This thing has a cute graph (play, and see. I frown on division by zero.)

Can you create a nice problem for… hmm. If you can create a nice problem, do it, and let us know who it it appropriate for.

Context (I’m hiding it, for now).

(Do feel free to modify the equation as you create your problem.)

“I’m not going to remove him, but he knows he cannot have any similar type of comments. He is on a very strict line as far as his behavior,” said Walcott, who added that some school staffers want Chase to remain in his post.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx-principal-fire-outrageous-machine-comments-photocopier-article-1.1002357#ixzz1iy5ky7op

Following the deplorable moral standards of his predecessors under Bloomberg, Dennis Walcott staunchly asserts that he will not remove principal John Chase from his leadership position at Bronxdale High School.

I have represented teachers for many years as a UFT chapter leader and district representative. Given the unique position of teachers, the role model status we have, and the damage we can do if we display immoral behavior in front of children, there has been no tolerance for remaining in a classroom under even an allegation of misconduct. Teachers are removed pending adjudication to err on the side of protection. The Department of Education does not see the equivalence in protecting staff and students from misbehaving principals however.

This article in yesterday’s Daily News focuses on his b— j– comment regarding the copy machine but omits his inappropriate comments made to female employees for which he has already been found guilty. Perhaps if his own wife were subjected to comments about her breasts by her boss Walcott might take it more seriously? But this is only a secretary and he doesn’t even know her. It is much more important to stand tough in protecting the job of a principal.

And as far as school staffers wanting him to remain in his post, his entire teaching staff consists of eight untenured teachers (another good argument for tenure). They can be fired for any reason at any time while on probation. So their position must be taken with a grain of salt until they can speak without fear of consequences. Teachers should stand against sexual harassment in the workplace even if the victims are secretaries or paraprofessionals–all union members and all human beings.

And since when do chancellors, including Walcott, care if staffers want accused workers to remain in their jobs? When 400 people marched outside Roosevelt High School in support of teacher Raqnel James, a respected and beloved tenured teacher, the Department of Education stood idly by as she was shipped to the rubber room and arrested. The principal, Iris Blige, created the charges to have her removed from the school after she took the principal’s friend to court for unpaid rent. It cost James three years of salary and legal battles until finally being found “not guilty” last month in a trial. Clearly, hundreds of staffers wanted this innocent teacher to remain in her job but the DOE was unmoved. And this is just an egregious example. There are many schools where good teachers face charges and the staff supports them. Suddenly, in this case of a foul-mouthed sexual harasser, who happens to be the school leader, Dennis Walcott feels that staff “support” should outweigh the finding of guilt and the suffering of his victims?

Easy answer. Excusing principals’ bad behavior is policy. This is the Department of Education that ignored years of allegations of sexual misconduct by Richard Bost, former principal of Fordham Leadership Academy, who was also found guilty of abusing a secretary and guilty of giving $7000 of school money to his AP. Finally, after committing unwanted sexual advances against a parent, Sen. Jeffrey Klein’s office got involved and he was removed.

This is the Department of Education that supports Valerie Reidy after charges of supervisory harassment were upheld by an arbitrator, a well-documented mass-exodus of excellent teachers from Bronx High School of Science, and many demonstrations–the most recent on January 5–asked for her removal. This is the Department of Education that keeps Barbara Kirkweg, of Bronx Aerospace in place after several investigations into grade changing and loss of all Air Force funding due to a finding of misappropriation of their money. This is the Department of Education that failed to conclude investigations into Anthony Rotunno until the state comptroller found him guilty of misusing $90,000 of school money and then he resigned. This is the Department of Education that retains Iris Blige as principal of Fordham High School for the Arts despite the false charges against Raqnel James and the finding of guilt by the Office of Special Investigations into pre-determining the unsatisfactory ratings of teachers she did not like before she observed their teaching. She was fined a mere $7500 for abusing her authority and left in place. The protection of principals is paramount and appears to be the unwavering policy of the Department of Education. It is again time to fight back against this policy and demand the removal of John Chase.

wait a minute. This is a no-brainer. The school has been around exactly one term. This guy didn’t even design the school. Just a stiff behind a desk.

Oh yeah, and harassing his staff. Some of his staff. School aide. Secretary. Community Liaison. Precisely those who cannot disappear into a classroom to perform their duties.

