AFT Convention, July 14, 2004
Washington, D.C.
Keynote Address
Sandra Feldman, President

Welcome. It is truly energizing and gratifying to see you.

The fact you’re here bears out the theme of my talk today—which I hope you will understand and forgive if it seems to get personal.

First, every one of us here could be somewhere else—relaxing, vacationing, even working. Yet we’re here because we support an organization, a union that has made a great difference in our lives, and the lives of so many others—and we want it to continue to strengthen and to grow.

We’re here because we’re believers. I surely am, and that is what I want to talk about today in my final address as president of AFT.

Two months ago, we marked the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision. Much has been said, debated, written—about the meaning of the decision and its importance, and I’m not going to reiterate all that. I believe it was extremely important, because though it didn’t end segregation, the highest court in the land said that deliberate school segregation is unlawful. And much good followed from that, as did a great deal of serious struggle.

I was still in high school at that time. The AFT, in 1954, was a small but growing organization. But it was the only teacher organization to support Brown before the court. We were also the only teacher organization to expel our segregated locals in the South after the decision—which is why we are the smaller organization in the South to this day. Tomorrow, we are giving Eleanor Holmes Norton our Bayard Rustin Human Rights award. And it is well-deserved.

Of course this wasn’t the first time AFT had sacrificed size to belief. In the 1930s, when the communists took over the teachers’ union, the pro-democracy leaders who had lost, broke away and formed a much smaller union.

I start with this bit of history because it signifies something very important about this union we belong to: It has always been a union of believers. Not ideologues—but believers in the cause of public education, the needs of children and working families and the need to protect democracy so we can make our many fights.

Now don’t get me wrong—we love to party. But we don’t come here as revelers. We come to make serious policy about serious issues—and then dance all night.

I got to Brooklyn College in 1956, and the civil rights activities Brown had spawned were in full force. The great civil rights leader Bayard Rustin came to campus and held a rally to recruit students to participate in a march for integrated schools. I met lifelong friends like Rachelle Horowitz, who later became AFT’s political director, and Tom Kahn, who later became AFL-CIO’s international affairs director. And we all became followers of Bayard Rustin. Off campus, at movement functions, we met Eleanor Holmes Norton, whose leadership and contribution to the movement is immeasurable and continues to this day.

Through the late ’50s and early ’60s, freedom rides, sit-ins, and the 1963 March on Washington, we and thousands of other young people, of all colors and ethnicities, did our parts. And so did activist members of AFT across the country.

And I want to try to describe how we all felt.

I’m talking about myself, but I know that all of the people involved shared most of the feelings I had. And I know some of them are in this room today.

During college, my friends and I, including Eleanor, joined the Harlem Congress of Racial Equality—CORE. And we carried on many activities, all nonviolent. We were trained in civil disobedience and passive resistance. We spent weeks sitting in at the construction site of the new Harlem hospital that was being built, to force the integration of that workforce.

We had some unpleasant encounters with the building trades, I’m sorry to say, but it wasn’t always because of them; we also did some foolish things—like laying down in the street in front of a bulldozer. Years later, we all kissed and made up and worked well together from then on.

We also traveled. This New York girl got on a bus every weekend to integrate the Howard Johnsons up and down Maryland’s Route 40, and I have some vivid memories of being herded about by cops and dogs and being shoved along with many others into a stuffy, dirty Baltimore jail until the movement sent lawyers to get us out.

The most dicey, and probably more than a little foolish, thing that some of us did was go around Harlem one day with U-Haul trucks and pick up garbage that had been left in the streets for weeks—old mattresses and box springs, broken furniture, rotting piles of newspapers, all kinds of junk. We had a statement calling attention to the lousy housing conditions poor people in Harlem were living in, and at 5 p.m. we drove onto the Triboro bridge and dumped all the garbage we had collected and stopped the traffic going home. "You’re going home to nice neighborhoods," our statement said. "We just want you to take a look at how poor people are forced to live."

But the working people on their way home didn’t appreciate the logic or the traffic jam—especially when they understood what we had done.

So they started to leave their cars and advance on us (we were sitting amid the garbage—passive-resistance mode).

Fortunately, the cops got to us first.

The local Queens jail, with its overstuffed toilets and completely disdainful staff, was a haven compared to the anger we’d have faced from those irate drivers.

I tell this with some amusement, of course. But I tell you for a reason: And that is to try to explain that though we were scared, and perhaps sometimes mistaken, we were prepared for beatings and even worse, for the cause of equality and justice.

