Testimony of Randi Weingarten before DOE On Citywide Standards of Discipline and Intervention Measures: August 9, 2006

Aug 9, 2006 3:34 PM

Thank you for inviting me to speak tonight on the proposed revisions to the Citywide Standards of Discipline and Intervention Measures, also known as the Discipline Code.

First, let me say that any discussion along these lines bodes well for the students and staff at our schools. There is nothing more important than a safe school, a place where my members and their students feel secure and free from worries about minor or major disruptions to their learning environment.

Your press statement on tonight’s hearing mentioned your efforts “to remain responsive to the input of students, parents, school personnel and others in the community while continuing to maintain safe and secure environments.” Your statement said that changes were made “to define infractions more clearly; improve alignment between infractions and disciplinary responses; modify disciplinary responses to ensure greater continuity of instruction; and integrate more cohesively student support services.”

These are noble goals and ones that no one in the school system can argue with as a template for change.

But overlooked in your draft is any discussion about mandating increased resources to deal with discipline problems. Overlooked is the fact that, in too many of our schools, there is no process to remove disruptive students and SAVE rooms have become nothing more than a room to send disruptive and/or suspended students — with no educational environment. There must be a specific provision for alternative instructional programs for students suspended by principals or superintendents.

In too many schools, disruptive students are merely sent to another teacher’s classroom. Teachers are told by principals, who live in fear of having “high discipline numbers,” that it is the teacher’s fault because she or he can’t control the classroom.

My members are tired of hearing that it’s their fault. When I taught at Clara Barton High School, we had the support of the administration when it came to discipline problems. Sadly, that is no longer true in too many of our schools.

We know this issue is not unique to New York City. Alan Hevesi, the state comptroller, recently told the state that it better be more vigilant in monitoring the under-reporting of safety incidents in schools throughout the state.

When asbestos problems arose in some of our schools, we worked as partners with the Dinkins administration and the Board of Education to close schools while the problem was addressed. The Board released all of the chapter leaders from all schools on a rotating basis to attend workshops offered by the union. This program was rolled out over a period of time and led to an extraordinary partnership that actually still exists between the union and the Board on environmental safety issues.

More recently in the aftermath of 9-11, we also worked as partners to assist lower Manhattan schools, and now during this very, very hot summer, the union, the Division of School Facilities, the School Construction Authority and the Health Department have again worked collaboratively to address heat-related problems in schools. This type of collaboration is a no brainer. We all want schools that are environmentally safe. We should be doing the same when it comes to addressing all other aspects of school safety.

The UFT plans to programmatically address safety in the schools. We can do this as partners with the DOE; we all know that REAL collaboration is what it takes. Prior to this testimony I had my staff set up two meetings with DOE personnel involved in making schools safe. One meeting was about the disciplinary code and the other about the suspension centers. My staff offered this message: Let’s do this together; it will work if we do it that way.

But partners or not, part of our mission is making sure educators have an environment conducive to teaching and students have an environment conducive to learning. Students also need to know school is a safety net for them. We will focus our energies on making sure that our members understand and follow the codes, legislations, mandates and reporting regarding safe schools. I urge you to join our team as partners and we will make this work.

Your draft also left out any discussion about resources to accomplish your goals.

For example, the code talks about a greater role for guidance counselors, but how will they fulfill that role when they already have caseloads of 400 to 1,000 students.

Where are the funding mechanisms for more school psychologists and social workers? Where is the funding for an educator with expertise in handling disruptive students to be in those SAVE rooms? A SAVE room and a removal process must be a part of every school’s overall educational safety plan.

Your plan, as far as I can tell, has no training for teachers and students yet it is mandated in the SAVE legislation.

There is no requirement for the professional development needed for school-based and regional staff that is greatly needed to accomplish your goals. So far as I can tell, this is only suggested. The SAVE legislation, as you know, mandates professional development.

Another problem with this draft is the lack of safeguards for our paraprofessionals, who due to their responsibilities are often put in harm’s way ensuring the safety of the classroom.

I’m not going to discuss the DOE’s cell phone policy today. The union’s position on cell phones in schools is clear.

While this is a reasonable document as far as it goes, it misses the mark in solving the endemic disciplinary problems in too many of our schools.

No meaningful learning can go on if there is fear in the school. Mayoral control will mean something if it solves – not make worse – the long-term finger-pointing and adversarial relationship between teachers and administrators when something goes wrong.

We are all there for the same reason — to provide a safe haven for our students and to make educators feel secure so they can teach and not have to spend inordinate amounts of time worrying about when that disruptive student from yesterday will be back in their classroom tomorrow.

We can’t solve safety problems by pretending they don’t exist – or by threatening school employees so much that they have an incentive to hide incidents. Yet sadly, that seems to be happening in our schools. Indeed, that is why the DOE safety report to the state Education Department is now being questioned – there is a sense that the numbers don’t make sense and that there has been under-reporting.

Safety is a top priority for my members. We are ready to stand side by side with you to get the resources needed to make this code really work.

Thank you.