For decades the unions and the right of American workers to get a fair living wage and benefits has been under organized attack.
Right wing radio conmen routinely condemn unions and workers for trying to get enough in wages to support their families. During the grocery strike a few years ago KFI afternoon drive hosts John and Ken spent four hours each afternoon for weeks condemning the strikers and trying to get their listeners to break the strike and cross the picket lines. John and Ken told lies about union members to inflame their audience.
Yet when the strike was over and lost, the only violations found were by the owners.There were MANAGEMENT VIOLATIONS on a MASSIVE SCALE done in secret and contrary to both state and federal labor law. False social security numbers and names were used under the table to "hire" groups unscupulous striking workers to break the strike at different sites from where they normally worked so as not to be recognized. Just enough of these under the table workers were hired to keep the stores shelves stocked and the stores in operation.
Management was fined after the strike but the fines were just a cost of doing business. Pennies on the dollar that real living wages would have cost had the strike not failed. Management was only too happy to pay small fines to break a strike.
Did con men John and Ken of KFLie spend weeks ragging on these management violations of the law? NO! Did they even mention it once? NO! Why because radio con men are PAID by advertisers. The more advertisers, the more the con men make. Management decides where advertising dollars should go. The ads only go on the stations of con men who will say what they are told to say by the advertisers. Radio con men ALL work for management and are paid to be "opinion makers" to convince the public of whatever management wants the public to believe.
In our district good honest hardworking teachers are routinely called "union thugs" by the hatemongers in the ANTI crowd who listen to Con men on the radio and believe the lies they are told by Rush et. al. The lies the ANTIs tell about us only reflect the lies they here on the radio and Fox News. They repeat those lies to win votes and support among some in the community who do not know better. Without unions there is no American middle class. No American middle class and the American economy suffers as we have seen recently. Unions are a good thing for America.
Here is an excerpt from today's Tim Rutten's column in the LATimes describing what has happened to us in America as we have lost unions:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rutten18-2009mar18,0,3290633.column
Think back for a second to the beginnings of the financial crisis last year. When the auto companies went to the Bush administration asking for help, the first conditions imposed on them were executive pay cuts and renegotiation of their union contracts to bring down labor costs. The United Auto Workers went along because it wanted to save the firms and the jobs of the workers they employ.
What we're essentially being asked to believe is that employment contracts involving hardworking men and women on Detroit's assembly lines are somehow less legally binding -- less "sacred" in the current rhetorical argot -- than those protecting a bunch of cowboy securities traders living in Connecticut. When Larry Summers, Obama's chief economic advisor, piously tells us that the administration's hands are tied because we all must abide "by the rule of law," perhaps it's time to ask: What rule and for whom?
For years, the smart guys on Wall Street have convinced a growing number of Americans that organized labor is an impediment to economic progress, an unacceptable "cost" in a globalized system of production, a quaint social fossil from the era of mills and smokestacks. If there's a lesson to be gleaned from the current crisis, however, it's that when the chips are down, organized labor is a far more responsible social actor than the snatch-and-run characters who fancy themselves financiers.
The implications of this are wider than most of us imagine, and they deserve to be considered. Today, slightly less than 8% of all American workers belong to a union. Half a century ago, when more than one in three American workers were unionized, the middle class was growing -- not simply because organized labor won better wages and benefits for its members but because the presence of a vigorous labor movement pulled everybody else's compensation up as well.
As union membership dropped, middle-class incomes -- and average families' share of the nation's wealth -- stagnated and then fell. Families compensated for their reduced opportunity at first by sending both parents into the workplace, then by working more hours and, more recently, by simply going deeper and deeper into debt. At the same time, the incomes and share of the national wealth held by people like the AIG securities traders grew exponentially.
The Employee Free Choice Act, currently pending in both houses of Congress, would give unions the tools they need to reorganize a reasonable share of the American workplace. Whatever the howls of opposition from Wall Street's mandarins and their lackeys, the House and Senate ought to pass the bill and Obama ought to sign it as quickly as possible. We may have to swallow the outrage and injustice of AIG's and Goldman Sachs' venality and social irresponsibility for the moment, but we ought to spare our children that bitter taste.
timothy.rutten@latimes.com
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Tragedy strikes twice
Life is short. It is hard to believe but two key participants in last November's school board election have lost husbands. I was recently informed by post on this blog that Jill Parvin, a key Guffanti supporter lost her husband suddenly and unexpectedly.
Yesterday I learned that Barbara Franklin lost her husband on February 4th. I am told there was no warning. All very awful. We remember the incredible dynamo that Barbara was in organizing the VTA election strategy. She was a key to our incredible success as the chair of the VTA-PAC. With all that was going on she still managed to read the Twilight books at the same time. One night staying up to 4AM reading. Good times then. Very sad times now. Life can be so...
Here is her husbands obituary from the NCTimes:
Mark Franklin, 55 SAN MARCOS--Mark Franklin passed away Wednesday, February 4, 2009. He was born July 29, 1953 in Phoenix, Ariz., son of John Franklin and Janet Darling. Mark attended Mission Bay High School, San Diego, graduating in 1971. He became an IT Specialist at KRC Rock in San Marcos. His favorite pastimes were Skeet & Trap shooting, photography, and a motorcycle and Corvette enthusiast. He is survived by his wife of 31 years, Barbara, whom he married on Jan. 9, 1978; daughters, Jennifer Franklin of Escondido, and Kayla Franklin of San Marcos; sisters, Shelley Franklin Lengsfield of Louisville, Ky., and Melisa Seymour of Honolulu, Hawaii; and brother, Matthew Franklin of Denver, Colo. A memorial service will be held at 1 p.m., Saturday, February 21, at Eternal Hills Mortuary in Oceanside. Reception will follow the memorial service at KRC Rock, 700 North Twin Oaks Valley Road, San Marcos. The family requests contributions may be made to Greenpeace USA, or the National Parks Service.
Yesterday I learned that Barbara Franklin lost her husband on February 4th. I am told there was no warning. All very awful. We remember the incredible dynamo that Barbara was in organizing the VTA election strategy. She was a key to our incredible success as the chair of the VTA-PAC. With all that was going on she still managed to read the Twilight books at the same time. One night staying up to 4AM reading. Good times then. Very sad times now. Life can be so...
Here is her husbands obituary from the NCTimes:
Mark Franklin, 55 SAN MARCOS--Mark Franklin passed away Wednesday, February 4, 2009. He was born July 29, 1953 in Phoenix, Ariz., son of John Franklin and Janet Darling. Mark attended Mission Bay High School, San Diego, graduating in 1971. He became an IT Specialist at KRC Rock in San Marcos. His favorite pastimes were Skeet & Trap shooting, photography, and a motorcycle and Corvette enthusiast. He is survived by his wife of 31 years, Barbara, whom he married on Jan. 9, 1978; daughters, Jennifer Franklin of Escondido, and Kayla Franklin of San Marcos; sisters, Shelley Franklin Lengsfield of Louisville, Ky., and Melisa Seymour of Honolulu, Hawaii; and brother, Matthew Franklin of Denver, Colo. A memorial service will be held at 1 p.m., Saturday, February 21, at Eternal Hills Mortuary in Oceanside. Reception will follow the memorial service at KRC Rock, 700 North Twin Oaks Valley Road, San Marcos. The family requests contributions may be made to Greenpeace USA, or the National Parks Service.
Jaka, Chunka, and Herrera--Terrific Trio
Carol Herrera has for years been the only school board member who regularly visits school sites and talks to teachers and principals one to one. Now that Elizabeth Jaka and Angela Chunka have joined her on the board, they have also joined her in visiting schools. It is so nice to have board members who care about what is happening at the school sites.
The Terrific Trio also have been regular visitors to the district office. In fact the Gibson group have noticed that these women are doing their jobs and are concerned. Our ANTI friends are now complaining on the NCTimes blogs that the our three Terrifics are showing up and checking on our friends at the DO. Of course, if all is going well at the DO, having the Terrific come by should make it all better.
Our TTs are doing such a singular outstanding job that the ANTI crowd is getting more and more uncomfortable. Our ANTI friends are still reeling from the drubbing the ANTI school board candidates got in the last election. They are terrified that the Terrific Trio will become so well loved that their ANTI made up fictions will have no affect and all three will easily be re-elected in their next election bids. Even if one or more of our Terrific Trio do not chose to run again, their exemplary jobs stand in stark contrast to the ANTI board members legacy of missed meetings, wasted taxpayer money and pointless harangues against the good working folk of our district. The ANTIs are afraid they will never again be able to elect one of their own in the shadow of the legacy of Gibson and Guffanti.
Their desperation shows up in the bully boy tactics of Gibson during board meetings, in phony issues and charges, and in the name calling of the ANTI supporters of Gibson on the NCTimes blogs. The examples of the women in showing what good trustees should be doing have been devastating in contrast to Gibson. Now Gibson supporters have taken up the last ditch tactics of name calling. They now regularly refer to the Terrific Trio as "the three stooges" because they have nothing left, but name calling. A particularly angry and vicious ANTI blogger who calls herself, "Roxy" wrote on March 6 about the Terrifics, "One of them is a flying nun? One had a daycare center and the other a coach."
Our ANTI friends always resort to name calling when the facts do not support their position. Since facts seldom support them, name calling is what we get from them most of the time.
I am so glad that our greater VUSD community of voters has finally decided that they have had enough of the ANTI venom. We now have four school board members who put the needs of the VUSD students ahead of the personal aggrandizement and political agendas.
By the way Steve Lilly also comes to the performance at school sites and shows interest in VUSD with no ulterior motive. He has never tried to use his post as a stepping stone to higher office as Gibson as done time and time again. Lilly may not show up at as many sites as the Terrifics, but neither does he have some ANTI political agenda axe to grind. He is a good man with the best interests of our students at the heart of every decision he makes. I am not sure that Jim Gibson even knows the names of all the schools in VUSD, let alone where they are.
The Terrific Trio also have been regular visitors to the district office. In fact the Gibson group have noticed that these women are doing their jobs and are concerned. Our ANTI friends are now complaining on the NCTimes blogs that the our three Terrifics are showing up and checking on our friends at the DO. Of course, if all is going well at the DO, having the Terrific come by should make it all better.
Our TTs are doing such a singular outstanding job that the ANTI crowd is getting more and more uncomfortable. Our ANTI friends are still reeling from the drubbing the ANTI school board candidates got in the last election. They are terrified that the Terrific Trio will become so well loved that their ANTI made up fictions will have no affect and all three will easily be re-elected in their next election bids. Even if one or more of our Terrific Trio do not chose to run again, their exemplary jobs stand in stark contrast to the ANTI board members legacy of missed meetings, wasted taxpayer money and pointless harangues against the good working folk of our district. The ANTIs are afraid they will never again be able to elect one of their own in the shadow of the legacy of Gibson and Guffanti.
Their desperation shows up in the bully boy tactics of Gibson during board meetings, in phony issues and charges, and in the name calling of the ANTI supporters of Gibson on the NCTimes blogs. The examples of the women in showing what good trustees should be doing have been devastating in contrast to Gibson. Now Gibson supporters have taken up the last ditch tactics of name calling. They now regularly refer to the Terrific Trio as "the three stooges" because they have nothing left, but name calling. A particularly angry and vicious ANTI blogger who calls herself, "Roxy" wrote on March 6 about the Terrifics, "One of them is a flying nun? One had a daycare center and the other a coach."
Our ANTI friends always resort to name calling when the facts do not support their position. Since facts seldom support them, name calling is what we get from them most of the time.
I am so glad that our greater VUSD community of voters has finally decided that they have had enough of the ANTI venom. We now have four school board members who put the needs of the VUSD students ahead of the personal aggrandizement and political agendas.
By the way Steve Lilly also comes to the performance at school sites and shows interest in VUSD with no ulterior motive. He has never tried to use his post as a stepping stone to higher office as Gibson as done time and time again. Lilly may not show up at as many sites as the Terrifics, but neither does he have some ANTI political agenda axe to grind. He is a good man with the best interests of our students at the heart of every decision he makes. I am not sure that Jim Gibson even knows the names of all the schools in VUSD, let alone where they are.
Report Card Update
The directive from the district office that all principals must tell their site teachers to use computers to make report cards cannot be enforced. The report card computer program freezes up repeatedly when teachers try to record behavior grades. The time it takes to use the computer is far more than the time it takes to write grades on the cards in handwriting. This extra time is not compensated by the district. There has been no computer training for the program. In addition a change in how report cards are recorded is a change in past practices. If any principal instructs you or any teacher that report cards MUST be done on the computer, please ask the principal to call Jan O'Reilly at the VTA office.
Hopefully there will be a new report card committee convened by the district to solve some of the problems with the report cards before next year.
Hopefully there will be a new report card committee convened by the district to solve some of the problems with the report cards before next year.
Gibson no Gentleman, Rude attack on ex-Nun
Jim Gibson has out done himself in outrageous and inappropriate board behavior with his un-called for attacks on one of the sweetest, finest people in our district--Carol Herrera. Carol is a person who has done nothing with her life but help others.
Audience members boo-ed his boorish behavior, but that did not stop Gibson. He demanded that Carol resign. Read: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03/13/news/coastal/vista/zd13791934d4f8c1688257578006327a2.txt
Why? Pure politics. He manufactured an imaginary violation of the Brown Act. He was corrected. The NCTimes article regarding his phony, trumped up charge said there was NO violation. Further it stated that even if there had been a violation the topic was discussed at the next board meeting in public which would have remedied any such imaginary violation. Here is the quote from the NCTimes:
Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, said the get-together wouldn't violate the state's open meeting law, known as the Ralph M. Brown Act, unless the three trustees discussed district matters.And even if they did violate the act, he said, they may have remedied the situation by discussing the class-size issue publicly at Thursday's meeting."The only remedies that the Brown Act provides for are curing your violation by going back and ... doing it legally," he said. "If they did get together and then had a legal meeting .... there's not much that can happen."