Am I just saying this? Reporting Rumor? Nah. The Office of Equal Opportunity said so, in their first run at this creep. And there are two more investigations pending.

If a teacher did what this guy did, the teacher would be removed, pending disposition. (I get that. The teacher would also have their pay suspended – without a finding that’s plain wrong. Another serious, senseless giveback from 2005 that needs to be undone).

Choke Collar

In today’s Daily News, Walcott is quoted as saying “I’m not going to remove him, but he knows he cannot have any similar type of comments. He is on a very strict line as far as his behavior,” which sounds terrible. But maybe not. Klein never made “strict line” comments about Richard Bost or Tammy Smith, who are finally gone due to external events, or Barbara Kirkweg or Iris Blige who should be, but are still here. Maybe that “strict line” comment is a signal for what might happen. But we need to keep up the pressure.

Rally Tuesday

There’s a rally, in front of Columbus this Tuesday. A rally to demand his ouster. Chase Chase. Get him out. 3:30 PM. 925 Astor Avenue, in the Bronx. 2 to Pelham Parkway or the 5 to Pelham Parkway.

There are politicians coming to lend their support. Jeff Klein. Naomi Rivera. Jimmy Vacca. Their voices will be there. And I know, personally, maybe 25 people who will be there. Maybe 50. But there should be 250. Or 500. Or even more.

Links

Facebook Event (Chase Chase!)

Latest:  New York Daily News (today’s edition) (sex Machine comments), Inside schools, WPIX

DoE decision to give a slap on the wrist: NY Magazine, News 12 – Bronx, NY Post xxx-Craving

Our members and colleagues should not be subjected to sexual harassment. Period. Our non-classroom colleagues are even more vulnerable. We must stand up for them. And we should enjoy the sense of power that comes from gathering for a just cause. Get used to it.

Then how did it get into my inbox?

In too many baseball games today, fans are not allowed to see Best vs Best. It’s ridiculous. And it’s tradition.

Am I about to plug spreading the DH to the National League? Nope. Why go for a half-measure?

Let’s get this right. Every baseball team should have a defensive squad: the eight best fielders they can put together. And a few starting pitchers, and a few relievers. And every baseball team should have the best offensive squad they can assemble. I’m thinking four batters is perfect, but five could work. Eight, nine or ten would be ridiculous.

And the result?  Day after day fans would get to watch the best hitters face the best pitchers, backed up by the best fielding. The quality of the play would soar. No longer would the steady hands, no-hit infielder be a compromise – he would proudly take the field without creating weakness in the order. And no longer would the powerful slugger create a question mark at first base.

There would be whining about losing strategy. But football does fine with separate offensive and defensive squads. Why not baseball?

And old players would insist they could play both ways… and they would, for a while.

Top pitchers would thrive. But the middle of the pack might not do so well. Imagine facing Albert Pujols every inning, sometimes twice an inning? Perhaps more days off would make sense.

We would see the top hitters every inning. And only the top hitters.

Managers would have new strategic questions – 3 guys who can hit the gap, and a slugger? 4 guys who swing for the fences? 4 speedy, high average hitters?

And think of the emphasis on quality defense.

They’ll never do it. Makes too much sense. And we will continue to pretend that it is exciting to watch the light-hitting defensive replacement at 3rd swing at the third middle reliever’s breaking balls. Instead of watching the best face the best in every at bat.

by Rodney Grubiak, retired teacher

On this day, Wednesday, December, 21, 2011, Bronx Supreme Court Justice Dominic Massaro found Raqnel James not guilty and totally exonerated her of the criminal charges that were brought against her almost three (3) years ago by the Principal of Fordham HS of the Arts, Iris Blige. Fordham HS of the Arts is located in New York City in the borough of the Bronx and is a part of the Department of Education of the City of New York.

Raqnel James who was born and educated on the beautiful Island of Jamaica arrived in this country carrying the same hopes and dreams that all of us share. What she did not realize, at the time, was the fact that someday she might very well be forced to return to her country leaving behind nothing but shattered memories of what might have been.

In February 2009, after many successful years touching and changing the lives of each and every one of her students, her life would be changed forever when she was falsely accused of placing a letter in the mailbox of the principal of the school threatening to harm her life and the life of her son. She was immediately removed from her duties and arrested shortly thereafter on a criminal charge of aggravated harassment.

