New York State Supreme Court Justice Philip Minardo is expected to issue a decision within the next few weeks on whether a lawsuit that could make it easer to fire lousy teachers in New York State can proceed. Campbell Brown, the former CNN host, through the organization she founded, the Partnership for Educational Justice, played a key role in backing and supporting the lawsuit.
Reason magazine Managing Editor Katherine Mangu-Ward caught up with Brown recently to discuss the lawsut. Click above to watch that interview, which was originally released on January 13. Here's the original writeup:
Oral arguments are scheduled to begin on Wednesday in Wright v. New York, a lawsuit filed in New York State Supreme Court last July that seeks to overturn certain teacher tenure protections on the grounds that they deny public school students their constitutional right to an adequate education.
Former CNN anchor Campbell Brown, whose organization, the Partnership for Educational Justice, is providing support for the plaintiffs in the case, says that the lawsuit was inspired by the outcome of Vergara v. California. In that lawsuit, a superior court judge struck down five statutes that provide tenure protections to teachers in the Golden State. (The decision is under appeal.)
"Judge [Rolf Treu], in how he wrote his decision, was quite extraordinary," Brown told Reason magazine Managing Editor Katherine Mangu-Ward in an interview for Reason TV. "[He wrote] that the evidence presented of how these kids were being denied a quality education shocks the conscience," said Brown, "and it
gave these parents…hope that a judge in New York might understand these arguments and find the same thing."
In her interview with Mangu-Ward, which took place at the National Summit on Educational Excellence in Wasington, D.C., Brown also discussed her decision to leave journalism for the "glamorous world" of ed reform, her response to critics who object to her tactic of turning to the courts to shape policy, and the personal attacks she's endured since entering a field in which ad hominem attacks are the norm.
"I don't particularly care because, you know, sticks and stones."
Shot by Todd Krainin and Joshua Swain. Produced and edited by Jim Epstein.
About 6 minutes.
Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com
posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary
period.
Subscribe
here to preserve your ability to comment. Your
Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the
digital
edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do
not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments
do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and
ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
I was thinking of suggesting more tacky symbolism for that poster, but they pretty much covered them all except maybe suggesting she beats the chillenz.
Yes, it's amazing that they want you believe the only reason anyone would be against lousy teachers is that they are a puppet of the 1% (as if anyone in the 1% would be sending their kids to a crappy public school) or are a tool of the horrible Republicans.
Somehow, it seems the only people unintelligent enough to believe that poster would be lousy public school teachers, which I guess says it all.
My mother taught public school for many years, and she and the other good teachers always felt the union and the rules it created prevented them from being that much better -- and they were also always frustrated that there was no such thing as merit pay, as the worst teachers got the same pay as the best ones, based only on years on the job. They wouldn't have dared say that out loud though, or would have gotten their tires slashed (or worse).
I always click on the "comments" link on the main H&R page at the bottom of each article. That takes me directly to the opened comments, although it takes an inordinately long time for all the "reply to this" links to show up.
Got 'get offa my lawn' noise when I posted several years ago that I won't watch vids.
Sorry, if I can't scan it for interest, I'm NOT going to watch flapping jaws hoping something is worth the time.
I hope Campbell "Cleveland" Brown doesn't end up letting everyone down.
I was thinking of suggesting more tacky symbolism for that poster, but they pretty much covered them all except maybe suggesting she beats the chillenz.
Yes, it's amazing that they want you believe the only reason anyone would be against lousy teachers is that they are a puppet of the 1% (as if anyone in the 1% would be sending their kids to a crappy public school) or are a tool of the horrible Republicans.
Somehow, it seems the only people unintelligent enough to believe that poster would be lousy public school teachers, which I guess says it all.
My mother taught public school for many years, and she and the other good teachers always felt the union and the rules it created prevented them from being that much better -- and they were also always frustrated that there was no such thing as merit pay, as the worst teachers got the same pay as the best ones, based only on years on the job. They wouldn't have dared say that out loud though, or would have gotten their tires slashed (or worse).
What poster?
P.S. I'm not reading the article or watching the video.
I'm calling the blue-background image with her as a marionette a "poster"; maybe something else?
I missed that. And, surprisingly, I haven't been drinking yet.
Well, for pete's sake! It's 8, so at least you ought to have some wine with your fine dining experience.
I had to take the kids to Urgent Care. I didn't want beer on my breath, because nowadays, that sort of thing gets Child Protective Services called.
Problem solved. I'm playing catch up.
Pl?ya Manhattan.|1.31.15 @ 11:22PM|#
..."Problem solved."...
Good news!
I'm not reading the article or watching the video.
I didn't realize those were options.
Sure they are. Scroll down really fast, and click "comments".
I always click on the "comments" link on the main H&R page at the bottom of each article. That takes me directly to the opened comments, although it takes an inordinately long time for all the "reply to this" links to show up.
Shame you can't get lousy students fired!
...out of a cannon, into the sun.
How about applying Obama's criteria? "Maintain a 2.5 GPA and make steady progress. Make school free for everybody who is willing to work for it."
free does not mean what you think it means.
Free for me, but not for thee, sucka!
Oh, I get that.
Perhaps I should have phrased it: "Allow school only for those who are willing to work for it."
Yes, I know: work does not mean what I think it means. 😉
Nothing if free. Someone is going to pay for it...taxpayers.
Irrelevant.
You're fired.
...out of a cannon, into the sun.
This'll be the third time I don't watch this video.
Francisco d'Anconia|1.31.15 @ 9:41PM|#
"This'll be the third time I don't watch this video."
Is this one worthy of more vid-scorn than usual?
Just the usual amount of scorn for videos.
I can read about 10x faster than people talk. Ain't nobody got time for that.
"I can read about 10x faster than people talk"
Got 'get offa my lawn' noise when I posted several years ago that I won't watch vids.
Sorry, if I can't scan it for interest, I'm NOT going to watch flapping jaws hoping something is worth the time.
Don't get me wrong. If there's some eye candy, I might watch.
It looked like a boring story the first two times they posted it.
Hey, Matt! Post copy or get vid scorn!