Or read the entire article here:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03/06/news/coastal/vista/zafeb0db720418fa8882575710068a8e6.txt
The Brown Act is to make sure all major decisions by public government is dealt with in public session. Gibson made up allegation concerned the three hard working women on the board talking among themselves and deciding not to lay off doznes of teachers and increase K-3 class size. How scary! Oh no, those 'evil women' were conspiring not to lay off good teachers and to crowd our youngest and most vulnerable children. What kind of sick parnoid mind would turn that decision into a "conspiracy"?
Still Gibson thought he could make something out of it to rile up his "base" of misguided ANTIs. Our ANTI friends do not seem to care about actual facts nor do they let facts get in the way of what they want to believe. All that is important is what the FEEL should be facts--the kind that re-enforce their prejudices. Gibson may feel his ridiculous grandstanding helps him with the ANTIs but it sure make him look bad to any one with good manners or logical thinking abilities.
While Carol works hard to help others, what does Jim to with his own sad life? He bullies people, praises the firing of good principals, lauds a 30 minute automated phone "test" as the way to evaluate teachers, writes NCTimes forum advocating firing ten percent of VUSD employees every year, pushes for "privatizing" our school buses and firing all the drivers, firing of 28 principals and other administrators, delays schools being built, wastes taxpayer money by the tens of millions and never apologizes.
Read: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/05/20/perspective/15_87_545_19_07.txt
and: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/02/25/news/coastal/20_40_012_24_07.txt
and: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/07/11/news/inland/vista/18_11_517_10_07.txt
and: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/06/16/news/inland/vista/23_24_556_15_07.txt
In fact Gibson never seems to feels a moment of contrition for his embarrassing behaviors. He has only one goal to self-aggrandize. he never misses a chance to grandstand to the newspaper about some "fake" issue that will get his name in the news.
He loves running for higher office. He has tried to get on Oceanside City Council twice and once run for a California State Assembly office. He uses his VUSD Board position not to help our students but as a platform to try to launch a grander political career.
A few years back after being rejected for School Board president by the other members of the board over and over, he decided the others weren't being fair to him. (December 2006) He started a very public crying campaign to the North County Times saying it wasn't fair. Everyone else got to be school board president why couldn't he? Several of this misguided supporters wrote letters to the editor of the North County Times saying the same thing. (December 2006)Finally the other board members got tired of his tears and let him be VUSD School Board president for a while.
Gibson apparently was so ashamed of the way he got to be VUSD board president that he somehow got his friends at the North County Times to "scrub" the archives of all mention of his sorry whining that finally got him the position he wanted. The only reference missed by his editor friends is the following letter to the editor:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/12/27/opinion/letters/12_26_0618_38_41.txt
Back to school
Let's send Mr. Gibson, VUSD trustee, back to school. In an article titled “VUSD trustees fail to pick president,” Gibson stated, “It has nothing to do with ability ... It has everything to do with the political viewpoints that you guys hold that are different from us.”
The term “guys” is certainly inappropriate slang in this context, and “ours” should replace “us” at the end of the sentence. What a shame that one of our district's educational leaders isn't a better role model for our students!
MARY PACE,
retired English teacher
Oceanside
I remember the article. As I recall only four members were in attendance. The vote was split two to two. I think Hubbard was the missing trustee. At the next meeting, Jim Gibson was elected school board president because the missing trustee felt sorry for him. You can see the article title in the letter to the editor above, but there it is no longer in the NCTimes archives. Check for yourself. There is nothing about either December 2006 meeting in the NCTimes archives or the two letters to the editor in December by Gibson supporters whining that he should be elected President of the VUSD Board.
After Gibson got the title he so desperately wanted, what did Gibson do? Did he thank them? Did he try to do his very best job to prove he was mature enough to handle the job? No, his response was to USE the title to make a run at the Oceanside City Council again. Of course he lost again. Most people in the North County have figured out who and what he is.
BLOG EDITOR NOTE: I spent hours searching for the articles about Gibson becoming board president. There are NO LONGER any in the NCTIMES archives. Currently the NCTimes archives contains not a single article indicating even one December 2006 VUSD school board meeting. In addition Guffanti was allowed to publish an inaccurate history of the delays in constructing VUSD third high school, the dual magnet high school. The Guffanti article has also been scrubbed. The only evidence in the archives is a letter to the editor rebutting it. (below) We are left with the following questions:
(1) How did the archives get scrubbed?
(2) Whose would have scubbed them?
(3) Why were they scrubbed?
(4) Did Gibson and Guffanti request the scrubbing?
Here is the reference to the Guffanti editorial scrubbed from the archives:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/12/08/opinion/letters/12_7_0619_20_11.txt
Guffanti is wrong
Stephen Guffanti certainly doesn't let the facts get in the way of his arguments ("VUSD pursuing monumental high school," Dec. 5). Lincoln Middle School will close for renovations in January. When it reopens, it is needed for middle schoolers.
The state will not provide matching funds to build a high school there, and the existing facilities are inadequate to accommodate 2,000 high schoolers on top of the middle schoolers.
The new magnet high schools being built will effectively relieve the overcrowding at Vista and RBV high schools, something Guffanti's proposed boutique schools can't do.
It is particularly galling to see Guffanti's demand to act faster. This from the man who, after accepting campaign contributions from the property owners, blocked the acquisition of a previous site and has done everything in his power to block the schools from being built, including providing support to the NIMBY lawsuit. He should be ashamed.
Leigh Rayner
Vista
Audience members boo-ed his boorish behavior, but that did not stop Gibson. He demanded that Carol resign. Read: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03/13/news/coastal/vista/zd13791934d4f8c1688257578006327a2.txt
Why? Pure politics. He manufactured an imaginary violation of the Brown Act. He was corrected. The NCTimes article regarding his phony, trumped up charge said there was NO violation. Further it stated that even if there had been a violation the topic was discussed at the next board meeting in public which would have remedied any such imaginary violation. Here is the quote from the NCTimes:
Peter Scheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, said the get-together wouldn't violate the state's open meeting law, known as the Ralph M. Brown Act, unless the three trustees discussed district matters.And even if they did violate the act, he said, they may have remedied the situation by discussing the class-size issue publicly at Thursday's meeting."The only remedies that the Brown Act provides for are curing your violation by going back and ... doing it legally," he said. "If they did get together and then had a legal meeting .... there's not much that can happen."
Or read the entire article here:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03/06/news/coastal/vista/zafeb0db720418fa8882575710068a8e6.txt
The Brown Act is to make sure all major decisions by public government is dealt with in public session. Gibson made up allegation concerned the three hard working women on the board talking among themselves and deciding not to lay off doznes of teachers and increase K-3 class size. How scary! Oh no, those 'evil women' were conspiring not to lay off good teachers and to crowd our youngest and most vulnerable children. What kind of sick parnoid mind would turn that decision into a "conspiracy"?
Still Gibson thought he could make something out of it to rile up his "base" of misguided ANTIs. Our ANTI friends do not seem to care about actual facts nor do they let facts get in the way of what they want to believe. All that is important is what the FEEL should be facts--the kind that re-enforce their prejudices. Gibson may feel his ridiculous grandstanding helps him with the ANTIs but it sure make him look bad to any one with good manners or logical thinking abilities.
While Carol works hard to help others, what does Jim to with his own sad life? He bullies people, praises the firing of good principals, lauds a 30 minute automated phone "test" as the way to evaluate teachers, writes NCTimes forum advocating firing ten percent of VUSD employees every year, pushes for "privatizing" our school buses and firing all the drivers, firing of 28 principals and other administrators, delays schools being built, wastes taxpayer money by the tens of millions and never apologizes.
Read: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/05/20/perspective/15_87_545_19_07.txt
and: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/02/25/news/coastal/20_40_012_24_07.txt
and: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/07/11/news/inland/vista/18_11_517_10_07.txt
and: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/06/16/news/inland/vista/23_24_556_15_07.txt
In fact Gibson never seems to feels a moment of contrition for his embarrassing behaviors. He has only one goal to self-aggrandize. he never misses a chance to grandstand to the newspaper about some "fake" issue that will get his name in the news.
He loves running for higher office. He has tried to get on Oceanside City Council twice and once run for a California State Assembly office. He uses his VUSD Board position not to help our students but as a platform to try to launch a grander political career.
A few years back after being rejected for School Board president by the other members of the board over and over, he decided the others weren't being fair to him. (December 2006) He started a very public crying campaign to the North County Times saying it wasn't fair. Everyone else got to be school board president why couldn't he? Several of this misguided supporters wrote letters to the editor of the North County Times saying the same thing. (December 2006)Finally the other board members got tired of his tears and let him be VUSD School Board president for a while.
Gibson apparently was so ashamed of the way he got to be VUSD board president that he somehow got his friends at the North County Times to "scrub" the archives of all mention of his sorry whining that finally got him the position he wanted. The only reference missed by his editor friends is the following letter to the editor:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/12/27/opinion/letters/12_26_0618_38_41.txt
Back to school
Let's send Mr. Gibson, VUSD trustee, back to school. In an article titled “VUSD trustees fail to pick president,” Gibson stated, “It has nothing to do with ability ... It has everything to do with the political viewpoints that you guys hold that are different from us.”
The term “guys” is certainly inappropriate slang in this context, and “ours” should replace “us” at the end of the sentence. What a shame that one of our district's educational leaders isn't a better role model for our students!
MARY PACE,
retired English teacher
Oceanside
I remember the article. As I recall only four members were in attendance. The vote was split two to two. I think Hubbard was the missing trustee. At the next meeting, Jim Gibson was elected school board president because the missing trustee felt sorry for him. You can see the article title in the letter to the editor above, but there it is no longer in the NCTimes archives. Check for yourself. There is nothing about either December 2006 meeting in the NCTimes archives or the two letters to the editor in December by Gibson supporters whining that he should be elected President of the VUSD Board.
After Gibson got the title he so desperately wanted, what did Gibson do? Did he thank them? Did he try to do his very best job to prove he was mature enough to handle the job? No, his response was to USE the title to make a run at the Oceanside City Council again. Of course he lost again. Most people in the North County have figured out who and what he is.
BLOG EDITOR NOTE: I spent hours searching for the articles about Gibson becoming board president. There are NO LONGER any in the NCTIMES archives. Currently the NCTimes archives contains not a single article indicating even one December 2006 VUSD school board meeting. In addition Guffanti was allowed to publish an inaccurate history of the delays in constructing VUSD third high school, the dual magnet high school. The Guffanti article has also been scrubbed. The only evidence in the archives is a letter to the editor rebutting it. (below) We are left with the following questions:
(1) How did the archives get scrubbed?
(2) Whose would have scubbed them?
(3) Why were they scrubbed?
(4) Did Gibson and Guffanti request the scrubbing?
Here is the reference to the Guffanti editorial scrubbed from the archives:
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2006/12/08/opinion/letters/12_7_0619_20_11.txt
Guffanti is wrong
Stephen Guffanti certainly doesn't let the facts get in the way of his arguments ("VUSD pursuing monumental high school," Dec. 5). Lincoln Middle School will close for renovations in January. When it reopens, it is needed for middle schoolers.
The state will not provide matching funds to build a high school there, and the existing facilities are inadequate to accommodate 2,000 high schoolers on top of the middle schoolers.
The new magnet high schools being built will effectively relieve the overcrowding at Vista and RBV high schools, something Guffanti's proposed boutique schools can't do.
It is particularly galling to see Guffanti's demand to act faster. This from the man who, after accepting campaign contributions from the property owners, blocked the acquisition of a previous site and has done everything in his power to block the schools from being built, including providing support to the NIMBY lawsuit. He should be ashamed.
Leigh Rayner
Vista
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Charter School Concerns
President Obama has said that more charter schools will be a centerpiece of his educational reform in his recent address on education. There are some concerns with charter schools however.
Charters created for purpose of giving children of a particular faith religious instruction at state expense is becoming a real concern. There are problems with public school charters using taxpayer money being created in Minnesota for Muslim students. Read:http://www.startribune.com/local/17406054.html
And both an Arabic language and a Hebrew language charter school created in New York City for Muslims and Jews repectively. Read:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/nyregion/12hebrew.html
Here inside our VUSD, we have had two charters created at two different churches. Neither was chartered by VUSD but by another much more distant school district. I believe one was chartered by the Julian School District. The charter school students in both cases were mostly the children of church members and the teachers also attended that church. The first church charter was closed several years ago due to financial irregularities. Read:
The second charter called the Classical Academy is still in operation at a local Baptist Church. It came to light when its director, Melvin Goode, was accused of criminal sexual misconduct with underage children. Read: http://www.10news.com/news/18645419/detail.html
A third may be a coincidence, North County Trade Tech High School has a forty acre site next to St. Anne's church where it intends to construct a school. Will there be a religious tie in with the church next door?
A fourth is the case of the San Marcos Unified affiliated charter school, Bayshore Prep, founded by Guffanti campaign contributer and home school advocate, Carolyn Lucia who was forced to resign last May in disgrace because of student transcript irregularities.
Read: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/education/20080621-9999-1mi21smchart.html
Charter schools as religious instruments of instruction not only violates the Church/State separation required in our Constitution but if allowed to continue will tend to separate our country into little groups of similar believers that do not trust outsiders. This "Balkanization" of our country can only lead to disaster and eventually dis-union.