As a tenured employee of the Department of Education of the City of New York with due process rights she would remain temporarily reassigned from her duties as a teacher pending the outcome of the criminal charges and final review and determination from the Department of Education.

Her problems were just beginning. In June 2009, The Department of Education sent her a letter that would terminate her employment citing a provision of the immigration status agreements under which she was employed. Because she was not yet a citizen of the United States she would not be entitled to, in the eyes of the Department of Education, the same due process rights that we all take for granted, “innocent until proven guilty”. She, would be treated differently.

Raqnel James lost her job that June based on nothing more than an allegation and from that day forward she had no salary, no benefits and a future that held little or no hope. Her immigration status was now in jeopardy with the real threat of imminent return to Jamaica.

Why would the Department of Education decide to terminate the services of this well-respected, satisfactory teacher from Jamaica on the sole basis of an accusation made by one individual, Principal Iris Blige? This is a question, that, to this day, still does not have an acceptable answer.

Her life was soon to change again, but this time for the better. A true relationship with a wonderful person was flourishing and she would soon marry and begin to build a new life together with a man who would love and support her each and every day.

In the months and years that would follow, Raqnel would need this love and support because she would have to overcome a complex legal system that was filled with never ending motions and delays that included thirty-three (33) court appearances over the next three (3) years.

Three years ago Fordham HS for the Arts principal Iris Blige had Raqnel arrested, paraded of out school in handcuffs, for threatening the principal. But the threatening letter, no one ever saw anyone aside from Blige with the letter in their possession. And today a judge, in finding Raqnel not guilty, agreed with her supporters and did not believe that Raqnel wrote it.

At the time, Lynne Winderbaum, United Federation of Teachers District Rep for Bronx High Schools (and one hell of an ESL teacher) organized a protest in front of the school. Four hundred teachers from dozens of schools showed up in support. Raqnel was not Iris Blige’s first victim – she fits the profile of an abusive administrator. How many teachers did she rubber room? U rate?  And those U ratings?  A year ago OSI found that she had inappropriately ordered APs to U teachers, sight unseen (and as a result was fined the equivalent of a car payment, for a year and a half). But having a teacher led out in handcuffs, threatened with deportation, enough was enough and chapter leaders and activists rallied loudly.

The charge was preposterous, and rightly rejected. But the charge was viciously and maliciously calculated – Raqnel is from Jamaica, an international teacher, and “due process” is not equally due all of us. She has been out of school for three years. She fought deportation; she fought criminal charges; she fought two dozen postponements.

The reward is sweet. Not guilty. It sounds that good. And another reward is putting her accuser on the stand, for none to believe.

But those bills. Those lost years. The mental anguish.

We have a just verdict. Now we need justice.

Former KIPP Teachers: Share Your Story

I am considering introducing it to 9th grade algebra students.

They think symbols are cool.

I know they get confused when solving  4(1-2b) = 2(3-b) – 2 , maybe the special symbol would help?

What do you think?

Soon they will learn about the holidays half way between the solstices and the equinoxes, other facts about the mean times we live in, that FOIL is no longer allowed (and some will hate me for that ), and that high school final exams are stressful, even in a “nice” school.

But last week they learned a little about exponents. My way.

                Clearly demonstrate that  is true.

Those were the instructions they saw on the board, and I got busy directing kids to put up homework or to review problems others had put up, but pushed every kid, slowly, to switch to the problem in front of them, and I could sense some discomfort.

Should we prove it?
Show it… You could try a proof, but that would be hard. And you could demonstrate with a few examples, but even a whole bunch of examples doesn’t show that it is always true.

Strange quiet as they worked. Or as a few worked. Most sort of just stared.

It doesn’t work!
What?
No, I tried 3 and 2, it doesn’t work.
Well, wait, three plus two squared is twenty-five, and since we distribute the exponents, we get twenty-five on the other side. Work on fixing your mistake. Does someone else have something to add?

Four and six don’t work either!
Can someone help him with the arithmetic? Of course it works.
[I demonstrate how to distribute 2(a + b) and baldly assert the same thing happens with exponents]
Can we get a good explanation of why this is so?

Zero and one work.
Very nice, but is one example enough to show that this is true?
Nooooh.
What can we do with one example?
We can have a counterexample.
Very good.

Murmurs about distributing exponents. A girl starts to tell her neighbors that I am fooling around. The revolt is about to start.

What about ten and one?  Don’t they work?  Ten plus one is eleven, eleven squared is one hundred twenty-one, and ten squared plus one squared are also one hundred twenty one, right?
Lots of muttered yeses, and heads nodding yes, but finally a bunch of heads nodding no.
No, that’s one hundred one, it’s not one hundred twenty-one. It’s not true. These are counterexamples. These are all counterexamples! 

I’m fighting to hold back the laughter, but they see. General chaos for a minute.

I share with them what other teachers say about exponents and kittens, and we vow never to distribute exponents ourselves. In one class (this story is a composite of the three classes, and quite a bit shortened), we went on to discover when  is true. And in every class many kids are claiming that they knew from the beginning, but just didn’t say anything.

Some will still distribute an exponent here and there. But most won’t.

Let me back up before I start the stories. I left my regular Bronx high school at the end of 2002. I’d always had five classes – but we never had tremendous parent turnout for conferences. Maybe once I had 35 between Thursday and Friday? And then I came to my new school, with much higher turnout. But our first year we only had 62 students. And our second my course load was reduced to three, as I was the programmer. And aside from an occasional extra class, and Spring 2008 when I had five – and Spring is always lighter than Fall – I have had three classes. And now, no more comp time, I have five regular classes, including most of our freshmen, who show up around 90%.

Good – 36 on Thursday evening (two and a half hours). That’s about four minutes per conference. Wrapped up with less than 10 minutes left. One parent had signed my sheet, but left (but has two of my kids).  The longest conference was less than ten minutes.

Brief – (after a minute establishing saying hello, making some observation about the child’s work or attitude or demeanor or enthusiasm)  ”I don’t mean to be rude, and I’m glad to have met you.”  (at this point I hand them something the kid had written about their math experiences in lower grades, call it a parting gift) ”If any concerns arise, please call the school and I’ll get right back to you, but your child is off to a wonderful start, we really don’t have anything else to discuss right now.” (rise to usher them out) (maybe 10 – 15 of these)

Tongue was in cheek! Tongue was in cheek! – Child was at the conference. Overwhelmingly positive, but the child worries too much, feels slightly unsure and is needlessly nervous (even if everything in doubt was wrong, test grades would still be in the 90s. And not everything in doubt is wrong). I express this small concern to the student and the parents, (they nodded with understanding), the student really is doing fantastically well, and add, tongue in cheek, that I could ask the student to record an estimated score at the top of the next test, and I could deduct if the estimate was off by more than 10 points. The poor student looked horrified, and one parent requested that I really do this.

Visiting is fun!  - Over a quarter of my senior parents showed up – in almost all cases their kids were fine; in the “bad” cases the kids were ok, but homework was a bit spotty. We talked about college, about calculus, about four years of progress, and in several cases, about Gross. I shared his message with the kids, many of whom were fairly excited, and some of whom in turn showed their parents.

Sloppy! – I barely glanced at my gradesheets, as I have a good idea of what I wanted to say, and I know one kid from the next. But at the end of Friday, I goofed. One child has a great attitude, but I was concerned (I blundered) about test and quiz scores not being the highest. And then I did glance at the grade sheets, and I was clearly overreacting to two mediocre quizzes; the tests had been quite strong. The concern was right, but not to the degree I expressed. I still think the parent heard most clearly the positives (I was quite specific), so no harm done. But sloppy. Tsk.

Fast again – Friday was two hours, I saw 26, but ran a few minutes over. This was almost five minutes per conference. A parent, waiting near my door for someone else, remarked on how quickly I was popping out for the next one.

Sweet!  I heard “my child loves your class” more than I have in the past. I mean, well, that’s not really the point, is it? But if they love it, they are more likely to do the work, more likely to do the work with interest, more likely to be eager to try to please, etc, etc. Plus, you know as well as I do, looking at smiling faces or looking at scowling faces….

Don’t bother me, even if you’re the Chancellor – actually, that was his call. He visited our school Thursday evening, spoke with administration, and the people in the hall, who were mostly parents. More to do here than in most Bronx high schools, where parent participation remains lower than it could be, by a lot. Of all the Bronx schools to visit – ahem. But he stayed out of the rooms, as the conferences were private (he’s right).

Difficulties? There were a few tougher conversations. But in most cases it was clear that the parents and I were on the same side. In several cases (three?) I had samples of work that needed improvement, but chose to make the point without taking out the embarrassing papers. I think that was the right call. In any case, even where we did not end up agreeing, the conversations were respectful and professional.

