Friday, December 3, 2010

"Data craziness is starting to hurt," says Kaya Henderson

In an interview with WAMU's Kavitha Cardoza, Tuesday, Kaya Henderson stepped away from the Michelle Rhee script and began, for the first time, to articulate what might be a different approach. "I think we've gotten something wrong," she said. "The goal is to educate children. And I think the swing of the pendulum from absolutely no accountability to what I might call data craziness is starting to hurt." Read Bill Turque's account here.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Diane Ravitch Responds to Bill Gates' Questions

Bill Gates has increasingly come to articulate the dominant narrative on education reform in the US. In this week's Newsweek he takes on Diane Ravitch and terms her his main adversary. Ravitch responds today in Valarie Strauss' Post Column to the questions Gates poses to her in Newsweek. Its a thought provoking interchange, particularly Ravitch's response.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Is DCPS's new IMPACT Evaluation System Rigged?

On November 1, Valarie Strauss invited Columbia Teachers College professor, Aaron Pallas to analyze just how the new IMPACT teacher evaluation system works and his simple description (here) is a shocker. It turns out that teachers are not being evaluated against a standard of good teaching, but rather against the student test score achievement of similarly situated teachers in DCPS. So half the teachers will always be rated ineffective, and half effective, no matter how good the quality of teaching really is.  The question is, would it be the best use of DC tax dollars to extend the test based IMPACT model, now used only in 3rd, 5th, and 8th grades, on lots of new standardized tests so that teachers can be evaluated in this way at all grade levels and subject disciplines? Read the Pallas analysis and you'll probably demand that IMPACT be drastically modified so that its about good teaching, not a zero-sum game based on which student scores are higher and which lower.
[...which reminds us of a joke about two teachers camping in the woods. When they were about to go to sleep for the night, the one teacher started putting on his sneakers. "Why are you doing that?" asked his friend. "Bears," said camping teacher #1. "You can't outrun a bear," said camping teacher #2. "I don't have to outrun the bear, said #1. I just have to outrun you."]

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Responses to Simplistic Approaches

Co-Chairs of the Broader, Bolder Approach to Education -- Helen Ladd, Pedro Noguera, and Tom Paysant -- issued the following statement on behalf of the network of thousands of individuals who signed the Broader, Bolder Approach to Education campaign statement in 2008, including the now secretary of education, Arne Duncan. The statement was issued as a timely response to "simplistic approaches."
-- Mark

New Material on a Simplistic Approach to Teacher Evaluation and School Improvement
Many policymakers have recently become enthusiastic about using student test scores, and gains on student test scores, to evaluate and compensate teachers. We agree that every classroom should have a well-educated, professional teacher, and school systems should recruit, prepare, and retain teachers who are qualified to do the job. But evaluating and compensating teachers primarily by their student test scores can corrupt the educational process. Even the use of "value-added" test scores, in the absence of a holistic evaluation of teacher quality, can narrow the curriculum, encourage gamesmanship in education, and misidentify more and less qualified teachers.

The Economic Policy Institute has recently published two documents that elaborate on these points and that we want to share with you, our colleagues in the campaign for a Broader, Bolder Approach to Education. (click link to read further and if you are an education researcher or an educator, to sign-on to the statement on the use of student test scores)

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

What Went Wrong? Fenty's Real Mis-steps

The election confirmed what polls had shown for several weeks, that Fenty and Rhee had squandered their opportunity to reform the schools and the city. The question is how did this happen? The final vote: after Fenty's $5 Million warchest had been spent and the Washington Post editors had cheerled unceasingly for the Mayor and his accomplishments -- Vince Gray won -- 57% to 42%!

The Washington Post continues to insist in its post-election analysis that mayor Fenty's missteps were all about his personality and his failure to listen to his paid advisors. In the first salvo of their post-election analysis, reporters Nikita Stewart and Paul Schwartzman traced back examples of Fenty's hubris over the past year. But their analysis manages to maintain the myth that his policies and accomplishments really deserved to get him re-elected.