The religious co-opting of the charter movement is the first and best reason to oppose charters but there are two additional reasons as well.
First charter schools are FAR more dangerous to our children during earthquakes. Charter Schools have been specifically exempted from the Field Act. The Field Act was passed after the 1933 Long Beach earthquake which collapsed numerous schools thankfully in the early morning hours before students arrived. The Field Act requires all school buildings to be made with substantial extra reinforcement to ensure that in the event of a major earthquake the students would be protected. Because charter school proponents wanted to use office buildings and empty stores for their schools, they sought and were given Field Act exemptions. Read:
Second at most charter schools employees have no rights. There is no requirement for administration to be fair or competent in releasing employees. Whimsical decisions to fire teachers and others have been made at Guajome Park Academy here in Vista. Read: http://www.guajomeunderground.org/phpBB/ and here:http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/188834/former_employees_have_complained_of_growing_tension_at_charter_school/
Now firing for no reason has become a problem in San Diego as well. Here are the first couple of paragraphs of a story "Charter Teachers, Fearful of Firings, Push to Unionize a Shaken School" found today in the Voice of San Diego online newspaper. Read:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2009/03/13/education/836kch031209.txt
Thursday, March 12, 2009 Less than a year after a Barrio Logan charter school discarded its director and cut loose nearly all of its teachers with little warning, teachers in its system of schools are taking their first steps toward forming a union.
Six out of eight teachers at King/Chavez Arts Academy were dismissed last summer, shortly after its director was replaced. The jilted teachers, many of them relatively new to teaching, said they received little explanation of why they were let go.
Here are a couple of telling sentences from the middle part of the story:
It also made many of the remaining teachers fearful of losing their jobs, especially after another teacher from the same school was fired in the middle of this year. Some were galled that the principals and administrators judging them had not been classroom teachers themselves.
And another:
It is a dramatic illustration of the tradeoffs that teachers face when choosing to forgo a union and its protections for the freedoms of a charter school.
And another:
"These teachers are much more exposed to unfair treatment than teachers in the San Diego Education Association," said Peter Zschiesche, founding director of the Employee Rights Center, a group that advocates for employees who are not unionized. "Most people think there has to be some law that says, 'You've got to treat me fairly,' and there isn't." (bold type added by blog editor)
And one more:
But some teachers questioned how they could be evaluated fairly and consistently by administrators who did not know their subjects or had never taught classes of their own. (bold type and italics added by blog editor)
Charters created for purpose of giving children of a particular faith religious instruction at state expense is becoming a real concern. There are problems with public school charters using taxpayer money being created in Minnesota for Muslim students. Read:http://www.startribune.com/local/17406054.html
And both an Arabic language and a Hebrew language charter school created in New York City for Muslims and Jews repectively. Read:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/nyregion/12hebrew.html
Here inside our VUSD, we have had two charters created at two different churches. Neither was chartered by VUSD but by another much more distant school district. I believe one was chartered by the Julian School District. The charter school students in both cases were mostly the children of church members and the teachers also attended that church. The first church charter was closed several years ago due to financial irregularities. Read:
The second charter called the Classical Academy is still in operation at a local Baptist Church. It came to light when its director, Melvin Goode, was accused of criminal sexual misconduct with underage children. Read: http://www.10news.com/news/18645419/detail.html
A third may be a coincidence, North County Trade Tech High School has a forty acre site next to St. Anne's church where it intends to construct a school. Will there be a religious tie in with the church next door?
A fourth is the case of the San Marcos Unified affiliated charter school, Bayshore Prep, founded by Guffanti campaign contributer and home school advocate, Carolyn Lucia who was forced to resign last May in disgrace because of student transcript irregularities.
Read: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/education/20080621-9999-1mi21smchart.html
Charter schools as religious instruments of instruction not only violates the Church/State separation required in our Constitution but if allowed to continue will tend to separate our country into little groups of similar believers that do not trust outsiders. This "Balkanization" of our country can only lead to disaster and eventually dis-union.
The religious co-opting of the charter movement is the first and best reason to oppose charters but there are two additional reasons as well.
First charter schools are FAR more dangerous to our children during earthquakes. Charter Schools have been specifically exempted from the Field Act. The Field Act was passed after the 1933 Long Beach earthquake which collapsed numerous schools thankfully in the early morning hours before students arrived. The Field Act requires all school buildings to be made with substantial extra reinforcement to ensure that in the event of a major earthquake the students would be protected. Because charter school proponents wanted to use office buildings and empty stores for their schools, they sought and were given Field Act exemptions. Read:
Second at most charter schools employees have no rights. There is no requirement for administration to be fair or competent in releasing employees. Whimsical decisions to fire teachers and others have been made at Guajome Park Academy here in Vista. Read: http://www.guajomeunderground.org/phpBB/ and here:http://www.redorbit.com/news/education/188834/former_employees_have_complained_of_growing_tension_at_charter_school/
Now firing for no reason has become a problem in San Diego as well. Here are the first couple of paragraphs of a story "Charter Teachers, Fearful of Firings, Push to Unionize a Shaken School" found today in the Voice of San Diego online newspaper. Read:
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2009/03/13/education/836kch031209.txt
Thursday, March 12, 2009 Less than a year after a Barrio Logan charter school discarded its director and cut loose nearly all of its teachers with little warning, teachers in its system of schools are taking their first steps toward forming a union.
Six out of eight teachers at King/Chavez Arts Academy were dismissed last summer, shortly after its director was replaced. The jilted teachers, many of them relatively new to teaching, said they received little explanation of why they were let go.
Here are a couple of telling sentences from the middle part of the story:
It also made many of the remaining teachers fearful of losing their jobs, especially after another teacher from the same school was fired in the middle of this year. Some were galled that the principals and administrators judging them had not been classroom teachers themselves.
And another:
It is a dramatic illustration of the tradeoffs that teachers face when choosing to forgo a union and its protections for the freedoms of a charter school.
And another:
"These teachers are much more exposed to unfair treatment than teachers in the San Diego Education Association," said Peter Zschiesche, founding director of the Employee Rights Center, a group that advocates for employees who are not unionized. "Most people think there has to be some law that says, 'You've got to treat me fairly,' and there isn't." (bold type added by blog editor)
And one more:
But some teachers questioned how they could be evaluated fairly and consistently by administrators who did not know their subjects or had never taught classes of their own. (bold type and italics added by blog editor)
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Are you a teacher because of your refrigerator?
Here is an article I found on line. Interesting premise.
'Fridges and washing machines liberated women': researcher
Université de Montréal professor studies impact of household technology
The advent of modern appliances such as washing machines and refrigerators had a profound impact on 20th Century society, according to a new Université de Montréal study. Plug-in conveniences transformed women's lives and enabled them to enter the workforce, says Professor Emanuela Cardia, from the Department of Economics.
Within a short time-span, household technology became accessible to the majority. In the late 1910s, a refrigerator sold for $1,600 and 26 years later such appliances could be purchased for $170. Access to electric stoves, washing machines and vacuum cleaners was also generalized.
"These innovations changed the lives of women," says Professor Cardia. "Although it wasn't a revolution per se, the arrival of this technology in households had an important impact on the workforce and the economy."
Professor Cardia based her research on more than 3,000 censuses conducted between 1940 and 1950, from thousands of American households, across urban and rural areas. "We calculated that women who loaded their stove with coal saved 30 minutes everyday with an electric stove," says Cardia. "The result is that women flooded the workforce. In 1900, five percent of married women had jobs. In 1980, that number jumped to 51 percent."
In 1913, the vacuum cleaner became available, in 1916 it was the washing machine, in 1918 it was the refrigerator, in 1947 the freezer, and in 1973 the microwave was on the market. All of these technologies had an impact on home life, but none had a stronger impact than running water.
"We often forget that running water is a century-old innovation in North America, and it is even more recent in Europe. Of all innovations, it's the one with the most important impact," says Cardia.
In 1890, 25 percent of American households had running water and eight percent had electricity. In 1950, 83 percent had running water and 94% had electricity. According to Cardia, in 1900, a woman spent 58 hours per week on household chores. In 1975, it was 18 hours.
While there have been several studies on the industrial revolution and different aspects of technology, says Cardia, very few investigations have focused on the household revolution. "Yet, women play a very important role in the economy whether they hold a job or work at home."
###
On the Web:
Read the complete study, "Household Technology: Was it the Engine of Liberation?" at
http://www.cireq.umontreal.ca/personnel/cardia_household_technology.pdf.
A French story about this study can be consulted at
http://www.nouvelles.umontreal.ca/recherche/sciences-sociales-psychologie/revolution-de-cuisine.html.
About the Université de Montréal:
www.umontreal.ca/english/index.htm
'Fridges and washing machines liberated women': researcher
Université de Montréal professor studies impact of household technology
The advent of modern appliances such as washing machines and refrigerators had a profound impact on 20th Century society, according to a new Université de Montréal study. Plug-in conveniences transformed women's lives and enabled them to enter the workforce, says Professor Emanuela Cardia, from the Department of Economics.
Within a short time-span, household technology became accessible to the majority. In the late 1910s, a refrigerator sold for $1,600 and 26 years later such appliances could be purchased for $170. Access to electric stoves, washing machines and vacuum cleaners was also generalized.
"These innovations changed the lives of women," says Professor Cardia. "Although it wasn't a revolution per se, the arrival of this technology in households had an important impact on the workforce and the economy."
Professor Cardia based her research on more than 3,000 censuses conducted between 1940 and 1950, from thousands of American households, across urban and rural areas. "We calculated that women who loaded their stove with coal saved 30 minutes everyday with an electric stove," says Cardia. "The result is that women flooded the workforce. In 1900, five percent of married women had jobs. In 1980, that number jumped to 51 percent."
In 1913, the vacuum cleaner became available, in 1916 it was the washing machine, in 1918 it was the refrigerator, in 1947 the freezer, and in 1973 the microwave was on the market. All of these technologies had an impact on home life, but none had a stronger impact than running water.
"We often forget that running water is a century-old innovation in North America, and it is even more recent in Europe. Of all innovations, it's the one with the most important impact," says Cardia.
In 1890, 25 percent of American households had running water and eight percent had electricity. In 1950, 83 percent had running water and 94% had electricity. According to Cardia, in 1900, a woman spent 58 hours per week on household chores. In 1975, it was 18 hours.
While there have been several studies on the industrial revolution and different aspects of technology, says Cardia, very few investigations have focused on the household revolution. "Yet, women play a very important role in the economy whether they hold a job or work at home."
###
On the Web:
Read the complete study, "Household Technology: Was it the Engine of Liberation?" at
http://www.cireq.umontreal.ca/personnel/cardia_household_technology.pdf.
A French story about this study can be consulted at
http://www.nouvelles.umontreal.ca/recherche/sciences-sociales-psychologie/revolution-de-cuisine.html.
About the Université de Montréal:
www.umontreal.ca/english/index.htm
USA education number one in the world
Our ANTI friends like to claim that teachers in general and VUSD teachers in general are lazy, over paid and do not educate our children as evidenced in any NCTimes blog after any article mentioning VUSD.
Guess what, the United States has MORE college graduates than ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! We are number one! I guess the K-12 education we give to our students is not so terrible after all. How else could they become so well educated that they sail through college in the greatest numbers in the world.
Read:
HTTP://BLOGS.SCIENCEMAG.ORG/SCIENCEINSIDER/2009/02/WERE-ALREADY-ON.HTML#MORE
FEBRUARY 25, 2009
We're Already on Top, Mr. President
In his speech last night to Congress, President Barack Obama promised that his education policies would help more people attend college, ensuring that "by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world."
But guess what? We're already there.
Data compiled by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, affiliated with the European Union, show that the United States leads the world, with roughly 30% of its adult population holding 4-year college degrees. NSF's 2008 Science and Engineering Indicators, the gold standard for such statistics, puts the United States atop a bar graph of 27 industrialized countries among adults aged 25 to 64, followed closely by Norway and Israel. OECD's Education at a Glance 2008 shows Norway barely ahead of the United States and Israel. In both rankings, the trio are head and shoulders above the rest of the E.U. countries.
So what is Obama worried about? "The concern is with younger people," says Thomas Snyder of the National Center for Education Statistics in Washington, D.C.
Over the past 2 decades, many countries have poured money into their universities on the assumption that a well-educated population is essential for long-term economic and national security. As a result, several nations now top the United States in the percentage of younger adults (ages 25 to 34) with college degrees. "So eventually they might win out," says NSF's Joan Burelli. However, Burelli notes that historically it's more common in the United States for older adults to return to college than it is elsewhere. That suggests the younger adult cohort may not be the best measure of educational attainment for the entire population.
With all the challenges that the country is facing, Obama might welcome the news that his goal of creating the best-educated populace is already in his grasp.
—Jeffrey Mervis
Guess what, the United States has MORE college graduates than ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! We are number one! I guess the K-12 education we give to our students is not so terrible after all. How else could they become so well educated that they sail through college in the greatest numbers in the world.
Read:
HTTP://BLOGS.SCIENCEMAG.ORG/SCIENCEINSIDER/2009/02/WERE-ALREADY-ON.HTML#MORE
FEBRUARY 25, 2009
We're Already on Top, Mr. President
In his speech last night to Congress, President Barack Obama promised that his education policies would help more people attend college, ensuring that "by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world."
But guess what? We're already there.
Data compiled by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, affiliated with the European Union, show that the United States leads the world, with roughly 30% of its adult population holding 4-year college degrees. NSF's 2008 Science and Engineering Indicators, the gold standard for such statistics, puts the United States atop a bar graph of 27 industrialized countries among adults aged 25 to 64, followed closely by Norway and Israel. OECD's Education at a Glance 2008 shows Norway barely ahead of the United States and Israel. In both rankings, the trio are head and shoulders above the rest of the E.U. countries.
