Educators Take "Off with Their Heads" Stance Against Governor's Proposals

No room for compromise?

Two "Action Meetings" were held at Royal Oak Middle School Tuesday. More than 250, "primarily teachers and school employees" according to Superintendent Shawn Lewis-Lakin, attended the 4-o'clock session; another 150 or so, "predominantly community members and parents," attended the 6:30 gathering. I attended the 4 p.m. meeting.

The call for action is focused on the perceived need to beat back Governor Dick Snyder's proposed restructuring of the public schools system, described in part by the speaker as "An agenda for special interests who avoid solid prerequisites for quality or requirements for transparency; An agenda for special interests with no recognition or concern with research-based best practices; An agenda that opens the coffers to a for-profit raid on billions in public money."

Laying down the challenge forcefully and articulately was Dr. Vickie Markavitch, Superintendent of Oakland Schools, the tax-funded entity which provides 28 school districts with services and programs which would be difficult or too costly for each district to supply on its own.

The 4 o'clock session turned into a rally, with cheers and applause for statements made by Dr. Markavitch and by several other district superintendents who were present. Representative from the Lamphere School District (Madison Heights) were especially numerous and boisterous.

Intensely articulate, Markavitch presented a one-sided review of her focus: "For more than 20 years a persistent group of people have been trying to get public money to support private forms of education." She took sharp digs at Governor Snyder and managed to derogatorily toss "Engler" and "Lansing" in there somewhere. Specifically, she targeted House Bill 5923,Senate Bill 620, and Senate Bill 1358.

Her action plan includes encouraging the use of a website (http://www.capwiz.com/tca4educ/home/) to begin the process of getting 1 million messages to Lansing. The website is operated by the Tri-County Alliance for Public Education, which serves Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne county school districts. To influence the lame duck session, she pointed out, "Legislators have to hear from you . . .  before December 12th. You must contact your legislators today."

Because it would be understandable for Versagi Voice readers to wonder whether the quotations I've used here are themselves biased, I have published the speaker's text in Versagi Voice's Education folder. The page also contains the text for the several legislative alerts and a "Contact Your Legislator" sample letter.

My concern is that there was not the slightest acknowledgement of the almost worldwide mindset that money allotted to each student belongs to the student and should be available wherever the student goes to school. Or that course-level instructional choice or some aspect of Snyder's "any time, any place, any pace" thrust might play a role in improving education. I didn't stay for the Q&A session after the break, so I don't know if anyone raised those  points. As well-conducted and polite as the gathering was, it saddened me that the tone and intensity reflected those of a 1940s-era union meeting where anyone who might question or disagree with this or that point in the party line would be scorned and considered a traitor or enemy. Straightforward "us vs. them."

Judging from content and tone of news reports and organized letters to the editor and lobbying (lobbying everybody, not just politicians and PTAs), educators around the state reject any suggestion for change which does not originate within the education community.

Those clicks we hear in the civic arena are of group minds snapping shut.
And the backlash has begun.

Frank Versagi is the editor of Versagi Voice.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Mike Reno December 04, 2012 at 11:49 PM
"Reverend" Markivitch also preached to the choir in Rochester yesterday. If her true intent were to inform people, then perhaps she should’ve done the presentation as a panel, rather than a solo indoctrination. She is certainly entitled to her perspective on data interpretation, but it is her opinion, and is not fact. For example, she knocks the ACT College Readiness Benchmark – an indicator developed from decades of college entrance testing. The data suggests that 60% or more of our graduates are not adequately prepared for college. She counters with some “homegrown” study that says the number is more like 22% (as if that is acceptable.) And she then even brushes that off, speculating that much of that number is the result of middle-aged people going back to college due to the dire economic times, and wouldn’t we all need a refresher course on Algebra? (chuckle, chuckle, chuckle from the choir!) Sadly, in Rochester, with roughly 1100 graduates annually, that 22% translates into nearly 250 graduates that will need to take – and pay for – remedial college courses. There is nothing wrong with considering VOLUNTARY choice.
Mike Reno December 04, 2012 at 11:52 PM
She attempts to demonize online learning companies, criticizing CEO pay, advertising budgets, and profits. She doesn’t seem to have a problem, however, with those same issues for textbook companies, computer companies, and other SUPPLIERS to education. Supplier profits are OK, but competitor profits are BAD. And she also overlooks the fact that the hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue flowing to these cyber classrooms comes from VOLUNTARY enrollment. People want this stuff! But perhaps the most troubling part of her presentation is that she attempts to assign motives for pro-choice advocates. Without one single shred of evidence, she lobs accusations that this is some organized long-term plan by corporations to defund education and reap huge profits. Would she like people to assign motives to her actions? Educators SHOULD be a part of this conversation, and could make a valuable contribution to improving the proposals. But who is going to listen when they approach in this manner?
Philip December 05, 2012 at 05:13 PM
It is the government's responsibility to educate the population, not some for-profit organization's. There is the matter of socialization with which to be concerned as well as the textbook matters. Charter schools have shown no long term stability as they have not been around long. Nor are they likely to be as long as parents chase the quantifiable best test scores and ignore the non-quantifiable effects of socialization.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »