Tuesday, August 30, 2005

Daily Howler -- Back to School Blues

I'm a big fan of Bob Somerby's site, The Daily Howler. I like his blunt, tough, suffer-no-fools politics. And when he speaks about urban schools, he knows what he's talking about. This week he is devoting each of his daily howls to the issues facing urban schools. I heartily recommend his first two installments:

BACK-TO-SCHOOL BLUES (PART 1): "Poor fourth-grade kids can'’t read at all. So we need to set our standards higher! Poor kids are light-years behind the non-poor. So we need to define one set of graduation standards! In our view, such 'recommendations' tend to come from people who have never set foot in urban schools--and think tanks funded by both major parties sometimes seem to be full of such people."

PART 2--WHY CALIXTO CAN'T READ: "After attending school for three years, low-income students are 'about three grade levels behind' non-poor students! Say it again, and let it sink in: After three years, they’re three years behind!! But Herbert shows no sign of grasping the enormity (or the absurdity) of the situation described here."

Monday, August 29, 2005

First Day of School

The following was originally posted to sfschools@yahoogroups.com. Rich has given me permission to post this here. Feel free to write your responses as comments to this post. Rick may also provide an email address to send comments to for those that don't want their comments to appear on the blog.

--- In sfschools@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Reynolds" wrote:

Hello,

I hope everyone had a good first day! The Parent Advisory Council is conducting a survey of parents about the their first day of school experience. We will take the feedback we get and communicate it to The Board of Education in our annual First Day of School Report.

If you have a few minutes please share your experiences! Here's some questions to help but don't feel as though you need to specifically answer these questions, just tell us your stories good or bad about your first day of school.

  • How is your first day experience? Impressions?
  • Do you feel you received adequate information regarding the first day from
    • The District?
    • The School?
    • Parent's organizations at the school?
  • Do you have any comments on the information you have received?
  • Did the potential for a labor action/work stoppage concern you?
  • Did you do anything in particular in response to the work stoppage?
  • Do you have any suggestions about what to improve for next year's first day?
  • Do you understand the new dress code? (No red or blue)
Thanks!
Rick Reynolds
Vice Chair, Board of Education Parent Advisory Council

Sunday, August 28, 2005

Sick out

I was talking with one of my son's friends about the rumored "sick out" by SEIU Local 790, explaining that custodians, secretaries, and cafeteria workers may skip work on the first day of school. He noted that it was a heck of a way to welcome the incoming freshmen to his high school. I agree - it's a heck of a way to welcome any student back to school.

It seems like some adults have lost sight of the fact that the primary mission of the San Francisco Unified School District is to educate the kids, not serve as a jobs program for adults. Some blame the district for not "creat(ing) a new contract for these key employees", but a contract by its very nature is a mutually agreed upon document, not something which one side "creates" and then imposes on the other. The purpose of a "sick out" is to demonstrate that the workers are essential to smooth operation and that their absence hurts, but in this case, the "operation" is our schools, and it is our kids who will be hurt.

Particularly troubling is the issue of cafeteria staff taking the day off. If secretaries and custodians fail to show up for work, phones may go unanswered, papers unfiled, floors unswept and bathrooms uncleaned, but these workers will return to their jobs to find most of Monday's undone tasks waiting for them, in addition to all of Tuesday's chores. But cafeteria workers, who serve breakfast and lunch to the over 50% of SFUSD students who qualify for free or reduced price meals, will have turned their backs not on phones or computers or papers or mops or trashcans, but rather on children. The vast majority of students who eat cafeteria meals are in elementary school, some as young as 4 or 5 years old. Any disruption to the meal program hits these kids - hard. Last school year, about 30,000 students qualified for free or reduced price meals, and it is well known that the actual number of needy students is higher, because some families do not fill out the application, fearing it may jeopardize their immigration status (it won't) or put off by the stigma of a perceived "handout." Some children come to school on a Monday morning having not eaten a real meal since their Friday school lunch. Undermining the availability of school meals for these children for even one day is unconscionable.

Meals will be provided every school day, whether the cafeteria workers show up for work or not. Student Nutrition Services will be sending cereal for breakfast and cold sandwiches, raw veggies, and fresh fruit for lunch, for every student at every school. The SFUSD will not allow children (and especially poor children) to go hungry. Too bad the first day back to school, the kids will be eating cold sandwiches instead of the overwhelmingly popular chicken tostada boat, as originally scheduled. SNS had planned to welcome kids back with one of the favorite meals from the previous year, but oh well.

A recent letter to the editor of the Chronicle bemoans "the deplorable meals we serve schoolchildren" and reminds us that "the cafeteria is also important, and must be given enough funding to teach lifelong habits of healthful eating." This writer is right on - there is a connection between the quality of the food served to kids, and the amount of money in the Student Nutrition Services budget to pay for cafeteria workers, and it is a zero sum game. If salaries go up, the food budget must go down. The only way to both improve the food and also have more money for salaries is to increase revenue. Will a "sick out" accomplish that?

Well, no. Nor will a strike. The largest source of revenue for Student Nutrition is from the government reimbursement for meals served to those students who qualify for free or reduced price meals. Volunteers can and will help out in the cafeterias during employee absences, to make sure kids get fed, but because of confidentiality requirements, a student's free or reduced status is known only to the caf workers. Because volunteers have no way of knowing which students qualify for free or reduced meals, SNS will not be able to collect any government reimbursement for meals served while employees "sick out." This means that SNS will be starting the year with a huge financial loss right from the first day. A combination of rising food costs and the highest rate of pay for cafeteria workers in the Bay Area already had SNS running a deficit of about $600,000 for the 05-06 school year. The loss of reimbursement for just one day of "sick out" will not only put employee raises further out of reach, but may also result in cuts to the quality of the food served to the kids for the rest of the school year.

Some union supporters have gone so far as to claim that parents who volunteer at their kids' school during a "sick out" are "scabs." Call me what you want - I know where I will be Monday morning. I will be at my child's school, doing whatever needs doing, and come lunchtime, I will be in the cafeteria making sure that every student who wants a lunch gets one. This isn't about siding with the school district or siding with the union. It is about siding with the kids.

Labels:

Friday, August 26, 2005

A union-run charter school in NYC?

Here's a curious idea: a charter school run by the teachers' union. Not only that, but I heard about it by reading their blog: Edwize - The Virtues of Competition:

If there is one article of faith among contemporary ideologues of the right, it is that competition solves all problems. For every issue and for every problem, an unfettered, laissez-faire market is the solution. Nowhere can one find this dogma more faithfully followed than on the editorial page of the New York Post.

Except when it is a competition from a teachers’ union.

Take the question of charter schools. The editorial page of the New York Post went apoplectic at the thought that the UFT might sponsor two charter schools, and that those schools might demonstrate the educational power of a school founded on principles of teacher professionalism and democratic governance. A series of editorials were launched against the UFT charter school application, in ever more strident terms.

I'm adding the Edwize blog to our blogroll. Good to see teachers raising their voice. Too often I find they feel speaking out is too risky.

Edwonk: Kindergarten Cop vs. CTA

Found an interesting post over at Eduwonk.com that makes an important point about Prop 74: Kindergarten Cop vs. CTA

BUT, as McDonnel argues, increasing the amount of time before teachers get tenure isn't going to produce the kind of increased performance accountability, better teaching, or other reform many California schools need. Tenure is often a red herring and conservative hobby-horse in education policy debates, but a look at teacher quality indicators, dismissals, and performance across states with and without tenure suggests it's not the real problem. More important, the Governator's antagonistic stance towards teachers on both the tenure and school funding issues undermines his proposals to more closely link teacher pay to performance or reward teachers in hard-to-staff schools, ideas that do have promise to improve accountability and help attract to the profession the kind of high-quality new teachers California desperately needs."
So not only is Prop 74 useless and ineffective, its dooming Arnold's other policy initiatives. Great.

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Charter schools' press vs. reality

The Aug. 24 Chronicle carried a naively enthusiastic feature about a Leadership charter high school.

Leadership Public Schools (LPS) is a chain created by Mark Kushner, founding principal of San Francisco's struggling Leadership High School, an 8-year-old charter.

Kushner has been going around the Bay Area peddling charter schools. If a district school board rejects his proposal, he goes over its head to the county or the state Board of Education. That means a school district is likely to have a charter school forced on it against its will. This is happening right now with Leadership campuses in Hayward and Campbell. (LPS also runs schools in Oakland, Richmond and East San Jose.)

Kushner has been citing the supposed success of San Francisco's Leadership as a key selling point (SFUSD's Leadership, though founded by Kushner, is not technically part of LPS.)