So what is Obama worried about? "The concern is with younger people," says Thomas Snyder of the National Center for Education Statistics in Washington, D.C.
Over the past 2 decades, many countries have poured money into their universities on the assumption that a well-educated population is essential for long-term economic and national security. As a result, several nations now top the United States in the percentage of younger adults (ages 25 to 34) with college degrees. "So eventually they might win out," says NSF's Joan Burelli. However, Burelli notes that historically it's more common in the United States for older adults to return to college than it is elsewhere. That suggests the younger adult cohort may not be the best measure of educational attainment for the entire population.
With all the challenges that the country is facing, Obama might welcome the news that his goal of creating the best-educated populace is already in his grasp.
—Jeffrey Mervis
science denial--it happened here in 1992, could it happen again
We had a group of three deniers of science, logic and rational thinking elected to our VUSD board in 1992. Three makes a majority. The majority drives the agenda. So we got two years of creationism, and other nuttiness. A massive effort by the good citizens of VUSD got rid of them after they turned our district into a national laughing stock. That board's crazy decisions had VUSD as front page headline news from the New York Times to SF Chronicle to LATIMES. We recalled two of the ANTI deniers. Another declined to run again as she had "family" problems. The district was saved.
However, the forces of ANTI science, ANTI fact based education are alive and well in this country. Here is what's happening down Bobby Jindal way in Louisiana:
HTTP://BLOGS.SCIENCEMAG.ORG/SCIENCEINSIDER/2009/01/LOUISIANA-CREAT.HTML#MORE
Louisiana Creates: New Pro-Intelligent Design Rules for Teachers
JANUARY 15, 2009
Last year, Louisiana passed the Louisiana Science Education Act, a law that many scientists and educators said was a thinly veiled attempt to allow creationism and its variants into the science classroom. On Tuesday, the state's Board of Elementary and Secondary Education adopted a policy that sharpens those fears, giving teachers license to use materials outside of the regular curriculum to teach "controversial" scientific theories including evolution, origins of life, and global warming. Backers of the law, including the Louisiana Family Forum, say it is intended to foster critical thinking in students. Opponents insist its only purpose is to provide a loophole for creationists to attack the teaching of evolution.
"We fully expect to see the Discovery Institute's book, Explore Evolution, popping up in school districts across the state*," says Barbara Forrest, a philosopher at Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond.(Here in VUSD the ANTIs brought in, Of Pandas and People. The same "test"book that was so roundly ridiculed in the Dover, Pennsylvania creationist trial a couple of years ago. Read: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/analysis/critique-pandas-people) The Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank, is a proponent of Intelligent Design. In a statement on the institute's Web site, its education analyst Casey Luskin hailed the new policy as a "victory for Louisiana students and teachers." The policy will now be printed in the Louisiana Handbook for School Administrators, which public school officials use as a guide.
State education officials tasked with translating last year's law into policy drafted a document that explicitly prohibits teachers from teaching intelligent design, but on 2 December, board members deferred a scheduled vote. Forrest says the advocates of the law used the delay to pressure education officials to remove that language and a disclaimer saying that religion should not be taught under the guise of critical thinking. On 13 January, the 11-member board unanimously approved a policy that contains no such caveats.
Education officials have defended the revision, arguing that it already includes language barring the use of materials that promote any religious doctrine. But Patsye Peebles, a retired science teacher who served on a committee that helped the education department draft the original policy language, thinks otherwise. "The creationists got what they wanted. We will have to redouble our efforts to educate our teachers and get them to teach good science," Peebles says.
—Yudhijit Bhattacharjee
However, the forces of ANTI science, ANTI fact based education are alive and well in this country. Here is what's happening down Bobby Jindal way in Louisiana:
HTTP://BLOGS.SCIENCEMAG.ORG/SCIENCEINSIDER/2009/01/LOUISIANA-CREAT.HTML#MORE
Louisiana Creates: New Pro-Intelligent Design Rules for Teachers
JANUARY 15, 2009
Last year, Louisiana passed the Louisiana Science Education Act, a law that many scientists and educators said was a thinly veiled attempt to allow creationism and its variants into the science classroom. On Tuesday, the state's Board of Elementary and Secondary Education adopted a policy that sharpens those fears, giving teachers license to use materials outside of the regular curriculum to teach "controversial" scientific theories including evolution, origins of life, and global warming. Backers of the law, including the Louisiana Family Forum, say it is intended to foster critical thinking in students. Opponents insist its only purpose is to provide a loophole for creationists to attack the teaching of evolution.
"We fully expect to see the Discovery Institute's book, Explore Evolution, popping up in school districts across the state*," says Barbara Forrest, a philosopher at Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond.(Here in VUSD the ANTIs brought in, Of Pandas and People. The same "test"book that was so roundly ridiculed in the Dover, Pennsylvania creationist trial a couple of years ago. Read: http://ncseweb.org/creationism/analysis/critique-pandas-people) The Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank, is a proponent of Intelligent Design. In a statement on the institute's Web site, its education analyst Casey Luskin hailed the new policy as a "victory for Louisiana students and teachers." The policy will now be printed in the Louisiana Handbook for School Administrators, which public school officials use as a guide.
State education officials tasked with translating last year's law into policy drafted a document that explicitly prohibits teachers from teaching intelligent design, but on 2 December, board members deferred a scheduled vote. Forrest says the advocates of the law used the delay to pressure education officials to remove that language and a disclaimer saying that religion should not be taught under the guise of critical thinking. On 13 January, the 11-member board unanimously approved a policy that contains no such caveats.
Education officials have defended the revision, arguing that it already includes language barring the use of materials that promote any religious doctrine. But Patsye Peebles, a retired science teacher who served on a committee that helped the education department draft the original policy language, thinks otherwise. "The creationists got what they wanted. We will have to redouble our efforts to educate our teachers and get them to teach good science," Peebles says.
—Yudhijit Bhattacharjee
Phillip Reese Sacramento Bee Responds
I received the following email from Phillip Reese of the Sacramento Bee. I have included the pertinent parts with websites. However it appears that there is a much bigger problem than I originally realized. It appears that the NEA, the Fordham Foudation, and others have uncritically used the California Department of Education statistics on average teacher salaries computed using FTEs without understanding that these so called average teacher salaries have over reached the mean through the addition of administration and non-teaching psychologists salaries.
I will contact the CTA and direct them to this potential problem with California Department of Education statistics.
----------------
The source of my data is the California Department of Education report at the link below. The title at the top of nearly every page of the report is "2007-08 CERTIFICATED TEACHER SALARY PROFILE BY COUNTY BY DISTRICT." Please note the word "teacher."
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/cs/documents/j90summary0708.doc
After getting your note, I compared the number of teachers listed at the link you sent me with the numbers listed in the above report. They match pretty well -- the 60,000 administrators, counselors, etc., you refer to do not appear to be included in the dataset.
I would also note that the NEA, which I don't think is composed of ignorant, right-wing hacks, estimates the average teacher salary in California at a level very close to the official figure given by the state.
http://www.nea.org/home/29402.htm
The sentence you refer to is actually not part of any article. It is in the brief introduction to a database that lets users compare teacher salaries across different districts. ( http://www.sacbee.com/1098/story/995141.html ). Neither the introduction nor the database makes any subjective statement about whether teachers are or aren't paid too much. (omitted by blog editor for confidentiality concerns) might use the database to note that the average teacher salary in Vista Unified District is lower than most other districts in San Diego County.
I will contact the CTA and direct them to this potential problem with California Department of Education statistics.
----------------
The source of my data is the California Department of Education report at the link below. The title at the top of nearly every page of the report is "2007-08 CERTIFICATED TEACHER SALARY PROFILE BY COUNTY BY DISTRICT." Please note the word "teacher."
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/fd/cs/documents/j90summary0708.doc
After getting your note, I compared the number of teachers listed at the link you sent me with the numbers listed in the above report. They match pretty well -- the 60,000 administrators, counselors, etc., you refer to do not appear to be included in the dataset.
I would also note that the NEA, which I don't think is composed of ignorant, right-wing hacks, estimates the average teacher salary in California at a level very close to the official figure given by the state.
http://www.nea.org/home/29402.htm
The sentence you refer to is actually not part of any article. It is in the brief introduction to a database that lets users compare teacher salaries across different districts. ( http://www.sacbee.com/1098/story/995141.html ). Neither the introduction nor the database makes any subjective statement about whether teachers are or aren't paid too much. (omitted by blog editor for confidentiality concerns) might use the database to note that the average teacher salary in Vista Unified District is lower than most other districts in San Diego County.
Here is some information on how California schools compare to other states. It was compiled by the Fordham Foundation which seems to have a right wing agenda but even the Fordham Foundation does not support the VUSD ANTIs in their contention that schools in California and specifically VUSD have oodles of money that they are misusing. In fact the Fordham Foundation says we in California spend less than the national average among all the states in United States.
They contend that teachers in California are among the best paid even accounting for cost of living. That contention is categorically untrue. As noted in my previous blog, the Department of Education in California appears to be averaging highly paid administration and non-teaching positions with classroom teacher salaries in order to give the appearance that classroom teachers have a higher salary than they do. Because admin and specialty non teachers like psychologists have credentials and are considered certificated should not mean that their much better salaries be averaged with classroom teacher salaries when computing average TEACHER salary.
The California Department of Education seems to be using a weird contrivance called a FTE in order to manipulate statistics to show classroom teachers in California salary average is far higher than it really is. When one out of every six data points in an average is not in the set of classroom teachers and in fact is paid far more than classroom teachers then the average is BOGUS.
Fordham is apparently using the phony California Department of Education statistics to decide that California teachers are among highest paid in nation.
Here is the Fordham Foundation statement on California schools:
How California Compares:
Demographics, Resources, and Student Achievement
For good or ill, there is clearly no state that compares with California. And no state will play as large a role in educating America’s future citizens. Seeing the dynamics that affect California’s public schools through a national lens can sharpen our understanding of the challenges our schools face and the progress they are making.
The indicators included in this report provide some answers regarding how California compares with the rest of the country and the four next-largest states—Texas, New York, Florida, and Illinois — which are the most likely to face similar challenges. Of equal importance are the issues the data and analyses raise about the young people this state is educating, its commitment to its public schools, and its progress in helping its students succeed.
The following highlights hint at the breadth of information in this report. You can purchase a PDF download of the full-color report or have a printed copy to be mailed to you.
Demographics
California has far more K–12 students than any other state.
Its birth and immigration rates have slowed compared with fast-growing Texas and Florida.
Its largest ethnic group is Latinos, unlike most states.
It has the highest percentage of children who live in a family in which the head of household has not completed high school.
It ranks first by a wide margin in the proportion of children who speak a language other than English at home.
Resources
California spent $614 less per pupil than the national average in 2005–06.
That year, it ranked in the middle in per-pupil expenditures among the five largest states.
Its teacher salaries are among the highest even when adjusted for the cost of living.
It ranks last in total school staff per student.
After years of low investment, California spent more on school facilities from 2003 to 2006 than any other state.
Student Achievement
California is one of three states that earns an “A” for its academic content standards from the Fordham Foundation.
It has a higher-than-average proportion of schools not making adequate yearly progress as the state defines it under NCLB.
Overall, it ranks among the lowest on NAEP (the “nation’s report card”), but its scores are much closer to the U.S. average if English learners’ results are excluded.
Its high school students are more likely to take advanced placement classes and perform well.
Its high school graduates are less likely to enroll directly in a four-year university.
They contend that teachers in California are among the best paid even accounting for cost of living. That contention is categorically untrue. As noted in my previous blog, the Department of Education in California appears to be averaging highly paid administration and non-teaching positions with classroom teacher salaries in order to give the appearance that classroom teachers have a higher salary than they do. Because admin and specialty non teachers like psychologists have credentials and are considered certificated should not mean that their much better salaries be averaged with classroom teacher salaries when computing average TEACHER salary.
The California Department of Education seems to be using a weird contrivance called a FTE in order to manipulate statistics to show classroom teachers in California salary average is far higher than it really is. When one out of every six data points in an average is not in the set of classroom teachers and in fact is paid far more than classroom teachers then the average is BOGUS.
Fordham is apparently using the phony California Department of Education statistics to decide that California teachers are among highest paid in nation.
Here is the Fordham Foundation statement on California schools:
How California Compares:
Demographics, Resources, and Student Achievement
For good or ill, there is clearly no state that compares with California. And no state will play as large a role in educating America’s future citizens. Seeing the dynamics that affect California’s public schools through a national lens can sharpen our understanding of the challenges our schools face and the progress they are making.
The indicators included in this report provide some answers regarding how California compares with the rest of the country and the four next-largest states—Texas, New York, Florida, and Illinois — which are the most likely to face similar challenges. Of equal importance are the issues the data and analyses raise about the young people this state is educating, its commitment to its public schools, and its progress in helping its students succeed.
The following highlights hint at the breadth of information in this report. You can purchase a PDF download of the full-color report or have a printed copy to be mailed to you.
Demographics
California has far more K–12 students than any other state.
Its birth and immigration rates have slowed compared with fast-growing Texas and Florida.
Its largest ethnic group is Latinos, unlike most states.
It has the highest percentage of children who live in a family in which the head of household has not completed high school.
It ranks first by a wide margin in the proportion of children who speak a language other than English at home.
Resources
California spent $614 less per pupil than the national average in 2005–06.
That year, it ranked in the middle in per-pupil expenditures among the five largest states.