What the Post seems incapable of understanding, but what those close to the ground in DC schools know only too well, is the story of how the missteps and reform strategies of the Rhee administration served to alienate at least as many parents and teachers as they served to inspire. The very constituencies that should have been supportive of the reforms, those that were desperate to improve the quality of teaching and learning in DCPS, were growing to hate the sloppy teacher evaluation process, the increasingly test-driven strategies, and the autocratic, demoralizing fear-based culture that is so antithetical to respect for teachers and good teaching. Its time the Post started to ask why the Rhee reforms are so unpopular among accomplished teachers and activist parents?

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

"Rheeform" -- What Went Wrong?

The meltdown of Adrian Fenty's re-election bid and the surprising Washington Post poll indicating that the Chancellor's approval/disapproval rating is 40% to 41% after three years has caused thoughtful DCPS watchers to begin to discuss the blunders that have been made that have so alienated parents and teachers. The Journal Rethinking Schools is publishing one analysis later this month that puts Michelle Rhee's leadership into a bit of historical perspective. A pre-publication copy of the article is available here, without pictures. Rethinking Schools is a national education journal written by and for teachers that has been published for more than 20 years with some of the most thoughtful and well-researched journalism in the field of education.
And Mark Simon got a Washington Post Op Ed published on what the Rhee administration did wrong and caused Fenty to be un-elected as a corrective to the lack of journalistic scrutiny of the Washington Post's coverage.

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Washington Post's blind allegiance to Michelle Rhee

There is a larger story overshadowing the report on DC test score achievement gaps in the Washington Post dated Aug. 27, 2010 by Bill Turque: Michelle Rhee's "reform" program is a failure.
DC test scores, which began to improve under Mr. Janey's tenure, have flattened. The Post struggles to defend Ms. Rhee by pointing to the nationwide pattern of lagging test score gains; quoting Ms. Rhee's spokeswoman (Jennifer Calloway) cautioning against drawing broad conclusions from single-year test data; and in a last desperate line of defense, suggesting that perhaps there was "some anomaly in the tests."
I would like for the Post to stop cheerleading for Ms. Rhee and look at the facts: her "reform agenda" is not working. Demonizing veteran teachers, relentless teaching-to-the-test, imposing a flawed and overly-subjective evaluation system (which, hypocritically, places strong emphasis on single-year test scores) have not succeeded.
Ms. Rhee, Mayor Fenty, and the Post cannot have it both ways: if test scores determine whether a teacher receives a raise or loses his/her job, then they should rightly redound on our city leaders in the same fashion. Why are teachers not given 3, 5, or 7 years to improve their students' test scores? Ms. Rhee calls the disparity "unacceptable" and pledges to eliminate it, but she offers no new plans. Increasingly it seems she and the Mayor have succeeded in firing alot of teachers and building some new schools while achieving little educational impact.
Buried at the end of the report is a telling quote from Bruce Fuller: "Part of this hitting the wall may be the troubling fact that we may need to somehow attack family poverty before we see greater progress in closing achievement." Troubling fact indeed! The Mayor and Chancellor have placed the entire responsibility for improving the education of our youth on classroom teachers when a broader societal effort is necessary. Until we face this issue testing, charter schools, Teach for America, IMPACT, and Ms. Rhee's "reform agenda" will have no positive and lasting effect.

Monday, July 26, 2010

Civil Rights Coalition Calls for Changes in Obama Approach to Education

A coalition of the leading Civil Rights organizations released today a 17 page report titled "The Opportunity to Learn Campaign," in which they take to task the approach of the Obama administration to the reauthorization of NCLB. Specifically, the report critiques the "Race to the Top" concept of competitive grants, stop-gap grant-driven innovations that amount to a revolving door of programs of the moment, and systemic reform that relies on charter schools. The Civil Rights groups oppose school closure as a strategy. Instead the report urges reliance on the tried and true, research supported efforts involving early childhood programs, wrap-around services, and targetted resources to communities in need. Valarie Strauss commented on the report in her column today, pointing out that though polite, the report basically "skewers" the programmatic centerpieces of the Obama administration education program. Ed Week has a good piece that points out that the Civil Rights groups seem to have a lot in common with the assumptions behind the Broader Bolder Approach founded in 2008. We may see a rebirth of that effort in the Fall of 2010.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Drop In Test Scores Should Make Us Think

Valarie Strauss points out in her Post blog column yesterday, that the whole house of cards that has been built by the Rhee administration in which tests scores are the be-all and end-all is brought into question by the reactions of the administration, and for that matter the editors of the Washington Post, to the recent drop in scores. Jay Mathews has had to have a similar "epiphony." The fact is that standardized test scores are not a good enough proxy for learning, or for teacher quality, or for school quality, or for that matter for the quality of a Chancellor. They admit that when the scores drop, but when they're rising, foolishly calibrate the quality of everything on this very imprecise measure.