What my friends and I did wasn’t the most dangerous by a long shot—not at all. Others went to the deep South, and of course Andrew Goodman, Michael Schwerner and James Cheney, young idealists, were murdered, and they weren’t the only ones.

Then there were the black citizens who lived on the front lines, who suffered cross burnings and death threats and the students who sat in lunch counters in the deep South, and those who walked through jeering mobs to get to school. They believed in a real cause.

Which leads me to the AFT. From its beginning, AFT was a cause. It was a trade union that had always had as its mission the betterment of its members and the children they served, from the time of its founding by John Dewey and other reformer educators.

And AFT members served needy children, in large part. If you look at the earliest copies of our newspaper, you will see pictures of huge classes of immigrant children and other poor children in cities across the country where the AFT was organizing. You will see exposés of unsanitary conditions and the lack of books and supplies.

You will see—in the roster of teacher activists who formed the union—social reformers who were fighting for decent healthcare and living conditions for their students as well as themselves and their colleagues. You will see women—forced to play a back-seat role in other organizations and in their schools—lead a crowd of school teachers—school teachers—in demonstrations and rallies and stirring—not just their followers, but bystanders—with their oratory and their righteous cause.

For example, early in the last century, when Margaret Haley of Chicago couldn’t get the administrator-dominated organization in that city to support her demands on behalf of the classroom, she went to the AFL and formed a teachers’ union—the AFT—Local 1. And that was before women even had the right to vote.

Teacher unionists wanted better pay, yes, of course. They also wanted the opportunity to learn their craft better and to practice it more meaningfully. They wanted the respect and dignity they knew they deserved—sound familiar?

And they wanted what was needed for their students—the children of other people entrusted to them. And they were ready to fight for it.

And, my dear sisters and brothers, that is the combination that made us—and makes us—different. In my opinion—better. That combination of militant trade unionism, the intellectual underpinnings members and leaders brought to it, and the passionate dedication to improving the public schools and the lives of those we served—starting with children, but carried over in our work with patients and clients in later years. That is what made us better, stronger.

As we sit here, there is no denying there has been a lot of progress. Yet, despite the progress, we still have two school systems in America—wealthy and poor—still often separated as much by color as by class.

AFT is a large union now. We represent urban and suburban districts, and our members fight for what is right in both. But we will never be fully successful if we don’t achieve equity—and that fight takes great solidarity. Because it is very easy for haves and have-nots to turn against each other—or, at the very least, not to help each other. But it takes believers to do the right thing.

Just look at the funding debate in New York State almost four years after one of the most sweeping decisions on providing what urban kids need—they’re still fighting over it today. One—because it means spending a lot more money on poor kids, and two—because of the serious compromises that need to be made to achieve equity. It takes believers who care about all the children.

And I’m proud to say—that is who we are.

From coast to coast, AFT is fighting not just for equitable school financing, but for funding for what we know works, especially for poor children—smaller classes, quality preschool, better prepared teachers, extended time.

We are solidly with the rest of labor fighting to organize to raise wages of workers in all sectors, for full employment and decent housing and universal healthcare. We know that when families do well, children do well in school, though we’re always striving to help them do better, and to keep standards high.

And we know that many poor children, with their serious health needs and lack of attention and exposure to wide experiences in their earliest years, need a lot more than schools can provide them.

But let’s face it, schools would be providing a lot more if teachers had a real voice and the wherewithal to do what we know works.

Imagine where poor children would be today if starting in the ’50s, instead of ugly fights to prevent integration, we had immediately provided every school and district with well-prepared teachers and smaller class sizes, quality early childhood education and quality afterschool programs and summer school for the children we know need that time.

Fifty years of caring and doing what teachers were demanding, what children needed—we wouldn’t have solved all the problems; an achievement gap might still be there if poverty persisted—but poverty might have been severely lessened over those generations if children had come out of school better educated.

Instead, color and class, so powerful in America, slowed us down.

And yet we still made progress. In the ’60s, we won Title I, and services started flowing into poor schools—and AFT was a major player in that fight.

In the ’80s and ’90s, we led the fight for high standards and accountability and serious attention, truly for the first time, began to be paid to the terrible neglect—all across the country—of the schools poor children attended.

Right now, in the passions over No Child Left Behind, I fear that neglect could return, and I’m proud that AFT still upholds the basic framework of high standards and accountability despite what is wrong with this law. But what comforts me most is this: NCLB, Bush version, will be a blip on the screen by this time next year when President John Kerry has had the time, with our help, to fix it and properly fund it.