But actually, Leadership in SFUSD has fallen on hard times. Its test scores have dropped. It has slid off the radar of aware parents looking for high schools even when they're in the immediate area &mdash something I'm directly familiar with as the parent of a 2005 graduate of SFUSD's Aptos Middle School, in the same part of town as Leadership. A number of my son's classmates are going to other charter high schools, but none even mentioned Leadership, despite its formerly impressive reputation and its proximity to Aptos.

Meanwhile, the San Francisco Leadership recently went to the SFUSD Board of Education seeking to become a non-charter district school, because it can no longer manage its own administrative affairs. The catch was, Leadership wants to maintain the freedom of a charter school (primarily meaning the freedom to avoid a union contract), while handing off the responsibility to manage its own administration. That request is currently in limbo, with the Board of Ed just returning from its summer hiatus and critical labor issues taking top priority.

A March 2005 editorial in the San Jose Mercury News blasted the Campbell school district for rejecting a Leadership school &mdash and cited the supposed success of Leadership's San Francisco charter (engaging along the way in some unbecoming race-baiting).

Leadership's primary claim to success, by the way, is based on the San Francisco school's graduates' supposed college admission rates &mdash something that as far as I can tell is entirely unconfirmable.

It may be that Kushner has finally judged it ill-advised to continue touting Leadership's San Francisco school now that its problems are prominent enough to show up in an Internet search. The Aug. 24 Chronicle story didn't mention the existence of a San Francisco campus.

I attended a panel discussion on charter schools at San Francisco's Commonwealth Club earlier this week. (Click "comments" on this blog item to read my informal description of the event.) The moderator invited written questions from the audience. I asked whether a charter school can ever work effectively with its school district if the charter school has been forced upon the unwilling district &mdash something that has happened in numerous other situations besides the Hayward and Campbell Leaderhip brouhahas.

San Francisco BOE veteran Jill Wynns, the Commonwealth panel's charter-school skeptic, responded simply: "No." Charter advocate Caprice Young, head of the California Charter Schools Association, seemed caught off-guard and mumbled something about how they'd eventually learn to get along. Young didn't exactly deliver a ringing vote of confidence for the ability of a charter school and a district to work together effectively in a situation that begins in a hostile standoff, as in Hayward and Campbell.

In a similar situation early this year, a bare majority of the SFUSD BOE approved a second Envision Schools charter in our district even as Envision's initial school &mdash its supposed showcase, Marin Arts & Technology in Novato &mdash is stumbling badly. July news reports announced that the Novato school district has put MAT on notice that it had better shape up or it's outta there.

MAT &mdash which posts far lower test scores, including on the crucial Similar Schools index, than Novato's two other high schools &mdash was warned to improve student discipline and special-education practices. In SFUSD, Envision runs year-old City Arts & Technology and will open Metro Arts & Technology this fall &mdash its only two schools besides the Novato campus. Envision is bounteously supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and other funders.

California's students would be better served if the press, the public and funders cast a more skeptical eye on operations like Leadership and Envision &mdash and on the charter movement in general.&mdash Caroline

Labels:

UESF statement concerning possible SEIU job actions

The following information was originally posted to the SfSchools list.

Fresh from my inbox, here is an email I received from Dennis Kelly concerning the potential job action by Local 790.

Dear KC,

Thank you for asking.

UESF is circulating the following flyer for posting in the schools:


ATTENTION UESF MEMBERS

The membership of SEIU Local 790 may engage in job actions at several sites or citywide. SEIU membership includes secretaries, clerks, custodians and cooks at school sites.

PLEASE RESPECT THEIR WORK

'UESF Supports SEIU--Don't ask me to do their work'


The administrators' union has said that their members will not ask our members to do the work of SEIU members. We do not expect our members to volunteer to do the work of SEIU members who are either officially or unofficially engaged in any kind of protest or job action.

I just spoke to the district labor relations officer who will contact the Child Development Center administrators to tell them that they are not to give the work of SEIU members to our teachers, paras, and others.

The administrators have a meeting at 4 pm Thursday to make sure that they all understand the message. Central office administrators have been assigned to all the schools to answer the phones, clean up the messes, and cook and serve the food. (Although the wisdom and legality of this is questionable.) It is their assignment and responsibility to see that the schools and students are safe.

