Powerful speech given on the floor supporting teachers, police and firefighters rights to collective bargaining. And pointing out the absurdity of blaming working class people for the financial crisis this country is in.
Please watch this…..
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
This is why we need to educate the public on the outstanding job done by a quality, dedicated staff that services the children of Pleasantville every day!
Q. Currently public school teachers earn tenure after three years of teaching. Once granted tenure a teacher can only be dismissed for just cause and must be given a chance to offer a defense. Do you approve or disapprove of tenure for public school teachers?
Approve 40%
Disapprove 58%
Q. The Christie administration is proposing to change how teachers are evaluated. Evaluations would depend in part on how well students do on statewide tests, as well as on classroom observations, student work and other measures. Is this a fair or unfair way to evaluate teachers?
Fair 60%
Unfair 37%
Q. Under this proposal, teachers would no longer automatically get tenure, and would risk losing tenure if they receive poor evaluations. Do you approve or disapprove linking tenure to these evaluations?
Approve 64%
Disapprove 32%
Q. The administration also proposes to link teacher pay increases to improved student test scores. Some additional consideration would be given for teaching in high-need schools and in subjects where there are teacher shortages. Do you approve or disapprove of this proposal?
Approve 60%
Disapprove 35%
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
New Jersey Voters Favor Christie Teacher Tenure Reform Proposals
OK with using test scores as part of teacher evaluation
ATTENTION POLITICAL, ASSIGNMENT EDITORS, Professor David Redlawsk may be contacted at 319-400-1134, 732-932-9384, ext. 285, or redlawsk@rutgers.edu. Visit http://eagletonpoll.blogspot.com for a link to specific questions and full tables.
The Christie administration wants classroom observations to be part of teacher tenure evaluations.
NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J – New Jersey voters generally support key planks in Gov. Chris Christie’s proposals to reform teacher tenure and pay, according to a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll released today. Families with school-age children and those without support reforms that would eliminate lifetime tenure, change how teachers are evaluated and tie pay to performance. While public employee union households want no change, others strongly disagree.
“While some voters, especially those who feel negatively toward the governor are dubious about the proposals, for the most part New Jerseyans seem to embrace his ideas,” said David Redlawsk, director of the Rutgers-Eagleton Poll and professor of political science at Rutgers University.
The poll of 912 New Jersey adults was conducted among both landline and cell phone households Feb. 24-26, with a margin of error of +/- 3.3 percentage points. A weighted subsample of 811 registered voters is reported here, with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percentage points.
Strong opposition to current teacher tenure policies
After being briefed on the current K-12 teacher tenure system, 58 percent of registered voters disapprove of the tenure policies while only 40 percent approve. In a Rutgers-Eagleton Poll last October, just 28 percent approved tenure when told some believe it prevents bad teachers from being removed, rejecting the idea that it is necessary for academic freedom.
“Taken together, these results tell us that New Jerseyans are nuanced in their response to tenure,” said Redlawsk. “When tenure is presented as providing due process, it gains more support than when it is described as a choice between academic freedom and protection of bad teachers. But in either case, a majority of voters doesn’t like it.”
Public employee union households are stronger supporters of tenure: two-thirds approve the status quo. Private union members disagree, however, with only 40 percent approving and 55 percent disapproving. Among nonunion households, 34 percent approve and 64 percent disapprove.
There are no differences between households with school-age children and those without, but partisan differences loom large, the poll found. Democrats, by a 2-to-1 margin over Republicans (53 percent to 26 percent), support current tenure policies. Independents are closer to Republicans on tenure, with only 36 percent in favor.
Personal feelings about Christie also strongly predict opposition to tenure: 21 percent of respondents who approve of the governor agree with the current tenure system versus 56 percent of those who disapprove of Christie.
“The governor’s tenure reform package is closely connected to him, since he is not only its most visible cheerleader, but has been vocal in attacking the current system,” said Redlawsk.
Comprehensive teacher evaluations including test scores welcomed
The administration’s proposed changes to tenure include evaluating teachers on such indicators as standardized test scores, classroom observations and schoolwide student performance. Six-in-10 voters call this a fair approach, while 37 percent say it is unfair.
As with tenure itself, party identification helps predict support for the policy. Republicans are 12 points more likely to say the proposal is fair, though even 55 percent of Democrats support the idea. But respondents’ impression of Christie is an even stronger predictor once again. Three-quarters of voters who like the governor say these changes in evaluation standards would be fair. But support drops precipitously among those who view Christie negatively. These voters are distinctly opposed to the plan: 44 percent see it as fair while 53 percent say it is unfair. And among public employee union households, only 36 percent see the proposal as fair.
Voters want tenure tied to teacher evaluations
New Jersey voters also support the administration’s proposal to make it harder for teachers to gain tenure and easier to lose it. Nearly two-thirds want tenure linked directly to positive or negative teacher evaluations. Again, liking Christie drives support even higher, to 81 percent, while those who dislike the governor are evenly split, 48 percent approving to 50 percent disapproving.
Concurrently, voters recognize that “one size does not fit all” when it comes to evaluations. More than eight-in-10 agree adjustments should be made for teachers who teach where “children struggle and may not perform well” on state tests. Neither partisanship nor personal feelings about Christie change this response.
“New Jerseyans clearly accept Governor Christie’s claims that the current system is broken, and thus needs to be reformed,” said Redlawsk. “At the same time, they want these reforms to be fairly applied, recognizing that some teachers have a tougher time than others.”
Pay should be tied to scores and other indicators
Garden Staters strongly believe teachers’ pay should be tied to new standards. The towns in which they teach as well as their subjects or areas of specialization also should be considered. Sixty percent of respondents approve linking pay to evaluations, while 35 percent disapprove. Almost three-quarters of Christie supporters back the measure, while only half of those with an unfavorable impression of the governor agree.
The findings are substantially different from reactions to using only test scores to determine teacher pay. Last October’s Rutgers-Eagleton Poll found that only 32 percent of respondents would support a proposal to link teacher pay solely to student test scores.
“Last time, we found little support for basing pay directly on test scores,” said Redlawsk. “Now a more holistic approach is clearly supported, allowing tests to play a role, but not be the only basis for rewarding teachers.”
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
NJ EDUCATORS RELEASE REPORT ON TENURE, TEACHER EVALUATION
Newark NJ — March 2, 2011
EQuATE, a group of NJ educators formed in response to Governor Christie’s Executive Order on NJ Educator Effectiveness , has issued a report with a series of recommendations on tenure reform and teacher evaluation. The report
is titled: Creating a Better System: Recommendations for a Systemic Approach to Improving Educator Effectiveness from Concerned Practitioners and Policymakers.
The group was led by Montgomery Township Superintendent Earl Kim and drew “membership from the research community, parents, boards of education, school leaders, policymakers and teachers who have demonstrated considerable success in improving large complex systems in the public and private sectors.” EQuATE members are listed on p. 11 of the report.
EQuATE presented its draft recommendations to the Governor’s Task Force last month. Briefly summarized, EQuATE recommends that the Department of Education and the Administration:
The EQuATE report summarizes current research on teacher evaluation and effectiveness and compares the strengths and weaknesses of state and district plans that have been offered as national models. It cautions against one-size-fits-all state mandates and over-reliance on standardized test scores as the basis for high stakes decisions about tenure, compensation and retention. Instead it recommends that the state conduct several pilot projects that use multiple measures of teacher effectiveness and nationally recognized standards for professional practice.
The group also recommends that districts develop Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) processes modeled on Montgomery County, Maryland’s Professional Growth System. PAR processes are locally negotiated labor/management agreements that provide novice and under-performing teachers with a “supportive yet consequential professional improvement plan.” This option would include a waiver from state tenure regulations to implement a locally negotiated evaluation process that could lead to recommendations for remediation, termination or contract renewal.
EQuATE plans to participate in the developing debate around tenure reform and teacher evaluation. The recommendations of the Governor’s Task Force, which were due March 1, have not been made public.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
VIDEO OF PRESIDENT OF WISCONSIN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
Madison — Who will blink first?
Neither side is budging in Wisconsin’s epic fight over union rights, but at some point the dispute must come to a head. And Tuesday could prove to be a crucial day.
Gov. Scott Walker says that is the deadline for the his budget-repair bill to pass because it includes a $165 million bond restructuring needed to shore up problems in the fiscal year that ends June 30. Tuesday is also the day Walker will deliver his two-year budget – one that will cut aid to schools and local governments by more than $1 billion, he said Sunday in television appearances.
Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Monona) has questioned the accuracy of Tuesday’s deadline, but Walker has said he will have to soon lay off 1,500 state workers – and more later – if the bill doesn’t pass soon.
Miller and his fellow Senate Democrats left the state Feb. 17 to prevent passage of the budget-repair bill, and they have given no indication of when they will return.
“I think the end game became very complicated when the Democrats left the state,” said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist.
The move by senators was successful in the short term, Franklin said. But since neither side is receding from its position, Democrats will have difficulty in finding a reason to return, he said.
Walker’s bill would fill a $137 million hole in the current fiscal year; require public workers to pay more for their pensions and health care; eliminate the ability of public employee unions to collectively bargain over anything but wages; and give Walker’s administration broad powers to reshape state health care programs.
Republicans control the Senate 19-14, but 20 senators must be present to pass spending bills like the budget-repair bill. The bill passed the Assembly 51-17 on Friday, but can’t get through the Senate until at least one Democrat returns.
None have offered hints on when that might happen. Asked Sunday when he would return, Sen. Chris Larson (D-Milwaukee) replied, “Good question.”
He spoke by phone after issuing a news release that listed him as attending a UW-Milwaukee forum Monday about a bill to require people to show photo ID to vote.
“As you can probably guess, I will not be there” in person, Larson said. He might participate by phone or over the web.
Senators may feel pressure from the public to return on a number of fronts. One example: Sens. Lena Taylor and Tim Carpenter, both Milwaukee Democrats, are members of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District’s 11-member commission, which is scheduled to meet Monday.
When Walker first released his budget-repair bill, his administration said it had to be passed by last Friday. The administration later said lawmakers had until Saturday, and Walker has now settled on Tuesday as the deadline.
An exact deadline isn’t clear, but a Feb. 22 memo from the non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau suggests it is around Tuesday.
That memo says one firm deadline comes March 16 because of requirements to transfer funds within the state budget under current law. But it also says two weeks before then the administration needs to create an official statement for the bond issue, secure an opinion from bond counsel, get a bond rating from independent agencies and take bids for issuing the bonds.
This Wednesday is exactly two weeks from the March 16 deadline.
Walker’s plan would delay a $165 million debt payment that is due May 1 and instead spread the payment over 10 years. The measure will increase interest payments by $14 million total over the next two years.
Similar bond restructurings have been used by elected officials from both parties over the last decade to help shore up the state budget.
On the campaign trail, Walker railed against using tricks to balance budgets. Walker spokesman Cullen Werwie said the restructuring was not a gimmick and that the money that was being freed up could be put toward outstanding obligations, such as a $58 million payment Wisconsin owes Minnesota under a scrapped tax-reciprocity deal.
In a phone interview from Illinois on Friday, Miller said Walker’s administration could start work on paperwork for issuing the bonds now, even though the bill hasn’t passed. “There’s not a real deadline,” Miller said.
Walker has threatened to issue layoff notices if the bill doesn’t pass soon. That would start with 1,500 state employees and could escalate to 12,000 state, local and school employees, he has said.
But Walker has not said exactly when he would issue pink slips.
“I’m going to push that back as far as possible,” Walker said Sunday on “Upfront with Mike Gousha” on WISN-TV (Channel 12).