No buses – I did not throw a single kid under the bus. The most negative, the parents had already spoken to me previously. Two seniors with some homework issues, raised, but I mentioned in the context of the overall quality of the work they are performing (good) and the amount of material they are mastering (considerable). The only near-regret I have here was a freshman, who I praised for several types of work, but then mentioned – too chatty. The parent keyed in on the negative, and the child may come on Monday complaining…

Looking ahead – for the spring, fewer freshman parents – they already know me, and their kids are largely doing fine. But I’ll try to max out the seniors, to say goodbyes and all.

Schools receive extra credit for moving special ed kids to a less restrictive environment, eg from a self-contained classroom to a collaborative team class (regular class, two teachers). That credit does not depend on whether the move is appropriate. Oh. And schools save money by making the move. Oh. Does the DoE ignore bad behavior? Encourage it? or reward it? Oh.

Most specialized high schools got As, but those with lower cut scores got Bs. How do they calculate grades?

They hate that the Bronx still has a few big high schools and CTE schools. F F F F…. Undermine the schools, and grade them while they scramble to deal with rapidly changing circumstances.

College Ready? The new stats (“metrics” is a mistake, since nothing is actually being measured) include a 75 on some regents exams. OOPS!  On regents, 65 (passing) is calculated, based on analysis. 85 (mastery) is calculated, based on analysis. But that 75? It lands where the cubic regression falls… fairly meaningless.

And the numbers? Gary Rubinstein does the best job I know of destroying the use of s.d. in creating grades. Read it. And watch this:  My school had perfect scores on one of the regents. I think every kid over 85. Maybe all but one over 90. But the mathematically indefensible practice of setting scale based on standard deviations, and the strange weighting of grades, ensures that the scores we get best, count against our score. (not complaining, we got off easy. But the system makes no sense.)

The Progress Reports are a waste of money. The scare people, without reason. They get schools to focus on improving progress report scores, instead of on teaching kids. And that is shameful.

I’ve been reading about the inverted classroom for several years. First a calc professor/blogger wrote about it a few times, and then used it repeatedly and continued discussing it, then I saw some chemistry people doing it. Then Khan Academy. And then it seemed to be everywhere.

I won’t do it. I don’t lecture at a camera. I develop the next piece of mathematics, with students participating in the development. My lessons vary – as I respond, without fear, to the questions and concerns that arise. From the students.

I am not teaching to a static camera. I am teaching TO and WITH a group of wriggly, curious teenagers. I answer your question now (unless it is if you can go to the bathroom, and try to pick a better moment to put up your hand), as long as you already asked the person next to you, and neither of you know. We interact. I do not invert.

But in calculus this year… Well, new course for me. And I decided that I don’t like video, but maybe I was being stodgy. Or silly. Or retro. Old-fashioned. So I decided to try.

For their summer assignment I included bonus points for watching and summarizing Khan Academy videos. I figured I’d throw them a few points, and get instant teen-aged feedback. Verdict:  a few watched them, thought them dry, but ok for an example or two. I reviewed their notes, and wasn’t impressed – nor was I disappointed. I wouldn’t want to depend on Khan, but as an occasional support or tutorial, yeah, it’s ok. For the record, my kids mostly looked at trig or log stuff.

I told them to prepare for the Level 2 Math SAT II. Seems most of what I want them to know for calc would be there.

And then I had them watch (no choice) 4 longer videos. I asked them to wait until 1 – 2 weeks before school to watch them. And to watch only one per sitting. And to take good notes.

I chose from “Free Online Courseware” at MIT, a series of lectures by Herb Gross, entitled “Calculus Revisited.” I assigned the introduction, Analytic Geometry, Functions, and Inverse Functions. (And I made the completion of this simple assignment be worth tons of points, too many for any of them to contemplate not doing them.) At the worst, they would come in griping about 4 lost hours of their summer. And at the best, the pre-limits review could go faster. And my teenaged scholars would walk in the first day, with math already on their minds.

The quality of their notes was relatively high, but fell off when they hit inverses. They reported liking Gross, and his nerdy, quirkiness. Being engaged. I responded by making the pre-limits review fast. Probably too fast. But it helped that they had watched.  The videos worked – not to the level of my most optimistic hopes, but there was definite positive impact.