The other point that Strauss fails to mention is that rises in test scores are frequently followed by a drop because the little cheats -- the test prep tricks or removal of low scoring students, or just the fact that kids get used to a particular test format and process and therefore do better regardless of whether they actually know more or not -- that caused the scores to go up have played themselves out. So the lack of an unnatural bubble makes it look like you've had a drop.

So the new consensus is the drop in test scores doesn't mean much. Test score results are only ever meaningful to the politicans, not so much to the students. Valarie Struass' epiphony is that they perhaps shouldn't have been touted as meaning so much when the scores went up, either.

Thursday, July 8, 2010

New Study on Teach For America

Valarie Strauss reports today that a new study that reviews the the national literature on Teach For America (TFA) out of the University of Texas at Austin, shows that 50% of TFA recurits leave after 2 years and 80% leave after 3 years. TFAers also get worse test score results in reading and math than fully credentialed recruits. The only clear win is when TFAers are brought in to a district that had been filling vacancies with non-certified, unqualified teachers. The authors of the study caution that districts considering using TFA consider both the long term cost implications of having to continuously retrain new recruits, and alternative ways to spend the same dollars for better results.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Wash Post Article Gets It Wrong on School Funding Equity

The following is a response from Mary Filardo, Director of the 21st Century School Fund to the June 6, 2010 article on the front page of the Washington Post, entitled “Spreading D.C.’s money around, Recent data on projects indicate Fenty doesn’t favor particular wards”

The quality of the physical school environment makes a difference to students and teachers—their health, focus, and curriculum—and thankfully the District government is investing in much needed public school building projects throughout the city. However, the taxpayers of the District will be paying hundreds of millions of dollars annually to repay the billions in bonds that finance these projects, so it is important that this use of these public funds is covered by the Washington Post. But “Spreading D.C.’s money around, Recent data on projects indicate Fenty doesn’t favor particular wards” is not telling an accurate story.

In her Sunday, June 6, 2010 article Nikita Stewart says “…some critics of Fenty (D) have long branded the mayor as favoring white neighborhoods at the expense of black communities. But a Washington Post analysis of city data on school construction, parks and recreation projects, and funding for new libraries and schools over the past three years shows that the reality is more complex.”

It was so complex the reporter got it wrong for schools, the lion’s share of the capital spending.

The DCPS school construction spending of the City since 2007 has favored Wards 2 and 3 far more than the rest of the city. The average spending on DCPS public schools in Ward 2 was $152 a square foot and in Ward 3 it was $118 a square foot. Not so in the other wards. The next highest spending was for Ward 5 DCPS schools at $74 a square foot, followed by Ward 6 at $62 a square foot, Ward 8 at $54 a square foot, Ward 1 at $52 a square foot, Ward 7 at $40 a square foot and Ward 4 at $37 a square foot.

Funding per building square feet gives the best characterization of the quality of the physical teaching and learning conditions. However, funding per student also gives a measure of equity and fairness. This is where it is more complex.

When looking at school construction funding per student, DCPS schools in Ward 3, rather than being the second highest falls to the fourth highest in spending per student. Ward 2 DCPS schools still top the list due to major modernization projects at School Without Walls HS, Hardy MS, Hyde/Addison and Thomson elementary schools. Ward 4 DCPS schools were again dead last. Another factor contributing to the inequity: Ward 7 and 8 had 34% of all of the DCPS students—14,388 students in the 08-09 school year, while Wards 2 and 3 enrolled only 19%—8,199 students.

There is good data and valid experience to support concerns about equity and how the District is making decisions about school construction projects and funding. Maybe it is not so complicated after all. Communities without social capital lose out on public investment when there is poor planning and no intentional public policy for equity.

Mary Filardo
Executive Director, 21st Century School Fund

Thursday, June 3, 2010

DCPS Teachers Approve New Contract Overwhelmingly - But What Does It Mean?

Washington Post reporter, Bill Turque today summarized the new WTU Teachers Contract approved ovewhelmingly by teachers in the vote tallied yesterday, and reported some reactions to the agreement. Only Randi Weingarten was honest enough to accurately characterize the agreement. Far from being a model for the country, the WTU agreement is a very traditional, "industrial" style contract, said Weingarten. "At the end of the day, this is still one of the industrial model contracts where a lot of the authority is reposed in the chancellor herself," said Weingarten, adding that the union was able to incorporate checks and balances into the contract that lend more transparency to Rhee's power. The aggregeous proposals to take away due process and impose a two-tiered salary structure put forward a year ago by the Chancellor were all eliminated. Commitments to professional development and joint engagement on evaluation and discipline, insisted upon by the union are new. So the AFT and the WTU made the best of a conflict-ridden, punitive approach being taken in the city. Other comments by Rhee, by Kate Walsh and by both Parker and Saunders seemed like pure wishful thinking and spin in comparison. Teachers voted for the much needed 21% pay increase, which by the way, only brings DCPS teachers up to par with surrounding suburban jurisdictions.

Sunday, May 30, 2010

Pedro Noguera Critiques Obama Administration Approach to Ed Reform

NYU's Pedro Noguera, one of the nation's foremost advocates for equity in the schooling for poor and minority youth, writes this week's cover editorial in the Nation magazine and delivers one of the most articulate critiques of the Obama Administration's approach to reform. After the Obama administration was elected on the need for change away from the failed NCLB policy, Noguera maintains, Obama's education Department set to work continuing that failed approach, exhibiting a profound lack of understanding of what was wrong with NCLB. The Obama administration has no vision of its own, says Noguera, serving up instead a hodge podge of quick fix programs that resemble George W Bush's philosophy of punishment, blame, and narrow test driven accountability. The Nation's education edition also features pieces by Linda Darling-Hammond and Diane Ravitch. Its worth picking up at your newstand and is probably worth the cost of a subscription its so good. Click here to read.

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Valarie Strauss Again Sets the Record Straight on Charters

In responding to the puff piece on charters and edu-entrepreneurs in the New York Times magazine today, Valarie Strauss pointed out that Steven Brill got his facts wrong on charters and a number of other things. The Times piece hailed the Obama administration, leaders like Michelle Rhee, and edu-entrepreneurs like John Schneur for standing up to the evil teachers' unions. But to make his case, Brill distorted what tenure means for public school teachers, glossed over the fact that at least in New York and Chicago, mayoral control has brought little in the way of improved NAEP scores, and can not be counted a success based on the data. The NY Times piece faithfully adhered to the myth-making narrative that consistently ignores the facts on the ground and the research. There are far too few Valarie Strauss' to hold the myth makers to account.

Monday, May 17, 2010

WTU Contract Funded, according to Gandhi. Now goes to members for a vote

According to a Washington Post story by Bill Turque last week Fenty and Rhee announced that they had received Natwar Gandhi's blessing and had come up with the funds to pay for what they previously negotiated with the WTU. The tradeoff will be other cuts in the system.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Rhee Contract with WTU Invalid???

Looks like there's an adult in the room. Natwar Gandhi, the DC CFO is refusing to certify the negotiated contract because it is premised on funds that might or might not be there. That's what the article in the Washington Post will read tomorrow. Certification by the CFO is a requirement in order for it to be sent out to the WTU membership for a vote.

It just came to light in the past few days that the Billionaire donors loaded on political conditions, like keeping the chancellor in place, that allows them to pull the money. The implications of donors getting to dictate policies does seem to cross the line in a public school system.

Friday, April 23, 2010

DCPS Budget Mismanagement -- What A Mess!

City Councilmemebers are demanding Michelle Rhee's "report card," and according to the Washington Post's Bill Turque, the unions want a meeting to get answers. All this because Michelle Rhee premised paying for the new teachers contract on a $34 Million surplus that DC Chief Financial officer Natwar Ghandi says isn't there. According to Ghandi, the Rhee administration overspent in the central office by $29 Million, effectively using up the surplus. Given the level of contracting out of central office services, we're not surprised.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

The Same Budget that Was in Crisis Causing Firings Now Finds $34 M Surplus to Fund Teacher Raises

Teaching asks a lot of teachers. An effective school system is one that inspires teachers to give their all for a life of inspired teaching. A sick school system is one with a culture of mistrust, cynicism, and disrespect. It is one run at the whim of autocrats based on fear. The culture becomes us vs. them. As Diane Ravitch argued on her blog a few weeks back, there are two kinds of superintendents and two kinds of school system cultures, one is professional, the other industrial.

I was hopeful that this new contract, which seems like a good one given the circumstances, could mean a new day. I was hopeful that the Chancellor perhaps has learned that you have to work with and inspire trust from teachers to imporve the quality of teaching, and that the WTU perhaps has learned that a labor intensive focus on the quality of teaching has to be central for the union as well. I still think its a pretty good contract, but...

The cynics and mistrusters are going to come out of the woodwork on this one. In testimony before the City Council, according to the article by Bill Turque in today's online Washington Post, and even harsher pieces in the City Paper and the Examiner, Michelle Rhee tried to explain that the same budget that had caused her to have to fire 266 teachers in the fall now has a $34 Million surplus that can be used to fund the newly negotiated rasies. The explanation? A mistake in math by DCPS. Trust that!!

Whether this will "blow up" the contract ratification, as the City Paper Article implies is open to question, but bad faith it clearly seems to be.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

My Thoughts on the Proposed WTU Contract

On Wednesday, April 7th I attended the WTU informational session on the proposed new contract. Two things that jumped out immediately were the large pay increases and the assurance that tenure would not be removed. I was happy to see that we have moved beyond the false notion that tenure means a job for life, when in actuality it serves as protections for basic due process.

We received an overview of the proposed new contract, but I am looking forward to reading the details. I have a few questions that need to be answered.

1. Involvement of School Stakeholders

  • Fortunately, contract language increases the involvement of LSRTs and other school-based committees in school management decisions. Will teachers, parents, and others in the school community have a real say in improving the school?
  • Will these changes be enforced or remain on paper like previous attempts at school community involvement?
  • How will the changes ensure that LSRTs have meaningful input in decision making at all schools?

2. Merit Pay

  • Although the merit pay program is voluntary, why would we, as educators, reinforce the idea that tying teacher pay to student achievement will lead to improved teaching?
  • Is there clear evidence that merit pay increases student achievement?
  • What will be used to accurately determine student progress and achievement in the classroom?
  • Will this lead to more teaching to the test or pruning of poor performing students from classes?
  • Too many students are already "dumped" from non-neighborhood schools because of truancy, behavior problems and poor academic performance. In a similar fashion, will it lead to students being removed from classrooms when teachers recognize they are adversely affecting their chances for merit pay?

3. Removing Ineffective Teachers

  • Streamlining DCPS's ability to remove ineffective teachers is a good thing as long as it is done fairly. What will be the exact criteria for determining "ineffectiveness?"
  • Currently, many teachers do not get the basic supports they need to effectively teach. At the same time IMPACT holds teachers to extremely high, and in some cases, unrealistic expectations. Is this the system we want to use to determine teacher effectiveness? (I realize that teacher evaluations are a nonnegotiable issue in the contract, but there needs to be a discussion about these important issues.)
  • Will IMPACT be revised so that it becomes less subjective and reflects the realities of classroom teaching?

4. Foundation Money

  • Will the $65 million in donations influence DCPS education policy in areas beyond pay raises?
  • Can we really expect these private funders to give money without any strings attached?
  • Do we want to promote the practice of a small group of wealthy donors using their private money to influence education policy (e.g., Gates' money used for small high schools)?

The contract can be an important tool in improving the quality of teaching and education in DC. However, we must ensure that it addresses the fundamental problems existing in many schools. I am reserving judgment and hope to have my questions answered soon.

Kerry Sylvia

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Tentative Agreement Reached in WTU Contract Negotiations!