Its teacher salaries are among the highest even when adjusted for the cost of living.
It ranks last in total school staff per student.
After years of low investment, California spent more on school facilities from 2003 to 2006 than any other state.
Student Achievement
California is one of three states that earns an “A” for its academic content standards from the Fordham Foundation.
It has a higher-than-average proportion of schools not making adequate yearly progress as the state defines it under NCLB.
Overall, it ranks among the lowest on NAEP (the “nation’s report card”), but its scores are much closer to the U.S. average if English learners’ results are excluded.
Its high school students are more likely to take advanced placement classes and perform well.
Its high school graduates are less likely to enroll directly in a four-year university.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Teacher Salary Lies--The ANTIS attack again
During the recent school board campaign our ANTI friends told outrageous lies about extravagant teacher salaries in VUSD and understated teachers work hours. The lies were first sowed by Guffanti, a troubled man, who wanted a mob to follow him. He wrote on a web page on his website called vusdwatch an entry entitled "Average VUSD Teacher Pay" and said the following:
"You should know because this $90,546 per teacher is your taxes. Is it a coincidence that the contract is signed immediately after the board election? You decide. Last, this raise generates a multimillion dollar budget deficit. Is this fiscal irresponsibility? You decide.” Guffant's website here:
http://vusdwatch.com/AverageVUSDTeacherPay.htm
Of course Guffanti and his lies are old news, but as recently as yesterday in NCTimes blogs our ANTI friends have been referring to outrageous teacher salary and teachers taking money form the students for lavish salaries. They now use as foundation for these lies an article in the Sacramento Bee. Here:
http://www.sacbee.com/1098/story/995141.html?appSession=42375329441684&RecordID=&PageID=2&PrevPageID=1&cpipage=2&CPISortType=&CPIorderBy=
The author of the article, Phillip Reese, confused Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) with classroom teachers.
As you know FTEs include administration and non-classroom teachers like psychologist--all of whom make far more than classroom teachers. Those two categories both of make up more than one in six FTE's. See the State of California produced table entitled Certificated Staff State of California 2007-2008. Here:
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/profile.asp?Tab=2&level=04&reportnumber=16
NOTE: District and local site administration as well as psychologists are all certificated but they are NOT classroom teachers.
Adding in their much higher salaries heavily skews the average FTE salary and also gives our ANTI friends a "lie" that they can rally around.
Here is my letter to Mr. Reese with a small part deleted to protect my family and friends who still work in VUSD. I have asked him to correct his article.
Dear Mr. Reese
I found your article because the right wing blogsters down here in Southern California keep referring to it. The teacher haters use it over and over to bash good hard working teachers.
Why would you write that the average teacher salary in California is $65,808? Are you ignorant of the difference between classroom teachers and their average classroom teacher pay and Full Time Equivalents (FTE)? or are you a right wing hack who deliberately lies to the mob to get readership? I hope not the second.
FTEs include district and local site admin pay as well as psychologist pay all of which is substantially more than classroom teacher pay. A good one in six FTEs are based on better paid admin salary and psychologists, etc.
See:
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/profile.asp?Tab=2&level=04&reportnumber=16
On this OFFICIAL state of California site see the table that says Certificated Staff. Please notice that Administration and Pupil Services (psychologists, etc.) are certificated BUT NOT CLASSROOM TEACHERS. Please further notice that those two together add up to more than 53,000 FTEs. Also notice that CLASSROOM teachers are worth about 300,000 FTEs which means that the HIGHLY paid NON teachers account for MORE than one out of every six FTEs. FTE does not equal classroom teacher. Certificated does not mean classroom teacher. Adding in admin and pupil services certificated FTE's is mis-leading to the public especially when the reporter conflates FTE's with teacher average pay.
My experience tells me that average pay of a California CLASSROOM teacher is somewhere around 50 thousand dollars, yet California is one of the highest housing cost states in the country.
Take for instance a CLASSROOM teacher in Vista Unified School District in San Diego County at the top of the CLASSROOM teacher salary, after thirty years in the classroom her salary is barely what you inaccurately call the average pay of teachers.
Most teachers do NOT have a masters or doctorate degree. The top of the salary schedule in any district has VERY FEW teachers in it due to the time needed to reach that level as a teacher teaching IN THAT particular DISTRICT and the advanced degrees needed. The top of any salary teacher salary may look very impressive but it is only an phantom impression almost a hoax to make the district look better to prospective new teachers. Admin knows that few if any teachers will ever make it anywhere near the top of the salary schedule.
Here is VUSD salary schedule: Sadly I have no breakdown as to the number of teachers on each level. If i did it would demonstrate that the bulk of the teachers are way down in the low fifties or lower.
http://www.vusd.k12.ca.us/Departments/hr/certificatedHR/Certificated%20HR%20Documents/Teacher%20Salary%20Schedule%200607%20Retro%20070106.pdf
Here is the psychologist salary schedule: Please note the difference between it and the teacher salary schedule.
http://www.vusd.k12.ca.us/Departments/hr/certificatedHR/Certificated%20HR%20Documents/Salary%20Schedule%20Psych.pdf
There is no administration salary schedule. But those folks can make up in the $250,000 yearly range. There salary is often equivalent to three or four CLASSROOM teachers.
Please correct your article or consider adding my email as a comment. Unless of course you are a right wing hack who is not interested in accuracy then of course your purpose was served by riling up the mob against good hardworking classroom teachers.
Sincerely,
"You should know because this $90,546 per teacher is your taxes. Is it a coincidence that the contract is signed immediately after the board election? You decide. Last, this raise generates a multimillion dollar budget deficit. Is this fiscal irresponsibility? You decide.” Guffant's website here:
http://vusdwatch.com/AverageVUSDTeacherPay.htm
Of course Guffanti and his lies are old news, but as recently as yesterday in NCTimes blogs our ANTI friends have been referring to outrageous teacher salary and teachers taking money form the students for lavish salaries. They now use as foundation for these lies an article in the Sacramento Bee. Here:
http://www.sacbee.com/1098/story/995141.html?appSession=42375329441684&RecordID=&PageID=2&PrevPageID=1&cpipage=2&CPISortType=&CPIorderBy=
The author of the article, Phillip Reese, confused Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) with classroom teachers.
As you know FTEs include administration and non-classroom teachers like psychologist--all of whom make far more than classroom teachers. Those two categories both of make up more than one in six FTE's. See the State of California produced table entitled Certificated Staff State of California 2007-2008. Here:
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/profile.asp?Tab=2&level=04&reportnumber=16
NOTE: District and local site administration as well as psychologists are all certificated but they are NOT classroom teachers.
Adding in their much higher salaries heavily skews the average FTE salary and also gives our ANTI friends a "lie" that they can rally around.
Here is my letter to Mr. Reese with a small part deleted to protect my family and friends who still work in VUSD. I have asked him to correct his article.
Dear Mr. Reese
I found your article because the right wing blogsters down here in Southern California keep referring to it. The teacher haters use it over and over to bash good hard working teachers.
Why would you write that the average teacher salary in California is $65,808? Are you ignorant of the difference between classroom teachers and their average classroom teacher pay and Full Time Equivalents (FTE)? or are you a right wing hack who deliberately lies to the mob to get readership? I hope not the second.
FTEs include district and local site admin pay as well as psychologist pay all of which is substantially more than classroom teacher pay. A good one in six FTEs are based on better paid admin salary and psychologists, etc.
See:
http://www.ed-data.k12.ca.us/profile.asp?Tab=2&level=04&reportnumber=16
On this OFFICIAL state of California site see the table that says Certificated Staff. Please notice that Administration and Pupil Services (psychologists, etc.) are certificated BUT NOT CLASSROOM TEACHERS. Please further notice that those two together add up to more than 53,000 FTEs. Also notice that CLASSROOM teachers are worth about 300,000 FTEs which means that the HIGHLY paid NON teachers account for MORE than one out of every six FTEs. FTE does not equal classroom teacher. Certificated does not mean classroom teacher. Adding in admin and pupil services certificated FTE's is mis-leading to the public especially when the reporter conflates FTE's with teacher average pay.
My experience tells me that average pay of a California CLASSROOM teacher is somewhere around 50 thousand dollars, yet California is one of the highest housing cost states in the country.
Take for instance a CLASSROOM teacher in Vista Unified School District in San Diego County at the top of the CLASSROOM teacher salary, after thirty years in the classroom her salary is barely what you inaccurately call the average pay of teachers.
Most teachers do NOT have a masters or doctorate degree. The top of the salary schedule in any district has VERY FEW teachers in it due to the time needed to reach that level as a teacher teaching IN THAT particular DISTRICT and the advanced degrees needed. The top of any salary teacher salary may look very impressive but it is only an phantom impression almost a hoax to make the district look better to prospective new teachers. Admin knows that few if any teachers will ever make it anywhere near the top of the salary schedule.
Here is VUSD salary schedule: Sadly I have no breakdown as to the number of teachers on each level. If i did it would demonstrate that the bulk of the teachers are way down in the low fifties or lower.
http://www.vusd.k12.ca.us/Departments/hr/certificatedHR/Certificated%20HR%20Documents/Teacher%20Salary%20Schedule%200607%20Retro%20070106.pdf
Here is the psychologist salary schedule: Please note the difference between it and the teacher salary schedule.
http://www.vusd.k12.ca.us/Departments/hr/certificatedHR/Certificated%20HR%20Documents/Salary%20Schedule%20Psych.pdf
There is no administration salary schedule. But those folks can make up in the $250,000 yearly range. There salary is often equivalent to three or four CLASSROOM teachers.
Please correct your article or consider adding my email as a comment. Unless of course you are a right wing hack who is not interested in accuracy then of course your purpose was served by riling up the mob against good hardworking classroom teachers.
Sincerely,
Elementary Report Card--wasted time, confused parents
Most elementary teachers have spent every spare minute of the last two weeks putting together a "report card" for their elementary classroom students. Sadly it was mostly wasted time.
The too complex and time consuming report card is full of 1,2 3 and 4 numbers on a variety of language arts and especially math picayune elementary tasks. These virtual blizzard of numbers requires huge investment of "busy" work time for the teachers with no payoff resulting in more informed parents. Most parents are just confused.
There is only one grade each for science and social science.
Why does language arts require TEN categories and math TEN more? This plethora of "grades" is confusing to our parents, especially our limited English speaking ones. Further having the grades as four numbers is not nearly as helpful as the five traditional letter grades would be. What parent does not understand ABCDF?
How do we get parents motivated to intervene if their child is not doing well ,if they cannot easily and quickly comprehend what the report card is telling them.
Because language arts includes reading and spelling, it does require more than one grade but ten? Couldn't fluency, grammar and comprehension all be rolled into one reading grade? Perhaps language arts should be four or five grades but ten is way over the limit.
Math is even worse--grade for every skill is nuts. One letter grade for math is more than enough to let parents know how well their child is doing. Any more than that is just wasted time busy work for the teachers and TMI for the parents. Besides how can the additional information given to the parents change the actions of the parents? If the child is doing poorly, one grade tells them to contact the school and find out what is going on just as well or better than ten grades.
Wasted teacher time is wasted preparation time for teaching and less effective classroom instruction. Confused parents given a flurry of numbers and letters are more likely to put the report card down without taking action than parents given clear simple letter grades. In both cases more is worse NOT better.
What about a single simple behavior grade? Instead there are seven grades for effort and ten redundant categories for work habits and social skills. Why?
In addition the report card were redesigned to get rid of the simple and bilingual use of the E,S,N, U behavior grade scale. The clear letter S in both English and Spanish was replaced with an M in English that looks VERY much like a N. Talk about confusing. How many parents notice the difference? The English speaking parents see a list of M's and N's and they all blend together. S grades stood out. M does not.
For Spanish speaking parents, the teachers must use a different letter "C" instead of the "S" or "M". How many teachers make a mistake and give a M grade to Spanish speaking student? The M has NO meaning in Spanish. The letter S does. Why this confusing change when S means satisfactory in English and satisfactorio in Spanish. Two similar words derived from the same Latin root seem like the intuit choice instead of using two different letters from two different source words.
Shouldn't report cards be crafted to give the most information in the simplest most clear way? Shouldn't the wasted time for the teachers with no gain for the students or parents be factored into decisions regarding what elementary report cards look like?
More than a decade ago there were a rash of lawsuits claiming that parents were not informed enough about their children's failure to learn in school sponsored by the forces of the ANTIs in America. In addition our good friends who are protective of our children decided that grading was labeling and bad for student self esteem. I am convinced those two movements coming together resulted in the VUSD board committees coming up with these time consuming ill informing report cards. At that time complex report cards that told less and were confusing seemed like a good idea for possible latter use in case of lawsuits to prove skills were taught and recorded. Secondly the then "new" elementary report card got rid of those nasty ABCDF grades that traumatized the children. At least that was the theory. Other districts fell into the same mistake of overly complex, non-informative report cards. I believe many have changed back to ABCDF grades. When will VUSD?
Even more sad for our VUSD students is that when those kids get to middle school and get their first report card many parents and children are shocked! "What do you mean a C? a D?I never got grades like that in elementary school." or from the parents, "But my child always got great report cards in elementary school. how could he/she get a C?"
All VUSD sixth grade teachers are overwhelmed with incredulous parents and children when the first report cards come home. For the first time ever the parents and students find out what their real accomplishments have been in school. The parents and students see an easily comprehensible grade and they are dumbfounded.n
The VUSD elementary report card is not fair to the teachers who spend weeks computing meaningless grades. It is not fair to the parents who are confused and do not understand when they need to take corrective action to help their child. It is not fair to sixth grade teachers at the middles school who must give the first "real" grades to these students.
