The National Council on Teacher Quality, an Education Reform propaganda engine, has reviewed the recent two-year contract between Seattle Public Schools and the Seattle Education Association, the teachers' union.
The review by the NCTQ compares the final contract language to the Seattle Public Schools’ Bargaining Platform and - inexplicably- the Our Schools Coalition’s platform as if the Our Schools Coalition had any kind of standing or qualifications. Inexplicable, that is, until we discover that the Our Schools Coalition commissioned the review. So when the question is "How closely does the contract align with OUR goals?", then things that are aligned with the OSC goals appear to be good and variances appear to be bad, without any determination of whether the OSC goals are good or bad.
This subtlety was either lost on Lynne Varner or intentionally omitted from her editorial about the review.
You can read it for yourself. Lines like this: "The six pages of the contract dealing with 'classroom control,' 'employee protection' and 'safety and security' read as if students (and their parents) are to be feared." give you a sense of the tone. It's not a scholarly effort. It sneers and casts doubts instead of speaking with authority "If anything, the contract may overemphasize collaboration at the expense of timely problem solving and responsiveness to individual teachers and schools." Note how it casts suspicion on efforts to collaborate and suggests that collaboration is antithetical to action but doesn't actually come out and say that plainly. Very weaselly.