WTU president George Parker has called a membership meeting for Wednesday, April 7th at McKinley HS, to review the details of the tentative agreement signed with DCPS. Mike Debonis of the City Paper published today a summary of the agreement and a leaked Q & A piece prepared by the WTU. The contract will be retroactive to 2007 when Michelle Rhee's tenure as Chancellor began. Negotiations have lasted for almost three years. At first blush, the agreement looks quite different and much more reasonable than the proposal the administration made public over a year ago. Although the reaction of teachers will be colored by the rhetoric of the campaigns for WTU president, we look forward to commenatry from teacher bloggers on Teachers and Parents for Real Education Reform after tomorrow's meeting.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Inexcusable: Empty promises to a D.C. school

This is the very important story about Bruce-Monroe at Park View ES that was not explained in the print edition story (Three closed D.C. schools won't reopen soon) in the POST this morning. It appeared later in the Online Washington Post in Valerie Strauss' Blog today. Providing the perspective that was missing from this morning's story, Strauss calls it "inexcusable" to promise a successful school, with solid enrollment and making AYP, that they'd be quickly renovated, temporarily relocated to another building (where they would be consolidated with another school), only to have that renovation plan go awry. Is there a pattern: Hardy, Ellington, Bruce Monroe -- successful schools disrupted, communities ignored? The print article focused primarily on Rhee and Graham’s statements. That was not the whole story.

Link to: Inexcusable --
Empty Promises to a D.C. School

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Reacting to the "Low Performing School" Label at T.C. Williams HS.

Patrick Welsh, who teaches English at T.C.Williams HS in Alexandria, VA, writes today in the Washington Post, describing the reaction among teachers at his school when they found it was on the US Department of Education list of the nation's lowest performing schools. T.C. Williams has been celebrated as a school with great teachers who add tremendos value to it's low income students' accomplishments. The label is all about the socio-economic background of the students. Welsh's piece manages to capture both the inaccuracy of the battering ram approach of the Deaprtment's labeling and the germ of truth that will cause educators to implement some long overdue reforms.

Friday, March 12, 2010

Two New Books Recommended by Valarie Strauss

Washington Post columnist Valarie Strauss in her column today applauds the advice and the research from Linda Darling-Hammond and Diane Ravitch in their respective new books. It seems that there finally are some voices emerging -- even in the Washington Post -- with an alternative to the consensus that has dominated Washington for far too long. If only it was as simple as Obama and Duncan reading these books and seeing the light as Strauss suggests.
For those of you without the time to read books or who tried to order it from Amazon and found that Diane Ravitch's new book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, is sold out in its 5th printing in 16 days after its release, here is a nifty summary of the book from Slate magazine.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Two Kinds of Superintendents.....Which One Do We have?

Diane Ravitch's new book The Death and Life of the Great American School System is out. It takes on the so-called reform movement of the past three decades and declares it a failure. According to the Daily Kos, This is "a book of critical importance."

Diane Ravitch has a post on her Ed Week blog that is full of insight into the two fundamentally different ways that school systems are being run these days. It's worth a read. In some ways, it was the longing for the kind that understands and cares about the quality of teaching and learning that led us to form Teachers and Parents for Real Education Reform.

Friday, January 22, 2010

The Press Got it Wrong says Ravitch

The editors and reporters at the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and Education Week, were flat out wrong about what Randi Weingarten said in her speech, says Education commentator Diane Ravitch on the Huffington Post today. We agree with Ravitch. The speech has particular relevance in DCPS, but its import was distorted by editors and even reporters who seem strangely locked into paradigms that prevent them from recognizing common sense when the source is a teacher union president.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Weingarten Proposes "A New Path Forward"

In a comprehensive speech at the National Press Club, AFT president Randi Weingarten charted a new path for public education reform. With clear reference to ill conceived strategies "that fixate on the supposed silver bullet of doing away with bad teachers," born of her frustration with Michelle Rhee's approach, Weingarten offered instead an integrated approach with four components: 1. a new template for evaluation, standards and student outcomes, 2. a new expedited approach to due process, 3. a focus on the conditions teachers need to be successful, and 4. relationships of trust and respect for teachers. "The problem with the so-called "bad teacher" refrain isn't just that it's too harsh or too unforgiving," Weingarten said, "The problem is that it's too limited. It fails to recognize that we have a systems problem." The film clip of the speech can be viewed at the AFT's "A New Path Forward" web site .