controlled public school districts on track, and, both within the “public-school-supporting,” public-school-intertwined political party and within many public schools, a lack of professionalism and lack of understanding of what meaningful standards are. When you take a good, hard look at party-affiliated School Board members, school administrators, and some teachers (though among the three categories, teachers are by far the most responsible and self-accountable), you find that too many have become accustomed to the laissez-faire “anything goes” free-for-all that is AZ ed and know there is no one watching. While these conditions persist, instances of inadvisable or irresponsible behaviors will multiply at all levels and within all three of our Arizona school “systems.”
As for the anti-religious comment above, it’s astounding what so-called “liberals” and “progressives” think they can get away with in flaunting their ignorant biases against the constructive commitments of so many of their fellow citizens. Religious faith has been one of the major motivators of social justice advocacy in this country, from MLK and many of those who participated in the civil rights movement to the activities of the American Friends Service Committee today. The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion for American citizens, not freedom from religion. There are too many who construe public schools as places where children should be taught to free themselves from religion rather than as places where children should be taught to respect religious diversity as much as any other form of diversity. Ironically, the prejudices and practices of this crowd are themselves one of the major motivators for the “choice / privatization” movement, and probably one of the largest reasons why that movement cannot and will not be reversed: there are too many legitimate objections to how too many public school districts are being run motivating it.
More word vomit from the GOP.
You are so right, Used To Teach In Az. I pray for the soul of Skinnyman for he knows not what he does.
Which comments in this stream may be “word vomit” would be in the eye of the beholder, but those who know their GOP talking points know that someone who references MLK and the American Friends Service Committee positively, calls for increased teacher pay and school funding as well as increased state oversight and more constructive and meaningful regulation of schools in all three sectors (private, charter, and public) is probably not affiliated with the GOP. Nor are they a good candidate to join the Freedom Institute or run for office as a Libertarian, contra other idiotic comments in these streams.
From the 4/27 Star article on the legislature’s response to the teacher walkout:
http://tucson.com/news/local/as-teachers-march-republican-lawmakers-make-progress-on-ducey-s/article_45b166dc-62db-5eaa-a947-8ee2157584ab.html
“A potentially more troubling sticking point [in Ducey’s 20% increase proposal] ‘s whether schools will have to spend the $670 million for teacher salaries strictly on that.
‘We want to be assured that the money is directed to pay increases,’ Kavanagh said. But he said its not that simple.
He said some school districts, including in Scottsdale, already have raised teacher pay by 14 percent, putting off things like repairs. Kavanagh said there is some sentiment to allowing school boards to use the new ‘teacher pay’ money to backfill those repair accounts.
One option, Kavanagh said, would be to give school boards more leeway but only after a public vote, what he called ‘kind of a shaming.'”
And what happens in districts like TUSD where “giving school boards more leeway” and “public vote shaming” (?!) has never worked in the past to bring about the right result for teachers? No provision for that, as expected.
Q.E.D.
This is exactly why you can not trust education with money:
http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/38056086/money-from-pot-taxes-doesnt-fix-colorado-teachers-problems
$18B? Are you kidding me?
The idea behind democratically controlled school districts with governance taking place in open meetings is that the constituency (and media) will serve as a watch dog to prevent money from being applied in the wrong places (or in the right places but in the wrong amounts, e.g. inflated bids from contractors, $18B for site improvements, etc.)
In troubled urban districts like TUSD, the standard-issue mechanisms of democratic control don’t work properly. These kinds of districts are vulnerable to being co-opted by machine-style politics and cronyism. If there is a solution, it has to be through the right kind of constructive oversight and regulation at a higher level in the system (State Department of Education, State Legislature, etc.)
But we won’t get that solution in Arizona because the theories being used to develop state level policy are faulty. Laissez faire economic organization, free market competition, and local control don’t solve the kinds of problems that have developed in TUSD. While state level leadership defaults to these ineffective, ideologically based solutions (“Giving school boards more leeway!” “Public vote shaming!”), the district’s characteristic problems only multiply and intensify. When there are 50,000 students enrolled in the thing, that’s a serious problem for the region and for Public District Education’s ability to make the case to the public that they should regain their previously held monopoly on the use of public funds to educate the citizenry.
I hope AZ teachers (including TUSD teachers) get the raises they need and deserve. But it seems unreasonable to expect that, even if they do, our troubled and sub-standard AZ public education system will immediately start to function the way public education systems function in states where there is less ignorance, more oversight, and more professionalization. In this context, the Democratic Party’s go-to education policy solutions, which include economically undermining high functioning alternative schools, are simply insane from the point of view of improving the overall quality of education offered in the state.
AZ Republicans, AZ Democrats: the rock and the hard place. And the rest of us stuck in it and suffering from their idiocies.
No we are not stuck in it. Take your kids to a charter or better yet, a private school and take advantage of tax credit laws. We don’t have to tolerate the failed disaster they call TUSD.
While nobody noticed they approved spending one million dollars for drainage and artificial turf at Tucson High School.
This is starting to remind me of unfilled potholes. Wake up Tucsonans. Your children deserve better.
JUST WONDERING IF OUR GOOFY GOVERNOR GOOSEY (DUCEY) COULD MAKE IT ON A TEACHER’S SALARY, INSTEAD OF HIS BUISINESS EXPERIENCE……THE GUY IS A CON ARTIST, JUST LIKE HIS MENTOR, DONALD TRUMP…. AND YET, THE PEOPLE OF ARIZONA TRUSTED A HIM TO BE THEIR GOVERNOR….WTF DOES THAT SAY ABOUT OUR REGISTERED VOTERS…..I’M THINKING THAT MOST OF THEM WHO VOTED FOR DUCEY SUFFER FROM ADVANCED ALZHEIMERS DISEASE
What a disgusting comment Carmine. There are millions of family members struggling with Alzheimers in one of their loved ones.