He also told Gousha it is essential to pass his budget-repair bill because it will give local governments and schools the ability to find savings so they can withstand the cuts he will announce Tuesday when he proposes his 2011-’13 budget. Those cuts will total more than $1 billion over two years, “most of which is in the schools,” Walker said.
Gousha asked what the impact of the budget cuts would be on governmental bodies that already have agreements in place for the coming fiscal year that don’t include the concessions. Milwaukee Public Schools has a four-year contract with its teachers that doesn’t expire until 2013. The agreement was ratified last year before Walker came into office.
“It’s the reason why we put the warning signs out early on,” Walker said.
He recommended that entities that have contracts already in place seek to reopen and modify the agreements with their employee unions to get concessions that could avoid layoffs.
But, according to an analysis of the governor’s budget-repair bill by the Wisconsin Association of School Boards, the provisions that strip most public workers of their bargaining rights go into effect when an existing collective bargaining agreement expires or is extended, modified or renewed. That might make local unions reluctant to reopen their agreements, regardless of the possibility of layoffs, if the bill becomes law.
Education groups have warned their members that the governor’s budget could include as much as a $900 million reduction in general school aid, which is the largest pool of money distributed by the state for K-12 education. They also have said the governor could recommend a decrease in state-imposed revenue caps of up to $500 per child.
Gousha asked Walker if the $900 million number was true.
“Yeah,” Walker said. “Overall, there will be over a billion dollars cut when it comes to schools, local governments across the board.”
The budget-repair bill would require most state, local and school employees to pay half their pension costs – 5.8% of pay for state workers – and at least 12% of their health care costs. It would also take away most collective bargaining rights for all public workers except police, firefighters and state troopers.
Specifically, they would be able to bargain over wages only, but their raises would be capped at the rate of inflation unless a higher increase was approved in a voter referendum. Public employees could not be forced to make payments to unions, as they currently are, and unions would have to hold annual elections to keep their organizations intact.
Public workers have filled the Capitol for two weeks to protest, saying they could accept the financial concessions but not the loss of the bulk of their collective bargaining rights. Walker questioned their sincerity on accepting concessions in his appearances on Gousha’s show and on NBC’s “Meet the Press” because unions have rushed to get local contracts approved before the bill becomes law.
“We’ve seen union local after union local . . . rush through contracts that had no pension contributions,” Walker said on “Meet the Press.”
But union locals are simply following the state’s current law, said Rick Badger, executive director of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 40. Badger’s group represents local government workers around the state, and he said his members are committed to the concessions.
“If the governor would sit down with us, we could resolve all this,” he said.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
It’s official. Legislators in both parties have officially introduced pension reform legislation.
As this debate heats up NJEA is working to ensure that:
The Democrat’s bill:
The bill #: S-2696. Makes various changes to PERS, TPAF, PFRS, SPRS, JRS including to board membership, control of investments, adjustments to member contribution, adjustments to benefits, and benefit factor for TPAF and PERS.
The sponsor: Senate President Steve Sweeney. Assembly Speaker Oliver is expected to introduce the Assembly version soon.
What it says: Text officially became available last night. You can read the bill at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2010/Bills/S3000/2696_I1.HTM
What we know: Here is a brief outline:
NJEA is at the table: NJEA has had several meetings with other public sector unions and the Senate staff members drafting the bill. NJEA and its coalition partners continue to have concerns about the bill and will continue to work closely with the sponsors on amendments.
The Republican bill was just introduced and text for it is not yet publicly available. Both the Assembly and Senate versions have been assigned numbers.
The bill #: A-3796 / S-2705 Makes changes to retirement benefits for members of the State- administered retirement systems and eliminates future COLAs.
The sponsors: Assemblymen O’Scanlon and Chiusano. Senator Pennachio.
What it says: No text is available. NJEA will try to secure a copy today from the sponsors. When it becomes available on line you can find it at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillView.asp.
