One of my particular gripes
is how the politics of education in NYC is usually framed by the media in simplistic terms as a battle between the teachers union vs. the mayor, without any reference to the views of parents,
advocates or other members of the community.
This is especially true now that we are in the midst of a mayoral race. If one or more of the candidates take a
different position from the mayor on education, this is usually interpreted as a naked attempt to appeal to the
union, with little acknowledgement of the fact that the political crosscurrents
are far more complex, and that they may also be responding to the priorities
and views of public school parents, community members, or voters in general.
Here is an example from a Daily
News article, about one of the mayoral debates:
There were also moments when it felt like United
Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew should have had a seat onstage
with the other candidates. The
four Democrats all praised the union’s push for smaller class sizes and more
education funding.
Yet class size is also the top priority of NYC
parents, according to the DOE own surveys, and is even more a potent political issue with them,
especially given the mayor’s statements favoring class size increases and the
fact that class sizes are now the largest in 14 years. And most New Yorkers
support more funding for the public schools, especially after five years of
cutbacks.
Another example is a
recent article in GothamSchools, that
focused on how a co-located Success Academy charter school had its PCB-laden
lights replaced, whereas students and teachers at the public schools in the
building have to endure the dangers of pre-existing toxic lights. IF there is one issue that NYC public school
parents are most furious about, its co-locations and the perception that
charters are given special privileges while squeezing public students out of
the space they need to receive a quality education. Yet the article ends with the implication
that if mayoral candidates oppose this practice, it is only to please the UFT:
“Each
of the Democratic candidates has been angling for months to please the UFT,
which will endorse a candidate this summer before the party primary. Union
officials said the process to choose a candidate would begin soon after the
union’s internal elections are complete at the end of this month.”
The fact remains that many candidates
may take aggressive positions on class size, education funding, co-locations, school
closings or other hot-button education issues for reasons other than simply to
woo the UFT, especially given that only
22 percent of the public trust the mayor’s current policies on
education.
I
asked Ben Chapman of the Daily News, a very accessible reporter whom I respect, the following
question a few weeks back: Why are the education issues defined by the media
in general as driven almost entirely by the UFT?
Below is Ben’s
response; please add your thoughts in the comment section. Does this practice annoy you as much as it does me? And what do you think of Ben's explanation?
____________
First of all, I think your underlying assumption in this
question – that education issues are “defined in
the media in general as driven almost entirely by the UFT” – is a bit of an
overstatement. I write at least one education story a day, on average, and I
haven’t written a UFT story in a week or so, at least.
A quick check shows the last
article I wrote mentioning the UFT was about their charter school getting a
reprieve from closure on Feb 27. Since then I’ve written about a number of
topics including: safety agents, hazing, STEM, etc. But no teachers union.
However, I won’t dispute your
point that the union wields a lot of clout in our dialog about the city
schools. Maybe even too much clout. I don’t know. I do have some guesses as to
why they are a major player– and my observations are probably not news to you
or anyone else.
For one thing, I think the
public conversation on education in the city often falls back on city vs. union
in part because both of those parties continually take shots at the other. They
often blame each other for failures in the system. And outsiders (politicians,
“experts,” etc.) often blame either the union or the city for the problems in
the system, too.
It’s a facile narrative that
people are drawn to for obvious reasons. First of all, it’s an easy,
two-warring-parties way to view the complex story of public education. Also,
people are drawn to labor vs. management stories in all kinds of contexts.
But I think people also
concentrate on the union vs. the city because they are both powerful forces in
our public schools. The city cuts the check and sets the policies. The teachers
union represents the boots on the ground. At least that’s what it’s supposed to
do. And not take anything away from principals, but teachers are probably the
most significant adults in the public schools.
It’s much harder to grasp the
significance of the social, economic and other factors at work in our public
schools. Obviously parents are a huge factor. But what about the character of
the larger communities that the kids inhabit? That’s huge too. And what about
money? That’s a huge factor too. What about technology? Lots of kids don’t have
computers or smart phones. That plays into it as well. And so many kids in our
diverse city come from different cultures, which also has a huge influence.
To sum it up, anyone who pays
attention to the public schools can see that they’re some of the most complex,
compelling and important things that we can ever hope to encounter. As a
reporter I try to do them justice. I’m sorry if folks feel that our coverage is
too simplistic, but I am doing my best.
One way to improve the coverage of the public schools is to contact us
reporters. My email is bchapman@nydailynews.com
and my phone number is (212) 210-6365. I always want to hear from as many
stakeholders in the schools as possible and I can be trusted completely to
maintain the anonymity of whistleblowers.
One of the best things about
the free press is that we all have a hand in it. So if you don’t like what you
read, drop me a line. --Thanks! Ben