We’re going to be talking about that crucial election quite a bit all week, but right now I want to talk about AFT’s continuing role, and the charge I hope you will continue to take very, very seriously: the charge of fighting for high quality schools for all children.

When I became AFT president in 1997, many of our districts had been suffering something called "reconstitution" as a result of early accountability provisions in the Title I law. Excessing or layoffs of teachers without rights, putting in new staff who had not a clue about what to do—you remember.

And I urged us—I had been faced with this as president of UFT—to think through an AFT response: to fight like hell, of course, for the rights of our members, but also to propose a program that would work to reach out to parents, and to fight to turn around those low-performing schools, not simply to defend them.

I exhorted us not to tolerate or condone the continuance of schools that neither you nor I or any mayor, governor or other elected official wouldn’t send our own children to. Yes, we needed to protect our members’ rights, and we could do that; we could and did negotiate agreements for them to be treated with integrity and respect as these schools were redesigned.

And, in the AFT way, we put together a committee of savvy leaders and educators and came up with a program: Redesigning Schools To Raise Achievement, which has now been adapted in different forms all across the country—although we don’t always get credit, of course.

And, what is it? It’s a compilation, based on research, of what the teachers and kids need to succeed: professional development, smaller classes—especially in the early grades, extended days, summer school and in many places, extra pay not only for the time, but for different roles teachers are playing.

We didn’t just say "no." We created a prototype that works.

Ah, if only we controlled the schools the way right-wingers are always accusing us of doing. The kids would be so much better off than they are now, with every new superintendent throwing out the work his predecessor did, and starting something new and untried.

For example, I am both amused and saddened when I see the mess over social promotion in my hometown.

In September of 1997, shortly after becoming AFT president, I gave a speech at the National Press Club about an AFT study that called for ending social promotion but making it clear that neither social promotion nor retention is a successful strategy despite their widespread use, which our study uncovered.

We must intervene before students fail, I said then. We must provide preschool and improve its quality. And some years before that, I had called for the same things as UFT president.

Now a new mayor and superintendent in New York have awakened—but, oh, the terrible mistakes they are making—because like almost every new administration, they decide to reinvent the wheel.

In 1999, we came out with AFT’s reading program: Teaching Reading IS Rocket Science, and began to develop projects in several cities, where we’ve now demonstrated that teachers—approached properly and given intelligent, substantive training by experienced colleagues—will not only welcome the new methodologies coming out of research, but find them useful and helpful for their students.

It isn’t easy to get teachers who have been around a while to teach reading differently—but AFT’s credibility makes it possible.

Same thing with the issue of teacher quality. We’ve never been defensive or disingenuous about the need to upgrade teacher preparation—in college and in the elementary and secondary classroom.

We know from our members—and from our own experience—that most new teachers are woefully unprepared for the reality they face in the classroom. And we know that even experienced teachers need ongoing support.

We’ve never supported keeping incompetent people; we know the harm one such person can do to a school and to kids. But we’ve also seen over and over how with peer support from an experienced master teacher, such a person can change 180 degrees and if not, out they should go—after appropriate and streamlined due process.

We have opposed emergency credentials and out-of-field teaching, and we have been open to new roles and different salary arrangements, movement from vertical to horizontal schedules, incentives for teaching in hard-to-staff schools, extra pay for National Board certification, and more.

Our major problem? Not the resistance of our members—though some of that is definitely there. Our major problem in places where we’ve tried and failed? Management.

It is very, very sad that so much lip service is given to the importance of teachers, but management not only won’t put its money where its mouth is, but won’t trust the teacher unions -– meaning the teachers—because that is who we are—to have right and good ideas. Just ask former Senator Al D’Amato what happened when he tried to separate the teachers from their union.

Well—that historic labor-management struggle will go on, but places where cooperation begins to work and student achievement benefits, will continue to serve as beacons for education change and improvement.

And AFT must—and will—continue to lead the way. Our affiliates are fighting hard for what children and families need. In many states we’ve gotten the ball rolling on quality preschool, smaller class sizes, especially in the early grades, Kindergarten-Plus, the extension of the kindergarten year to the summer before and after—has now been adopted in New Mexico, and teachers and principals are giving it rave reviews. Children have shown considerable progress, and parents are clamoring to enroll their children.