Let's dump the elementary report card for next year. Who is with me on this? Tell your favorite school board member (except Gibson who will politicize the issue). Or add a comment to this blog and I will forward it to the four rational school board members.
The too complex and time consuming report card is full of 1,2 3 and 4 numbers on a variety of language arts and especially math picayune elementary tasks. These virtual blizzard of numbers requires huge investment of "busy" work time for the teachers with no payoff resulting in more informed parents. Most parents are just confused.
There is only one grade each for science and social science.
Why does language arts require TEN categories and math TEN more? This plethora of "grades" is confusing to our parents, especially our limited English speaking ones. Further having the grades as four numbers is not nearly as helpful as the five traditional letter grades would be. What parent does not understand ABCDF?
How do we get parents motivated to intervene if their child is not doing well ,if they cannot easily and quickly comprehend what the report card is telling them.
Because language arts includes reading and spelling, it does require more than one grade but ten? Couldn't fluency, grammar and comprehension all be rolled into one reading grade? Perhaps language arts should be four or five grades but ten is way over the limit.
Math is even worse--grade for every skill is nuts. One letter grade for math is more than enough to let parents know how well their child is doing. Any more than that is just wasted time busy work for the teachers and TMI for the parents. Besides how can the additional information given to the parents change the actions of the parents? If the child is doing poorly, one grade tells them to contact the school and find out what is going on just as well or better than ten grades.
Wasted teacher time is wasted preparation time for teaching and less effective classroom instruction. Confused parents given a flurry of numbers and letters are more likely to put the report card down without taking action than parents given clear simple letter grades. In both cases more is worse NOT better.
What about a single simple behavior grade? Instead there are seven grades for effort and ten redundant categories for work habits and social skills. Why?
In addition the report card were redesigned to get rid of the simple and bilingual use of the E,S,N, U behavior grade scale. The clear letter S in both English and Spanish was replaced with an M in English that looks VERY much like a N. Talk about confusing. How many parents notice the difference? The English speaking parents see a list of M's and N's and they all blend together. S grades stood out. M does not.
For Spanish speaking parents, the teachers must use a different letter "C" instead of the "S" or "M". How many teachers make a mistake and give a M grade to Spanish speaking student? The M has NO meaning in Spanish. The letter S does. Why this confusing change when S means satisfactory in English and satisfactorio in Spanish. Two similar words derived from the same Latin root seem like the intuit choice instead of using two different letters from two different source words.
Shouldn't report cards be crafted to give the most information in the simplest most clear way? Shouldn't the wasted time for the teachers with no gain for the students or parents be factored into decisions regarding what elementary report cards look like?
More than a decade ago there were a rash of lawsuits claiming that parents were not informed enough about their children's failure to learn in school sponsored by the forces of the ANTIs in America. In addition our good friends who are protective of our children decided that grading was labeling and bad for student self esteem. I am convinced those two movements coming together resulted in the VUSD board committees coming up with these time consuming ill informing report cards. At that time complex report cards that told less and were confusing seemed like a good idea for possible latter use in case of lawsuits to prove skills were taught and recorded. Secondly the then "new" elementary report card got rid of those nasty ABCDF grades that traumatized the children. At least that was the theory. Other districts fell into the same mistake of overly complex, non-informative report cards. I believe many have changed back to ABCDF grades. When will VUSD?
Even more sad for our VUSD students is that when those kids get to middle school and get their first report card many parents and children are shocked! "What do you mean a C? a D?I never got grades like that in elementary school." or from the parents, "But my child always got great report cards in elementary school. how could he/she get a C?"
All VUSD sixth grade teachers are overwhelmed with incredulous parents and children when the first report cards come home. For the first time ever the parents and students find out what their real accomplishments have been in school. The parents and students see an easily comprehensible grade and they are dumbfounded.n
The VUSD elementary report card is not fair to the teachers who spend weeks computing meaningless grades. It is not fair to the parents who are confused and do not understand when they need to take corrective action to help their child. It is not fair to sixth grade teachers at the middles school who must give the first "real" grades to these students.
Let's dump the elementary report card for next year. Who is with me on this? Tell your favorite school board member (except Gibson who will politicize the issue). Or add a comment to this blog and I will forward it to the four rational school board members.
Monday, March 9, 2009
DO NOT USE VUSD PHONES, BALES IS DANGEROUS
I have just received a series of articles from the Pueblo Chieftain the local newspaper in Pueblo Colorado where Joyce Bales was superintendent before coming to VUSD.
For a time she had two school board members who opposed her and three in her favor. A recall campaign was conducted against those two. Enough signatures were obtained to run a recall election against one Bales opposing school board member. That member was recalled and replaced.
The replacement member decided he did not like Bales either. A campaign of whispers and innuendo was conducted against the replacement who was finishing out the term of the recalled member. He was shortly up for election in the regular school board elections. He was not re-elected. A new board member that supported Bales was voted in.
The other member of the school board that opposed Bales was also removed from the school board in a rather bizarre way having to do with residency.
In less than two years, Bales had five strong supporters of hers on a five member board.
Bales was ACTIVELY involved in removing the final board member who did not support her. Bales TAPED CONVERSATIONS between herself and her final target and used those taped conversations against the last school board member.
DO NOT SAY ANYTHING ON SCHOOL PHONES ABOUT POLITICS!! OR ABOUT BALES LEADERSHIP.
BALES HAS ACCESS TO ALL PHONE CONVERSATIONS ON VISTA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT PHONES!!!
Here is the article:
Published: Friday September 16, 2005
School board member: staffer sent to check claim of new residence
By JOHN NORTON THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN
A day after a news story appeared listing what Christine Pacheco-Koveleski said was her new Pueblo residence, School District 60’s community relations director appeared on the apartment doorstep.
Greg Sinn acknowledged that he went to the apartment in a fourplex at 616 W. 10th St. Thursday morning. He said he had been sent by Superintendent Joyce Bales to hand-deliver a letter presented to the school board Tuesday night by local citizen Arnie Carlsen, calling for Pacheco-Koveleski to resign or for the board to declare her seat vacant.
Bales said she wanted to make sure Pacheco-Koveleski, who did not attend this week's meeting, had a copy of the letter. In the letter, Carlsen, who led an unsuccessful attempt to recall Pacheco-Koveleski last year, said that since she had sold her home at 2225 N. Greenwood St. and has a home in Spotsylvania, Va., where she also works for Rappahannock Legal Services, she no longer was a resident of the district.
Pacheco-Koveleski said that she had sent an e-mail to Geri Patrone, the board's secretary, asking to have the letter sent to her law office at 612 W. 10th St., not to the apartment.
Sinn said after knocking on apartment No. 1 and finding it wasn't hers, he went to apartment No. 2 and Pacheco-Koveleski's son answered the door.
Sinn said he recognized her son and asked if his mother lived there. "He said, 'No,’ ” Sinn said. "Then he said, ‘Did you want me to give her a message? She's not here right now.' ”
An angry Pacheco-Koveleski said in a phone interview later in the day that she was very upset by the incident.
"I find it very inappropriate," she said. "I actually became very concerned. I've been on the board for six years and I've never had any staff member show up at my house. I wanted to know what was so dire that he would show up at my personal home. I consider it to be very unprofessional."
Sinn said that was not the case.
"I've probably delivered stuff to her house five or six times at her former residence," he said.
Pacheco-Koveleski said her son told her Sinn was not holding any papers and did not offer to leave anything.
Sinn said he had the letter in his back pocket.
"He was being the investigator since the address was in the newspaper," she said.
Pacheco-Koveleski phoned both Sinn and Bales to complain. Sinn, who said he was in a district foundation meeting when she called, said he saved the voice mail message.
The message on his phone, which he said was from Pacheco-Koveleski, asked: "Since when do you show up at my house? I think I might have to talk about that at the next board meeting."
She also implied he was ignoring the call and said, "Get yourself some huevos, as we say in Spanish."
Bales also taped her conversation during which the voice she said was Pacheco- Koveleski's also complained about Sinn's visit.
During their conversation, Bales asked, "Are you in Pueblo right now?" to which the answer was, "That's none of your business."
Sinn said later in the day, Pacheco-Koveleski left a message with his assistant questioning why he'd come to her apartment and saying she would get a restraining order against him if she had to.
©1996-2008The Pueblo Chieftain Online
For a time she had two school board members who opposed her and three in her favor. A recall campaign was conducted against those two. Enough signatures were obtained to run a recall election against one Bales opposing school board member. That member was recalled and replaced.
The replacement member decided he did not like Bales either. A campaign of whispers and innuendo was conducted against the replacement who was finishing out the term of the recalled member. He was shortly up for election in the regular school board elections. He was not re-elected. A new board member that supported Bales was voted in.
The other member of the school board that opposed Bales was also removed from the school board in a rather bizarre way having to do with residency.
In less than two years, Bales had five strong supporters of hers on a five member board.
Bales was ACTIVELY involved in removing the final board member who did not support her. Bales TAPED CONVERSATIONS between herself and her final target and used those taped conversations against the last school board member.
DO NOT SAY ANYTHING ON SCHOOL PHONES ABOUT POLITICS!! OR ABOUT BALES LEADERSHIP.
BALES HAS ACCESS TO ALL PHONE CONVERSATIONS ON VISTA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT PHONES!!!
Here is the article:
Published: Friday September 16, 2005
School board member: staffer sent to check claim of new residence
By JOHN NORTON THE PUEBLO CHIEFTAIN
A day after a news story appeared listing what Christine Pacheco-Koveleski said was her new Pueblo residence, School District 60’s community relations director appeared on the apartment doorstep.
Greg Sinn acknowledged that he went to the apartment in a fourplex at 616 W. 10th St. Thursday morning. He said he had been sent by Superintendent Joyce Bales to hand-deliver a letter presented to the school board Tuesday night by local citizen Arnie Carlsen, calling for Pacheco-Koveleski to resign or for the board to declare her seat vacant.
Bales said she wanted to make sure Pacheco-Koveleski, who did not attend this week's meeting, had a copy of the letter. In the letter, Carlsen, who led an unsuccessful attempt to recall Pacheco-Koveleski last year, said that since she had sold her home at 2225 N. Greenwood St. and has a home in Spotsylvania, Va., where she also works for Rappahannock Legal Services, she no longer was a resident of the district.
Pacheco-Koveleski said that she had sent an e-mail to Geri Patrone, the board's secretary, asking to have the letter sent to her law office at 612 W. 10th St., not to the apartment.
Sinn said after knocking on apartment No. 1 and finding it wasn't hers, he went to apartment No. 2 and Pacheco-Koveleski's son answered the door.
Sinn said he recognized her son and asked if his mother lived there. "He said, 'No,’ ” Sinn said. "Then he said, ‘Did you want me to give her a message? She's not here right now.' ”
An angry Pacheco-Koveleski said in a phone interview later in the day that she was very upset by the incident.
"I find it very inappropriate," she said. "I actually became very concerned. I've been on the board for six years and I've never had any staff member show up at my house. I wanted to know what was so dire that he would show up at my personal home. I consider it to be very unprofessional."
Sinn said that was not the case.
"I've probably delivered stuff to her house five or six times at her former residence," he said.
Pacheco-Koveleski said her son told her Sinn was not holding any papers and did not offer to leave anything.
Sinn said he had the letter in his back pocket.
"He was being the investigator since the address was in the newspaper," she said.
Pacheco-Koveleski phoned both Sinn and Bales to complain. Sinn, who said he was in a district foundation meeting when she called, said he saved the voice mail message.
The message on his phone, which he said was from Pacheco-Koveleski, asked: "Since when do you show up at my house? I think I might have to talk about that at the next board meeting."
She also implied he was ignoring the call and said, "Get yourself some huevos, as we say in Spanish."
Bales also taped her conversation during which the voice she said was Pacheco- Koveleski's also complained about Sinn's visit.
During their conversation, Bales asked, "Are you in Pueblo right now?" to which the answer was, "That's none of your business."
Sinn said later in the day, Pacheco-Koveleski left a message with his assistant questioning why he'd come to her apartment and saying she would get a restraining order against him if she had to.
©1996-2008The Pueblo Chieftain Online
Jill Parvin's tragedy and "toning down"
Today March 8, 2009 I received an email telling me that Jill Parvin's husband just died. The anonymous emailer said, "I might want to consider removing her name or at least toning some of this stuff down in regards to her."
First I am very sad she lost her husband. I am sure he was a fine man and I believe she is probably a very good woman, just misguided regarding Guffanti. Let me offer her my deepest sympathy. I am sure her loss is profound. I hope she has wonderful memories to comfort herself in her very sad and difficult time.
But secondly, I have re-read the post the anonymous emailer referred to. Here: http://vistaschools.blogspot.com/2008/10/guffanti-criminal-campaign-fraud.html
I found a couple of poorly written sentences that need help and I found a lot written about Guffanti, but very little about Jill Parvin. I am not sure what 'stuff' about her needs toning down. I wrote almost nothing about her. I do not know her. I had never heard of her before the NCTimes broke their long standing publishing policy and allowed her two published editorial pieces in the same week--one a letter to the editor and another a forum piece. Worse the TWO published pieces were redundant. Here is the pertainant part of the NCTimes LETTERS POLICY: Writers are limited to one letter to the editor or Community Forum about every two weeks.
Both her published pieces were on the same subject, support for Guffanti in the school board election. Worst of all the Forum piece was factually in error and contained a false charge against the good teachers of the VUSD and a gross factual error on the amount of money spent by Guffanti. I corrected her errors, nothing more.