I decided to incorporate video-watching, to some extent, in my course. (to be continued)

I love the Vi Hart videos. I like that Vi looks like the VI at the bottom of some clocks, or like the VI in VI Lenin. But mostly I like how fast she talks and how much she makes fun of math class while talking about nothing but math (and interesting tangent) and how cleverly she drops in cultural references and bad puns and so forth.

I also like the fruity platonic solids, and how to eat candy dots, and the music boxes made of paper, and, well, she’s just kind of cool, you know?

Is there a reason to make kids watch the mathy videos, other than me really liking them, and the elephants? How would I structure their use? Or unstructure them? Could I assign a four minute video for homework, and for “bonus” credit ask them to write up one detail that looked interesting or strange or compelling? Or ask them to write down a question or two about things she mentioned but they want to know more about? Or offer to teach in class about one of the topics that fascinated them, instead of “regular” math…

Ideas, people!  Help me with some ideas.

Oh, and if you don’t know who Vi Hart is (for shame!) go look: Here’s a video on Youtube and here’s her real page, with lots and lots of stuff to look at. Here’s the math video subpage, and the math doodling one.

— — —

But standardized testing for five-year-olds? People, speak up. This is wrong, and there’s not another point of view worth considering. Not for an instant.

On her listserve, Leonie Heimson copied a job listing: Periodic Assessment Associate, reporting to the K-2 Program Manager. Responsibilities include management of implementation activities for ECAM (Early Childhood Assessment in Mathematics)

The UFT officially stands opposed to testing before 3rd grade (a New Action resolution, passed February 2010. A version for consideration by the NYSUT RA was passed a year later, I don’t know the disposition, text below). Last year when Aminda Gentile introduced a resolution supporting standards for K-2, I expressed grave concern, as I suspected (correctly, it turns out) that standards in this day and age pave a path to testing. But we’ll dust off the anti-testing stuff.

February 2010:

The following Resolution to Oppose K-2 High-Stakes Standardized Testing was submitted by Karen Alford, Leroy Barr, Richard Farkas, David Kaufman, Maria Ramos and Michael Shulman:

Motion:       To recommend to the Delegate Assembly the following Resolution To Oppose K-2 High Stakes Standardized Testing:

WHEREAS it has been the policy of the UFT to oppose high-stakes testing where the score is used as the sole evaluator for students and teacher evaluation; and

WHEREAS “Time Out from Testing” opposes K-2 testing for these same reasons; and

WHEREAS “Time Out from Testing” has collected over 4,000 parent letters and over 50 principals have signed letters opposing this kind of testing; therefore, be it

RESOLVED that the UFT oppose the DOE’s plan to implement K-2 high stakes standardized testing; and be it further

RESOLVED that the UFT support “Time Out for Testing” in its effort to have 20,000 more letters from parents and 200 more from principals before holding a press conference with national experts on this matter; and be it further

RESOLVED that the Action Committee be directed to design a plan to publicize the dangers of K-2 testing and to achieve the above stated goal.

Motion:       To insert the following clause after the third “whereas”:

WHEREAS the DOE has spent $400,000 on a pilot program to expand standardized testing into kindergarten – grade 2, despite the near universal agreement of early childhood experts and educators that the testing of young children is unreliable and developmentally inappropriate.

Carried.  

Motion:       As amended:

                   WHEREAS it has been the policy of the UFT to oppose high stakes testing where the score is used as the sole evaluator for students and teacher evaluation; and

                   WHEREAS “Time Out from Testing” opposes K-2 testing for these same reasons; and

                   WHEREAS “Time Out from Testing” has collected over 4,000 parent letters and over 50 principals have signed letters opposing this kind of testing; and

                   WHEREAS the DOE has spent $400,000 on a pilot program to expand standardized testing into kindergarten – grade 2, despite the near-universal agreement of early childhood experts and educators that the testing of young children is unreliable and developmentally inappropriate; therefore, be it

                  RESOLVED that the UFT oppose the DOE’s plan to implement K-2 high stakes standardized testing; and be it further

                  RESOLVED that the UFT support “Time Out for Testing” in their effort to have 20,000 more letters from parents and 200 more from principals before holding a press conference with national experts on this matter; and be it further

                 RESOLVED that the Action Committee be directed to design a plan to publicize the dangers of K-2 testing and to achieve the above stated goal.

                                                                                                                                                                        Carried