The Louisiana Legislature has passed a pilot program, and other states are considering it. And now we’ve heard from Senator Dodd—a fairly new father –- that he has introduced federal legislation to help states do this cost-effective program. This is good news for teachers and children. Thank you, Senator Dodd.

And now, many people are finally turning to the health issues of poor children. Like you can’t read if you can’t see well, or listen to the teacher if your ear is infected, or pay attention if your teeth are hurting.

My dear colleagues, it remains a source of real anger to me—and I hope to you—that the needs of children, especially poor children in this wonderful, wealthy society of ours, are still neglected. Not just in school, but in general.

We know conclusively from studies, nationally and internationally, that poor children start from behind and need special help. We know that achievement goes up as family income goes up, but that too many families remain mired in poverty for generations.

We know that one of the few things they have going for their children is the public schools, and that too often their schools aren’t good enough.

All of you in this room are on the front lines of the fight for improving public education, either because you are part of it, or your own families are dependent on it, and because you believe in it.

And you know, first-hand, the problems and burdens that so many children bring to school. Across economic and racial and ethnic lines, so many of our students come to us with very great needs.

Whether in cities or suburbs, so many of them are growing up in a rough environment, without enough adult supervision and guidance.

Most of them have loving parents, and some not. They see a lot of violence—up close and personal—as well as on TV.

They live in a peer culture that is obsessed with clothes and looks, and walking and talking and being tough.

Many of our kids – especially in urban areas – are frightened. Unsure of themselves, behind in their learning, lacking hope in their future.

And many schools are being overwhelmed with the problems children bring, like children entering kindergarten or first grade who don’t even know their last names, who have little or no vocabulary…or children whose disruptive behavior interrupts learning every day, and there is no relief—for them, for the teacher, or for the other kids.

More than ever, schools are being asked to do the entire job of socialization of "character-building," of inculcating "good values"… and still do a lot better at providing an increasingly higher level of education.

Well, schools can and must do a lot more. But they can’t do it all—and they can’t do it alone.

Which is why a big part of our unfinished agenda is the fight for a level playing field for all children, in and out of school.

And at the same time, not to let that fight get in the way of our efforts on school improvement, for what works, for standards and for accountability—not just from teachers and students, but from lawmakers and parents.

My dear colleagues, whether you are a preK-12 teacher or para or higher ed faculty or health professional or public service member of AFT, I know, from spending time and talking to so many of you, that you are in the AFT because you share our mission and our agenda: for a just and equitable society; for public institutions that are democratic and that serve, equally well, both the poor and the middle class, who also deserve better. And especially for quality public schools that are the bedrock of a society that holds so much promise for its citizens. You are believers.

As the color and complexion of the U.S. citizenry changes rapidly; as the unfettered market economy pushes the middle class downward, what we do for other people’s children in our care becomes ever more important.

And for this great union, the AFT, the mix of fighting for our members’ economic well-being and also for what they need to do their jobs well, for those they serve, this heady potion of enlightened self-interest becomes a powerful thrust toward a better America.

I am very, very proud of having been a part of this great organization. I know that there will be a continuation of leadership that values all we have stood for since our founding and through our many trials and tribulations.

We have a culture of service, a culture of organizing, a culture of caring and of civility. Now more than 1.3 million strong, thanks to the marvelous work of Phil Kugler and our staff, as well as the affiliate leaders who have stepped up to the plate and devoted local and state resources to union growth.

AFT staff and leaders at every level and in every division are working together in unprecedented ways, and I am very proud of that.

I look forward to a future in which the AFT has been a leader in overturning a national administration that talks about accountability but is careless about the consequences of its actions, that has failed mightily when it comes to aftermaths--whether in Iraq or the implementation of NCLB, or a voucher program they pushed through for Washington, D.C., and then couldn’t even fill the slots they had allocated.

Yes, AFT will be a leader in overturning an administration that sees no value in public institutions, that doesn’t get the connection between public schools and democracy—despite the rote-like rhetoric we so often hear—that seems to suggest children will pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, like cowboys.

AFT will get in the way of all that. Our members and leaders will be organized, and in November, we will elect a new president and have the opportunity to get our country back on track.

We can settle for no less. We cannot let another 50 years go by; we cannot wait for the 100th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education. Our children need us to remain diligent and militant in our fight on their behalf.

I want to especially thank Ed McElroy and Nat LaCour, who have been wonderful partners in leadership and good friends. And thank you for your wonderful support and for allowing me to serve both you and the children of America for so many years.