The pounding of thunder outside the Atlanta convention center was so loud it could be heard inside the room where 7,000 delegates and 3,000 non-delegates met in the first large session of the RA.
From the preliminaries I was concerned that a push by the national leadership and President Dennis Van Roekel of the Common Core standards would cause a big unfortunate fight.
I had written earlier about his unscripted belligerent speech to the Retired Conference where he seemed to surrender the union’s core mission of collective bargaining in favor of pushing the Common Core.
In his keynote address to the RA this afternoon DVR was back on his pre-conference intended scripted message. Now there was no mention of collective bargaining. It was all about “educator-led reform and student success.” And read from a teleprompter.
He offered the now-required and expected criticisms of those like Michelle Rhee and other corporate reformers. “We are going to take charge of our own professions…we want to move beyond the old debate that has been defined by others—and replace their kind of solutions with our solutions.”
However there was little mention of school closings or the 300,000 teachers – NEA members – who have lost their jobs over the past three years.
Or the loss of collective bargaining rights in states like Michigan and Wisconsin.
The Wisconsin delegation is located next to the Illinois delegation, right in front of the podium. Milwaukee teachers lost all collective bargaining rights last week. Van Roekel did not mention it.
It was as if the current struggle in education is only about curriculum, instruction and evaluation.
Not jobs, contracts, pensions or privatization.
Two New Business Items demonstrate the common sense about Common Core on the one hand and anger over linking testing to teacher evaluation on the other.
NBI A was submitted by the NEA Board of Directors.
It calls for support and guidance in implementing the Common Core: Time and tools, fairness and clarity – stewardship by communities of teachers, parents and students.
This is a far cry from the “are-you-in-or-are-you-out” tone of DVR’s discussion of Common Core at the Retired Conference.
The vote on NBI A reflects the fact that there are good people on both sides of the Common Core issue.
Following some floor debate, NBI A passed easily.
That discussion and vote was soon followed by NBI 3. It passed by a wide margin. That NBI called for a ban on the use of high stakes testing “associated with the Common Core.” It was amended to go far beyond the recent statement by AFT President Randi Wiengarten. She had called for a moratorium on Common Core associated high stakes testing.
NEA delegates had no interest in simply a moratorium. “What happens after a year?” one speaker asked. “Then we go back to high stakes testing once the kinks have been worked out?”
For those looking for a battle over Common Core, or a complete rejection of Common Core – they were probably disappointed.
But I think the results of the first day showed that the biggest noise would be outside.
Inside there was a desire for common sense and a recognition of the complexity of the issue.
Fred Klonsky 
Thanks for your reporting, Fred. I trust your reporting on these issues more than I trust any other source I’ve come across.
Common Core = a weapon to destroy public education. There should have been a battle and a mass rejection.
Did NBI 3 pass?
That NBI called for a ban on the use of high stakes testing “associated with the Common Core.”
Yes.
When they ignore the issues stated in the article with those groups in the front who is to trust what they do. Something is wrong. When all pieces and policy do not fit there is always something wrong. You cannot deny something like that and all is OK.
Do you have a link or copy of DVR’s “unscripted” rant to the Retired Conf commitee? My brother-in-law is a member of the Retired Conf and he states that DVR was arrogant as !LLEH
Jack,
I and others asked if there was a video or audio recording of what he said. No response. I doubt that there was. We were one stop of what I figure was a tour of the special interest meetings that were taking place prior to the RA – students, minority, etc. He was definitely off message, as my new friend and DVR speechwriter Melinda Anderson suggests. And he didn’t return to it in an explicit sense anytime after his appearance at the Retired Conference.
Whether he made a mistake or the message got changed doesn’t matter to me. The orientation of the NEA (and IEA) leadership resonates with what he said to us at the Retired Conference: They conceded too much. They say no too little.