At present, there is the possibility of resolving all issues through negotiations.

Parents should not allow themselves to be enticed to work as volunteers and used as 'scabs' in a labor dispute.

Monday, August 22, 2005

Welcome back?


If you missed this Sunday's Doonsebury, clik on this snippet to see the rest. I'm not sure if our family falls on the 'did nothing' or 'ran them ragged' category—so maybe it worked out just right. I know we all had a great time and are sad to see the summer ending.

Sunday, August 21, 2005

826 Valencia: Teacher of the Month

Wow. I can think of many teachers that deserve this. What a cool idea: 826 Valencia: Teacher of the Month

826 Valencia
Teacher of the Month Guidelines

Nominate your favorite teacher to win our $1500 award.

The criteria: A combination of dedication and innovation, and an overall commitment to challenging students to excel. There are so many students who have had their minds set aglow by a teacher’s own zest for life and learning, and we’d like to do a very small part in rewarding them.

Potential award winners need to have been in the classroom for four full years.

Teachers must be nominated by one previous or current student, and one adult past college age, but the nomination may be in any form -- letters of support, pictures, videotapes, anything, as long as we have specific examples of the teacher’s impact.

If you’d like to nominate a teacher you know, you can drop off or send materials of any kind to:

826 Teacher of the Month Award
attn: Nínive Calegari
826 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA, 94110

We’re sorry but recommendations can’t be taken via email or over the phone. Please submit a contact phone number along with your nomination; we’d like to be able to call and discuss the nominee with you and others.

I'd love to post about similar programs, grants, awards. So if you have an leads, post a comment here or drop them in my inbox, here.

Monday, August 15, 2005

About the school bus drivers contract negotiations

We're honored to have the following contribution from Ange Beloy, UTU 1741 President, concerning the school bus drivers' ongoing labor negotiations with Laidlaw.


For those of who do not care for busing, I remind you that we also do special education which is federally mandated. The following information pertains to regular education and special education drivers. We have been serving San Francisco since busing started. The number one person on our seniority list was hired in 1969. We have taken great pride in our jobs and want to attract people who will have the same attitude. If there is erosion to our contract & working conditions, then we will lose good people now as well as to not attract the good people later. It is not easy putting 70 kids in your back seat and driving them in the conditions of San Francisco, dealing with traffic, late parents, late schools, sleepers on the bus, fights etc. We are interested in quality people so we must be able to offer them a quality contract.

Our issues during our negotiations with Laidlaw are:

  • Increasing healthcare costs to the drivers

    we acknowledge the great plan we are under; we pay no copay for office visits, $2 & $5 prescription, $25.00 emergency room visits and our contribution is $30.00 per month. Blue Cross is trying to force us out by raising the cost to the company 38%. So we are willing to take a copay at the drs. office if the rest of the plan stays the same. The company bid high earlier this year with the health care in mind and they were awarded the bid.

  • Getting a raise that will help maintain a full work force

    It has been said that we are the highest paid school bus drivers in the country; this may have been true years ago, but it is not the case now. In Hayward the drivers are making more than us and their cost of living is not as high as San Francisco. The average driver works 6-7 hours per day and we only work 180 days per year plus summer school if their seniority affords them a route. The field trips/charter work is not enough during the summer and drivers collect unemployment. Some of our members also qualify for aid from the city/state/federal government. We are asking for $1.00 per hour raise this year plus COLA. If we don't get this, with gas going up, bridge fare etc. I believe we will lose a significant number of members. These people will not be easy to replace, in 1998 we lost our 8 hour days when the kindergarten students went to school all day, we lost 55 drivers and we were 40 drivers short for two years. (more under "35 hour")

  • Getting COLA for the length of the agreement

    It is important to our membership to have this Cost Of Living Adjustment. We have not had a raise in over 20 years. If it wasn't for our COLA, we would ALL qualify for public assistance as was the case in the 70's.

  • Maintaining our "35 hour" guarantee language

    In 99, our members fought for more work. The company was not interested in doing charter work and would not hire a charter manager. So we ended up in Mayor Willie Browns office for mediation during the "run off" between Ammiano and Brown. Brown contributed $250,000. for the students of SF to have field trips on the mid day. This made it possible for our drivers to get what breaks down to 7 hour day but since most routes are about 6 hours, the extra hour was pooled together to allow a driver to take a school on a field trip about once or twice per week per driver. There were 120 of these routes, now we have lost some routes so the number will be 102. The company came to the table last week and said that the funds may not be there next year and we will no longer be able to fund the "35 hour" work. Obviously, the union has some questions for the Mayors Office.