Her first false claim was that there was a campaign by the teachers to deny that Guffanti was a doctor. She gave no verifiable evidence to back that contention. The North County Times editors did not force her to document the charge as they routinely do (line by line) when a PRO-education writer submits a Forum piece.
I am quite familiar with the Vista Teacher's Association. I receive their emails and campaign literature. There were no such charges in any campaign literature. I have never heard anyone on the PRO education side say anything about him not being a doctor.
I also corrected her second false statement that Stephen Guffanti had spent only a few thousand dollars in his campaign against the teachers.
I knew back in October that this statement was false as I know how much campaign fliers, etc cost. I knew then that he had spent tens of thousands of dollars but had no information about the totals. Tonight I have received an email spreadsheet listing his 2004 contributors and the amount they contributed. It comes to either $56, 866.04 or $62,776 depending on how the amounts are added or valued.
Jill Parvin's Forum was ABSOLUTELY wrong where she said he spent only a few thousand dollars on the campaign. This fact could have been checked at the San Diego Registrar of Voters office. It was not. Yet it was allowed in the Forum by the editor (J. Stryker Meyer?) who checks Forum material for the NCTimes before it is published. This was clear bias by the NCTIMES editor.
I corrected her editorial. I did not insult her.
What am I supposed to tone down regarding her? By the way the same false charge about the teachers denying Guffanti's medical credential was in the North County Times blogs as recently as yesterday. http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03/06/news/coastal/vista/zafeb0db720418fa8882575710068a8e6.txt
To find the false blog scroll down after the article to the comment by Samuel March 7, 2009 2:56PM PST who said, "Some of the information was blogged including the claim that he (Guffanti) wasn’t really a medical doctor."
I believe I read every blog having to do with VUSD in the NCtimes from June 2008 through today March 08, 2009. I have at no time EVER seen a blog that denied that Guffanti was a doctor.
Again what about Jill Parvin should I tone down in the above? The article is mostly about Guffanti. Very little is written about Jill Parvin. Please anonymous tell me what is objectionable.
Here is the email in its entirety:
Just so you know, Jill's husband recently passed away unexpectedly. Perhaps you might want to consider removing her name or at least toning some of this stuff down in regards to her. Guffanti is what he is but she's going through a rough time and it's sort of sad to see her name here when I was just looking for his obituary.Thanks.
Further research in the NCTimes archives—Another two hours on a Sunday night.
I re-read Jill Parvin’s editorial in the North County Times in October 2008. In the first paragraph she referred to a blog after the NCTimes article about the VTA endorsing candidates. She claimed the blog was posted on September 5, 2008. There was no such article that I could find on that date. Using “vista schools” as the search words for that date, September 5, 2008, I found seven entries all had to do with high school sports not one had to do with the school board election.
I ran a five more searches with different terms for September 5, 2008 with words like “union” “endorsement” “endorses” etc. There was not one hit.
I, after a dozen more searches, finally found the VTA endorsement article on August 30, 2008 “VTA backs three in school board race” http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/08/30/news/coastal/vista/zec24e211d7b31852882574b40057a5a1.txt
I read all of the sixty of so blogs following the article, I found NO reference that said Guffanti did not have a medical degree.
So again I ask what is it about my original blog entry correcting Jill Parvin’s forum that was objectionable? Or incorrect?
I am very sorry for her loss. I will correct or change anything in my blog that is factually wrong. I will even change wording of the blog. Please give me suggestions. I do not want to add to her grief.
FURTHER UPDATE March 13, 2009
I received a second comment on this matter this time from "Jerry". He pointed me to the article that Jill Parvin's Forum "Dr. Guffanti is a doctor" had referenced. The article was published on September 4th 2008 in regards to the CSEA joining the VTA in endorsing Jaka, Chunka, and Lilly. Here: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/09/03/news/coastal/vista/z8ad321691d7c4e18882574b9005b9e47.txt
His post is at the my original blog. Here: http://vistaschools.blogspot.com/2008/10/guffanti-criminal-campaign-fraud.html
The blog about the article that Jill Parvin referenced was posted on September 5. Interesting that the NCTimes did not provide a link to the article in Jill Parvin's Forum piece. First time I have ever read an article in NCTimes that referenced an earlier NCTimes piece without a link. Perhaps because the blogs following that article do not support Jill Parvin's main contention in her Forum that the VTA had a campaign to say Guffanti was not a doctor. Never happened. The blogs do not support that contention.
The blogs followed a CSEA announced endorsement. I would guess most of the bloggers were CSEA folks. Even so not one blog said he was not a medical doctor. One said he was retired which was inaccurate and corrected on the blog. but I certainly understand the confusion we all have about Dr. Guffanti's practice of medicine. He has no office listed in the phone book. He has not had "privileges" at either Tri City or Palomar Medical Center. We have been told he practiced ER medicine in central California, Borrego Springs, San Marcos at Workers Comp office, and now Jill Parvin says he has an office in Vista. All confusing, maybe explained by the blog that says he is a "substitute" doctor.
First I am very sad she lost her husband. I am sure he was a fine man and I believe she is probably a very good woman, just misguided regarding Guffanti. Let me offer her my deepest sympathy. I am sure her loss is profound. I hope she has wonderful memories to comfort herself in her very sad and difficult time.
But secondly, I have re-read the post the anonymous emailer referred to. Here: http://vistaschools.blogspot.com/2008/10/guffanti-criminal-campaign-fraud.html
I found a couple of poorly written sentences that need help and I found a lot written about Guffanti, but very little about Jill Parvin. I am not sure what 'stuff' about her needs toning down. I wrote almost nothing about her. I do not know her. I had never heard of her before the NCTimes broke their long standing publishing policy and allowed her two published editorial pieces in the same week--one a letter to the editor and another a forum piece. Worse the TWO published pieces were redundant. Here is the pertainant part of the NCTimes LETTERS POLICY: Writers are limited to one letter to the editor or Community Forum about every two weeks.
Both her published pieces were on the same subject, support for Guffanti in the school board election. Worst of all the Forum piece was factually in error and contained a false charge against the good teachers of the VUSD and a gross factual error on the amount of money spent by Guffanti. I corrected her errors, nothing more.
Her first false claim was that there was a campaign by the teachers to deny that Guffanti was a doctor. She gave no verifiable evidence to back that contention. The North County Times editors did not force her to document the charge as they routinely do (line by line) when a PRO-education writer submits a Forum piece.
I am quite familiar with the Vista Teacher's Association. I receive their emails and campaign literature. There were no such charges in any campaign literature. I have never heard anyone on the PRO education side say anything about him not being a doctor.
I also corrected her second false statement that Stephen Guffanti had spent only a few thousand dollars in his campaign against the teachers.
I knew back in October that this statement was false as I know how much campaign fliers, etc cost. I knew then that he had spent tens of thousands of dollars but had no information about the totals. Tonight I have received an email spreadsheet listing his 2004 contributors and the amount they contributed. It comes to either $56, 866.04 or $62,776 depending on how the amounts are added or valued.
Jill Parvin's Forum was ABSOLUTELY wrong where she said he spent only a few thousand dollars on the campaign. This fact could have been checked at the San Diego Registrar of Voters office. It was not. Yet it was allowed in the Forum by the editor (J. Stryker Meyer?) who checks Forum material for the NCTimes before it is published. This was clear bias by the NCTIMES editor.
I corrected her editorial. I did not insult her.
What am I supposed to tone down regarding her? By the way the same false charge about the teachers denying Guffanti's medical credential was in the North County Times blogs as recently as yesterday. http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2009/03/06/news/coastal/vista/zafeb0db720418fa8882575710068a8e6.txt
To find the false blog scroll down after the article to the comment by Samuel March 7, 2009 2:56PM PST who said, "Some of the information was blogged including the claim that he (Guffanti) wasn’t really a medical doctor."
I believe I read every blog having to do with VUSD in the NCtimes from June 2008 through today March 08, 2009. I have at no time EVER seen a blog that denied that Guffanti was a doctor.
Again what about Jill Parvin should I tone down in the above? The article is mostly about Guffanti. Very little is written about Jill Parvin. Please anonymous tell me what is objectionable.
Here is the email in its entirety:
Just so you know, Jill's husband recently passed away unexpectedly. Perhaps you might want to consider removing her name or at least toning some of this stuff down in regards to her. Guffanti is what he is but she's going through a rough time and it's sort of sad to see her name here when I was just looking for his obituary.Thanks.
Further research in the NCTimes archives—Another two hours on a Sunday night.
I re-read Jill Parvin’s editorial in the North County Times in October 2008. In the first paragraph she referred to a blog after the NCTimes article about the VTA endorsing candidates. She claimed the blog was posted on September 5, 2008. There was no such article that I could find on that date. Using “vista schools” as the search words for that date, September 5, 2008, I found seven entries all had to do with high school sports not one had to do with the school board election.
I ran a five more searches with different terms for September 5, 2008 with words like “union” “endorsement” “endorses” etc. There was not one hit.
I, after a dozen more searches, finally found the VTA endorsement article on August 30, 2008 “VTA backs three in school board race” http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/08/30/news/coastal/vista/zec24e211d7b31852882574b40057a5a1.txt
I read all of the sixty of so blogs following the article, I found NO reference that said Guffanti did not have a medical degree.
So again I ask what is it about my original blog entry correcting Jill Parvin’s forum that was objectionable? Or incorrect?
I am very sorry for her loss. I will correct or change anything in my blog that is factually wrong. I will even change wording of the blog. Please give me suggestions. I do not want to add to her grief.
FURTHER UPDATE March 13, 2009
I received a second comment on this matter this time from "Jerry". He pointed me to the article that Jill Parvin's Forum "Dr. Guffanti is a doctor" had referenced. The article was published on September 4th 2008 in regards to the CSEA joining the VTA in endorsing Jaka, Chunka, and Lilly. Here: http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/09/03/news/coastal/vista/z8ad321691d7c4e18882574b9005b9e47.txt
His post is at the my original blog. Here: http://vistaschools.blogspot.com/2008/10/guffanti-criminal-campaign-fraud.html
The blog about the article that Jill Parvin referenced was posted on September 5. Interesting that the NCTimes did not provide a link to the article in Jill Parvin's Forum piece. First time I have ever read an article in NCTimes that referenced an earlier NCTimes piece without a link. Perhaps because the blogs following that article do not support Jill Parvin's main contention in her Forum that the VTA had a campaign to say Guffanti was not a doctor. Never happened. The blogs do not support that contention.
The blogs followed a CSEA announced endorsement. I would guess most of the bloggers were CSEA folks. Even so not one blog said he was not a medical doctor. One said he was retired which was inaccurate and corrected on the blog. but I certainly understand the confusion we all have about Dr. Guffanti's practice of medicine. He has no office listed in the phone book. He has not had "privileges" at either Tri City or Palomar Medical Center. We have been told he practiced ER medicine in central California, Borrego Springs, San Marcos at Workers Comp office, and now Jill Parvin says he has an office in Vista. All confusing, maybe explained by the blog that says he is a "substitute" doctor.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Names matter for alcohol and vegetable consumption
In education we are constantly giving new names to low achieving students. We seem to create whole new educationese language every five to ten years. Apparently there is a reason for this. Names really do matter. Changing names changes the way people react.
Here our two studies about names. In the first giving vegetables "better" names increases the amount of them that children ate. In the second children with alcoholic drink names on their clothing were found to consume far more alcohol.
Contact: Jennifer Cole Noble
jlc395@cornell.edu
Cornell Food & Brand Lab
Names turn preschoolers into vegetable lovers
Do you have a picky preschooler who's avoiding their vegetables? A new Cornell University study shows that giving vegetables catchy new names – like X-Ray Vision Carrots and Tomato Bursts – left preschoolers asking for more.
When 186 four-year olds were given carrots called "X-ray Vision Carrots" ate nearly twice as much as they did on the lunch days when they were simply labeled as "carrots." The Robert Wood Johnson-funded study also showed the influence of these names might persist. Children continued to eat about 50% more carrots even on the days when they were no longer labeled. The new findings were presented on Monday at the annual meeting of the School Nutrition Association in Washington DC.
"Cool names can make for cool foods," says lead author Brian Wansink. "Whether it be 'power peas' or 'dinosaur broccoli trees,' giving a food a fun name makes kids think it will be more fun to eat. And it seems to keep working – even the next day," said Wansink.
Similar results have been found with adults. A restaurant study showed that when the Seafood Filet was changed to "Succulent Italian Seafood Filet," sales increased by 28% and taste rating increased by 12%. "Same food, but different expectations, and a different experience," said Wansink, author of "Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Eat More Than We Think."
Although the study was conducted in pre-schools, the researchers believe the same naming tricks can work with children. "I've been using this with my kids," said researcher Collin Payne, "Whatever sparks their imagination seems to spark their appetite."
###
The research was funded by Healthy Eating Research grant funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Further details on the study are available at www.SmarterLunchrooms.org.
------------------------------------
Contact: Jason Aldous
Jason.Aldous@hitchcock.org
JAMA and Archives Journals
Owning alcohol-branded merchandise common, associated with drinking behaviors among teens
Between 11 percent and 20 percent of U.S. teens are estimated to own T-shirts or other merchandise featuring an alcohol brand, and those who do appear more likely to transition through the stages of drinking from susceptibility to beginning drinking to binge drinking, according to a report in the March issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.
Alcohol-branded merchandise includes T-shirts, hats or other items that feature a particular brand of beverage, according to background information in the article.
Increasing evidence suggests that this specialized type of marketing effectively reaches teenagers and is associated with alcohol use.
Auden C. McClure, M.D., M.P.H., of Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Hanover, N.H., and colleagues conducted a telephone survey of a representative sample of 6,522 U.S. adolescents age 10 to 14 years in 2003. The teens reported information about their drinking behaviors and drinking susceptibility, measured by items assessing responses to peer offers, intentions to drink and positive expectancies about drinking. At three follow-up surveys conducted every eight months, participants answered questions about changes in drinking habits and ownership of alcohol-branded merchandise.
The percentage of teens owning alcohol-branded merchandise ranged from 11 percent at the eight-month survey to 20 percent at the 24-month survey. The most commonly owned products were clothing (64 percent) and headwear (24 percent), with the remaining items a wide array that included jewelry, key chains, shot glasses, posters and pens. Most (75 percent) of the brands were beer, including 45 percent that featured the Budweiser label.
Among teens who had never drank alcohol, owning alcohol-branded merchandise and susceptibility to drinking were reciprocally related, with each predicting the other during an eight-month period. In addition, owning alcohol-branded merchandise and having a susceptible attitude toward drinking predicted both the initiation of alcohol use and binge drinking, even after controlling for other risk factors.
"Alcohol-branded merchandise is widely distributed among U.S. adolescents, who obtain the items one-quarter of the time through direct purchase at retail outlets," the authors write. "The results also demonstrate a prospective relationship between alcohol-branded merchandise ownership and initiation of both alcohol use and binge drinking. This is the first study to link alcohol-branded merchandise ownership to more problematic youth alcohol outcomes that predict morbidity [illness] and mortality [death]. Notably, the relationship is independent of a number of known social, personality and environmental risk factors for alcohol use."
Together with the literature to date, the study "provides strong evidence that alcohol-branded merchandise distribution among adolescents plays a role in their drinking behavior and provides a basis for policies to restrict the scope of such alcohol-marketing practices," they conclude.
(Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163[3]:211-217. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)
Editor's Note: This study is funded by a grant from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
Editorial: Action Needed to Regulate Alcohol-Branded Merchandise
"The evidence is strong that youth exposure to alcohol marketing increases the likelihood of early initiation, which in turn puts young people at greater risk of alcohol-related harm," writes David H. Jernigan, Ph.D., of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, in an accompanying editorial.
"Voluntary approaches have been ineffective in reducing the risk. Political will is needed both to improve data collection and reporting and to move toward restrictions that will give young people a chance to grow up alcohol-free. McClure et al provide important new evidence that points to an urgent need for action."
(Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163[3]:278-279. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)
Editor's Note: Please see the article for additional information, including author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
Here our two studies about names. In the first giving vegetables "better" names increases the amount of them that children ate. In the second children with alcoholic drink names on their clothing were found to consume far more alcohol.
Contact: Jennifer Cole Noble
jlc395@cornell.edu
Cornell Food & Brand Lab
Names turn preschoolers into vegetable lovers
Do you have a picky preschooler who's avoiding their vegetables? A new Cornell University study shows that giving vegetables catchy new names – like X-Ray Vision Carrots and Tomato Bursts – left preschoolers asking for more.
When 186 four-year olds were given carrots called "X-ray Vision Carrots" ate nearly twice as much as they did on the lunch days when they were simply labeled as "carrots." The Robert Wood Johnson-funded study also showed the influence of these names might persist. Children continued to eat about 50% more carrots even on the days when they were no longer labeled. The new findings were presented on Monday at the annual meeting of the School Nutrition Association in Washington DC.
"Cool names can make for cool foods," says lead author Brian Wansink. "Whether it be 'power peas' or 'dinosaur broccoli trees,' giving a food a fun name makes kids think it will be more fun to eat. And it seems to keep working – even the next day," said Wansink.
Similar results have been found with adults. A restaurant study showed that when the Seafood Filet was changed to "Succulent Italian Seafood Filet," sales increased by 28% and taste rating increased by 12%. "Same food, but different expectations, and a different experience," said Wansink, author of "Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Eat More Than We Think."
Although the study was conducted in pre-schools, the researchers believe the same naming tricks can work with children. "I've been using this with my kids," said researcher Collin Payne, "Whatever sparks their imagination seems to spark their appetite."
###
The research was funded by Healthy Eating Research grant funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Further details on the study are available at www.SmarterLunchrooms.org.
------------------------------------
Contact: Jason Aldous
Jason.Aldous@hitchcock.org
JAMA and Archives Journals
Owning alcohol-branded merchandise common, associated with drinking behaviors among teens
Between 11 percent and 20 percent of U.S. teens are estimated to own T-shirts or other merchandise featuring an alcohol brand, and those who do appear more likely to transition through the stages of drinking from susceptibility to beginning drinking to binge drinking, according to a report in the March issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.
Alcohol-branded merchandise includes T-shirts, hats or other items that feature a particular brand of beverage, according to background information in the article.
Increasing evidence suggests that this specialized type of marketing effectively reaches teenagers and is associated with alcohol use.
Auden C. McClure, M.D., M.P.H., of Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Hanover, N.H., and colleagues conducted a telephone survey of a representative sample of 6,522 U.S. adolescents age 10 to 14 years in 2003. The teens reported information about their drinking behaviors and drinking susceptibility, measured by items assessing responses to peer offers, intentions to drink and positive expectancies about drinking. At three follow-up surveys conducted every eight months, participants answered questions about changes in drinking habits and ownership of alcohol-branded merchandise.
The percentage of teens owning alcohol-branded merchandise ranged from 11 percent at the eight-month survey to 20 percent at the 24-month survey. The most commonly owned products were clothing (64 percent) and headwear (24 percent), with the remaining items a wide array that included jewelry, key chains, shot glasses, posters and pens. Most (75 percent) of the brands were beer, including 45 percent that featured the Budweiser label.
Among teens who had never drank alcohol, owning alcohol-branded merchandise and susceptibility to drinking were reciprocally related, with each predicting the other during an eight-month period. In addition, owning alcohol-branded merchandise and having a susceptible attitude toward drinking predicted both the initiation of alcohol use and binge drinking, even after controlling for other risk factors.
"Alcohol-branded merchandise is widely distributed among U.S. adolescents, who obtain the items one-quarter of the time through direct purchase at retail outlets," the authors write. "The results also demonstrate a prospective relationship between alcohol-branded merchandise ownership and initiation of both alcohol use and binge drinking. This is the first study to link alcohol-branded merchandise ownership to more problematic youth alcohol outcomes that predict morbidity [illness] and mortality [death]. Notably, the relationship is independent of a number of known social, personality and environmental risk factors for alcohol use."
Together with the literature to date, the study "provides strong evidence that alcohol-branded merchandise distribution among adolescents plays a role in their drinking behavior and provides a basis for policies to restrict the scope of such alcohol-marketing practices," they conclude.
(Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163[3]:211-217. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)
Editor's Note: This study is funded by a grant from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
Editorial: Action Needed to Regulate Alcohol-Branded Merchandise
"The evidence is strong that youth exposure to alcohol marketing increases the likelihood of early initiation, which in turn puts young people at greater risk of alcohol-related harm," writes David H. Jernigan, Ph.D., of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, in an accompanying editorial.
"Voluntary approaches have been ineffective in reducing the risk. Political will is needed both to improve data collection and reporting and to move toward restrictions that will give young people a chance to grow up alcohol-free. McClure et al provide important new evidence that points to an urgent need for action."
(Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163[3]:278-279. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)
Editor's Note: Please see the article for additional information, including author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
Impulsive kindergartens become gamblers?
Here is an interesting article I found. I took from it that hyperactivity that we see in our students is there before they enter school (inborn?) and that the ANTIs who blame teachers for hyperactive children are wrong. Children are not hyperactive and impulsive because they are just "normal" boys, or because the curriculum is boring. They come into our classrooms that way. Whether it is a genetic problem or an epigentic problem, who knows? Really it does not matter. It is not the teacher's fault and the impulsivity lasts many years (for life?) and can cause other problems.
Impulsivity in kindergarten may predict gambling behavior in 6th grade
Children whose teachers rated them as more impulsive in kindergarten appear more likely to begin gambling behaviors by the sixth grade, according to a report in the March issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.
Although gambling has become an increasingly common activity among U.S. adults and teens, public health risks remain, the authors write as background information in the article. "Problematic gambling in adults is associated with substance use, depression and suicide, psychopathology, poor general health and a multitude of family, legal and criminal problems," the authors wrote. "Most disconcerting is that young people seem more vulnerable than adults to gambling-related morbidity [illness] and suicidality. Data suggest that in most cases, youthful recreational gambling predates pathological gambling in adulthood."
Linda S. Pagani, Ph.D., of Sainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center and the Université de Montréal, Canada, and colleagues studied 163 children who were in kindergarten in 1999 (average age 5.5). At the beginning of the school year, teachers were asked to complete a questionnaire rating their students' inattentiveness, distractibility and hyperactivity on a scale from one to nine (with higher values indicating a higher degree of impulsiveness). After six years, when the children were an average of 11.5 years old, they were interviewed by phone and asked whether and how often they played cards or bingo, bought lottery tickets, played video games or video poker for money or placed bets at sports venues or with friends.
After considering other behaviors that may be associated with youth gambling, including parental gambling, a one-unit increase on the kindergarten impulsivity scale corresponded to a 25-percent increase in a child's involvement in gambling in sixth grade.
"Our results suggest that behavioral features such as inattentiveness, distractibility and hyperactivity at school entry represent a vulnerability factor for precocious risk-oriented behavior like gambling in sixth grade," the authors write.
"It is very plausible that these childhood characteristics snowball into cumulative risks for youngsters who do not eventually outgrow the distractibility and inattentiveness from early childhood and become involved in gambling as a typical pastime for many youth. Most importantly, our observations suggest a developmentally continuous effect of impulsivity that places individuals on a life course trajectory toward gambling involvement in adolescence and emerging adulthood."
Brain mechanisms underlying both impulsivity and problem gambling may include reward pathways and areas associated with decision making and self-regulation, the authors note. Training in self-control and executive functions before first grade may show positive results, they conclude.
###
(Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163[3]:238-243. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)
Editor's Note: This work was funded by Canada's Social Science and Humanities Research Council Standard Research Grants Program. Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
Impulsivity in kindergarten may predict gambling behavior in 6th grade
Children whose teachers rated them as more impulsive in kindergarten appear more likely to begin gambling behaviors by the sixth grade, according to a report in the March issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, one of the JAMA/Archives journals.
Although gambling has become an increasingly common activity among U.S. adults and teens, public health risks remain, the authors write as background information in the article. "Problematic gambling in adults is associated with substance use, depression and suicide, psychopathology, poor general health and a multitude of family, legal and criminal problems," the authors wrote. "Most disconcerting is that young people seem more vulnerable than adults to gambling-related morbidity [illness] and suicidality. Data suggest that in most cases, youthful recreational gambling predates pathological gambling in adulthood."
Linda S. Pagani, Ph.D., of Sainte-Justine University Hospital Research Center and the Université de Montréal, Canada, and colleagues studied 163 children who were in kindergarten in 1999 (average age 5.5). At the beginning of the school year, teachers were asked to complete a questionnaire rating their students' inattentiveness, distractibility and hyperactivity on a scale from one to nine (with higher values indicating a higher degree of impulsiveness). After six years, when the children were an average of 11.5 years old, they were interviewed by phone and asked whether and how often they played cards or bingo, bought lottery tickets, played video games or video poker for money or placed bets at sports venues or with friends.
After considering other behaviors that may be associated with youth gambling, including parental gambling, a one-unit increase on the kindergarten impulsivity scale corresponded to a 25-percent increase in a child's involvement in gambling in sixth grade.
"Our results suggest that behavioral features such as inattentiveness, distractibility and hyperactivity at school entry represent a vulnerability factor for precocious risk-oriented behavior like gambling in sixth grade," the authors write.
"It is very plausible that these childhood characteristics snowball into cumulative risks for youngsters who do not eventually outgrow the distractibility and inattentiveness from early childhood and become involved in gambling as a typical pastime for many youth. Most importantly, our observations suggest a developmentally continuous effect of impulsivity that places individuals on a life course trajectory toward gambling involvement in adolescence and emerging adulthood."
Brain mechanisms underlying both impulsivity and problem gambling may include reward pathways and areas associated with decision making and self-regulation, the authors note. Training in self-control and executive functions before first grade may show positive results, they conclude.
###
(Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163[3]:238-243. Available pre-embargo to the media at www.jamamedia.org.)
Editor's Note: This work was funded by Canada's Social Science and Humanities Research Council Standard Research Grants Program. Please see the article for additional information, including other authors, author contributions and affiliations, financial disclosures, funding and support, etc.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
I got it wrong Prop 13 did not mandate 2/3 budget vote
The North County Times contains an editorial in support of retaining the two thirds vote to pass a California Budget. In the editorial they reference the law that established the requirement. It was not Prop 13 as I wrote in this blog. It was a much earlier law. More than thirty years prior to Prop 13. I had written the two thirds budget requirement was another Prop 13 legacy. Sorry for my error.
The NCTimes editorial is here:http://nctimes.com/articles/2009/02/26/opinion/editorials/z86ec3fee4c5858bb8825756600827bd3.txt
The actual language of Prop 13 is here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_13A
I still think we need to change the two thirds rule for passing a California State Budget to prevent a small minority of ANTI zealots from endlessly obstructing the passage best possible budget for the people of California.
The NCTimes editorial is here:http://nctimes.com/articles/2009/02/26/opinion/editorials/z86ec3fee4c5858bb8825756600827bd3.txt
The actual language of Prop 13 is here: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_13A
I still think we need to change the two thirds rule for passing a California State Budget to prevent a small minority of ANTI zealots from endlessly obstructing the passage best possible budget for the people of California.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)