  • Clarifying the discipline language in our contract

    It is a disturbing trend throughout the school busing industry to not only offer low wages & a lousy health plan but to have high discipline standards. We believe that if a person is charged with an infraction, that they should have the right to due process just as any other system in the United States. The language in our contract accomplishes this, but with the turn over of management since the language was originally written, it is being misinterpreted. So we are trying to clean up the ambiguous language. We believe that IF you make it through the intense process of qualifying to be a school bus driver and the rigorous training it takes to get your school bus certificate that you deserve to be protected.

For more info contact: Ange Beloy or visit our web site: www.sfschoolbus.com


Thanks Ange! I certainly hope that a contract negotiations can be concluded in time for the new school year. I think no one on any side of this issue wants to see a work stoppage.

Happy Summer Vacation!

Saturday, August 13, 2005

Kids' needs should take priority

With SFUSD school support employees working under an expired contract and threatening to strike, there’s talk about using funds from Prop. H (city money approved by voters to support schools) to cover pay raises, the Examiner says.

An article by Bonnie Eslinger in the Aug. 7 Examiner reported:


“Unions representing teachers and service employees for the district suggested that some of the funds be used for pay raises.”


This may be legal, but it’s clearly not what the voters intended when they approved Prop. H. The portion of Prop. H that could be legitimately used that way was billed as supporting resources for students, such as nurses and counselors — not providing raises for existing staff. That pits adults’ interests directly against kids’ needs. Diverting funds this way is likely to anger voters who intended to support kids, and creating ill will toward SFUSD will hurt students and adult employees in the long run.


While I sympathize with any workers trying to survive in the Bay Area on a salary, school support staffers — such as custodians and lunch ladies — also aren’t suffering the same plight as teachers. Teachers are chronically underpaid professionals (with extensive educational credentials prerequisite for employment) who are expected to work impossible miracles daily — especially those who teach many disadvantaged kids. And they're constantly bashed, attacked and undermined. It's harder and harder to get and keep qualified teachers as the demands and attacks on them increase.

Custodians and lunch ladies do important jobs, but it's misleading to lump their situation together with teachers’.

The lunch ladies are paid from the Student Nutrition Services (SNS) budget, and the more they're paid, the more that encroaches on the quality of the food served in the lunch line. For example, SFUSD can't afford cut-up fruit, which would be a kid-friendly and popular way to offer fresh produce. A salad-bar pilot at K-5 Harvey Milk is amazingly successful with the kids, but SFUSD can’t afford to extend it to other schools and may have to scrap it entirely. Although the district offers a daily vegetarian option, it always includes cheese; parents have asked for plant-based vegetarian choices, but the district can't afford to purchase them.

SFUSD’s SNS budget has encroached for years on the district's general fund. When it runs a deficit, that comes from kids’ classroom needs. SNS is supposed to be self-supporting, covering its operating costs with government reimbursements for meals for low-income students, and from food sales to higher-income kids. Most school food services nationwide operate in the black; SFUSD’s SNS runs a deficit because of the relatively high wages paid to cafeteria staff — higher even than pay in wealthy Bay Area suburbs. (See below.)

SNS has been working to increase revenue and decrease the deficit, and has been pretty successful. Two years ago, the department ran a deficit of $1.3 million. For the 2003-'04 school year, that dropped to about $753,000. For the '04-'05 school year, the deficit is expected to be less than $600,000.

(Interestingly, these savings have been achieved at the same time that the district has discontinued the sale of soda, chips, snack cakes, corn dogs and other carnival-type junk food in its middle and high school cafeterias, replacing them with more nutritious items, and has upgraded the quality of the federally subsidized meals in the breakfast and lunch lines.)

However, SNS is under orders to break even or run at a profit for the '05-'06 school year, as the tight budget climate allows no general-fund money to subsidize SNS operations. The only way to increase the amount of money available to pay for labor is to reduce the amount of money spent on food for the kids &mdash that is, serve cheaper and less wholesome food.

When the quality of school meals suffers, it’s the poorest children and the youngest children who suffer the most harm, since they have no other options.

SFUSD has to balance two priorities — the need for higher-quality food for the students against increased pay for the caf workers. What should be take precedence — feeding the kids better or paying the workers more? It's either-or.

It’s also troubling that the SEIU has publicly taken a stand opposing this coming year's Grab 'n' Go breakfast pilot at Balboa High School. The pilot is intended to test whether a quicker, more convenient meal than the traditional hot breakfast (which requires kids to arrive at school some 45 minutes early) will result in better-nourished kids. Currently, a huge percentage of the largely-disadvantaged Bal student population arrives at school with no breakfast or with a soda-chips corner-market breakfast.

Grab 'n' Go is a pilot intended as a test, not a done deal districtwide. The goal is to improve kids’ health and nutrition. I hope that SEIU has seen the light on this issue. Its opposition was a classic case of putting adults’ concerns ahead of kids’ needs.

How cafeteria workers are paid


There are three categories of caf workers — permanent civil service (PCS), permanent exempt (PEX), and “as needed.”

“As needed” employees receive the lowest pay: $15.19/hour for a first-step employee. This does not include any benefits. Still, a position in the San Mateo Union High School District pays only $12.65/hour for first step (here called “step A.”)

The SFUSD lunch ladies who run the elementary school cafeterias heat up the lunches, serve, collect payment and record the free/reduced lunches served, and clean up. They are all either PCS or PEX, at the top (fifth) step, and their base pay is $18.39 (as listed on the district website as the top step pay for a 2615 “school lunchroom helper”). This doesn’t include benefits. A comparable position in Berkeley pays about $700 per month less.

Note that the SFUSD website lists pay in both hourly terms ($18.39) and also biweekly ($1,472, which equates to about $2,944 monthly), whereas the Berkeley position lists pay monthly only, at $2,243 for a top-step employee.

In reality, most 2615s at the top step in SFUSD (which is just about all of them) earn even more than $2,944 monthly. This is because employees with 10 years’ experience (which is most of them) get additional longevity pay. In addition, those who serve as employee-in-charge (the person running the caf, which at the elementary level is the sole employee) get an extra 10% of salary differential. The largest group of cafeteria workers falls into this category.

Then there are cooks (2630), at base pay of $20.23/hour, and cook/managers (2634), at base $23.77/hour. Most earn more because of longevity pay, and some also receive the employee-in-charge differential, bringing the top-paid employees in these categories to about $21/hour for a 2630 cook and $24.67/hour for a cook/manager. Again, this does not include benefits.

A comparable cook’s position in the San Mateo Union School District pays, at the top step, $15.39/hour (not including benefits).

According to this outdated ('02-'03) but still relevant salary schedule from the San Rafael High School District, the highest-paid caf worker there is paid less than SFUSD’s lowest-paid "as needed" worker. San Rafael’s gets $12.10 at first step, where SFUSD’s gets $15.19 at first step.

Again, I would never say any worker surviving on a salary in the Bay Area is adequately paid. But this is a case where the adults’ interests conflict directly with the kids’, and as I say, these workers’ situation is not analogous to teachers’. So simply calling for raises has complex and troubling implications.
Caroline

Labels:

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

The latest SFUSD consent decree monitor report

Carline's recent post on SFUSD monitor's 13 fave schools is excerpted from a court mandated report by Stuart Biegel, the consent decree monitor in the case San Francisco NAACP vs. SFUSD. Thanks to links from Eric Mar, I was able to obtain a full copy of the report here (PDF). Since many readers have trouble reading PDF documents, I took the liberty of transcribing the document to a more accessible format which you can read here

Go read it now. Its a nice short report with lots of interesting observations.

I was also able to determine that all of the current and past monitor reports can be accessed via this page: San Francisco Unified School District Desegregation, Reports of the Consent Decree Monitoring Team for the Years 1997-2005. This page is a treasure trove for SFUSD policy junkies. Enjoy.

Labels:

May 2005, June 2005, July 2005, August 2005, September 2005, October 2005, November 2005, December 2005, January 2006, February 2006, March 2006, April 2006, May 2006, June 2006, July 2006, August 2006, September 2006, October 2006, November 2006, December 2006, January 2007, February 2007, March 2007, April 2007, May 2007, June 2007, July 2007, August 2007, September 2007, October 2007, November 2007, December 2007, January 2008, February 2008, March 2008, April 2008,