What we know: Only what is reported in the press:
NJEA has not been at the table: The Republicans have neither shared their proposal with us nor invited our input thus far.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
TRENTON — A bill that would give tax credits to companies that pay for poor students to attend private or parochial schools passed an Assembly committee Thursday after six hours of impassioned debate. Supporters of the Opportunity Scholarship Act argued children trapped in chronically failing schools deserve better options, but critics countered the program would drain resources from a public system that desperately needs the money.
The commerce committee hearing was packed, with some backers of the bill wearing clerical garb or yarmulkes, while some opponents wore yellow buttons bearing the name of their loose grass-roots coalition, “Save Our Schools.’’
Committee Chairman Albert Coutinho, D-Essex, acknowledged that the pilot program would not solve the bigger problems afflicting troubled public schools, but he said it was time to give new ideas a chance. He noted the proposed $360 million in scholarships, to be awarded over five years, account for about one-third of 1 percent of anticipated state and local education spending over the same period. “We need to try everything possible because this is a crisis,” Coutinho said before the committee approved the bill on a 5-0 vote.
The five-year pilot program would cover 13 districts, including Paterson and Passaic. The numbers involved keep changing, but the Assembly version would grow yearly to cover up to 19,000 children in its fifth year. The Senate bill covers more than double that number for $800 million in scholarships. Companies would provide grants of $6,000 to $9,000 per student, and earn tax credits equal to the full amounts of their donations.
Newark Mayor Cory Booker, the first speaker, pleaded with legislators to “liberate” thousands of children from the “deep, dark quicksand of despair” that comes with being stuck in awful schools in a city where only about half of public school students graduate. While critics complained the bill lacked sufficient accountability measures to ensure that private institutions would do a better job than the public schools, Booker said parents know which schools work well.
“Don’t infantilize my parents and tell me they don’t know how to make choices about what’s best for their kids,” he said. Critics of the bill lambasted it as “un-American” for violating the separation of church and state by giving taxpayer resources to religious schools. Several speakers predicted that many private schools would either discriminate against special-needs students or not be able to serve them, leaving the most vulnerable children behind. Some also said it wasn’t truly targeted to help the poorest students, because children from families that earn up to 250 percent of the federal poverty threshold — $55,125 for a family of four — would be eligible to participate.
“This voucher scheme would hurt struggling public school districts by removing both funding and the easiest-to-educate students,” said Julia Rubin, a Save Our Schools member. The SOS coalition also included the Education Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union, the League of Women Voters and the Paterson Education Fund. Walter C. Farrell Jr., a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said he had researched voucher programs in Milwaukee, Cleveland, Florida and New Orleans. “Studies by those supportive of and opposed to vouchers confirmed that voucher schools do no better at educating low-income children than do public schools,” he said. “Most often they perform worse.”
Several representatives of Catholic schools, however, said their schools taught children better for less money. Germaine Fritz, president of Benedictine Academy in Elizabeth, said tuition for its roughly 150 students is $6,525 — which doesn’t cover the full cost of educating a child — and that 100 percent of its students graduated and 98 percent went to college. She rejected critics’ claim that parochial schools would cherry-pick the top students.
“We take children who are three or four years behind grade level,” Fritz said in an interview. “We have a number of kids who have impairments. We work very hard with them and they stick it out. One of the advantages is we’re smaller.”
One of the bill’s sponsors, Assemblyman Gary Schaer, D-Passaic, said four Catholic schools had recently closed within four miles of his home, adding hundreds of additional children to struggling public schools. He said helping children stay in private schools through the scholarship act would cost less than having them switch to the city’s public schools, which he said often don’t serve them well enough. He said students in Passaic, one of the poorest cities nationwide for its size, often graduate “unable to write a complete sentence in any language.”
Before the hearing, Senate Majority Leader Barbara Buono, D-Middlesex, made an impassioned pitch against the bill, saying it was a misguided step toward privatizing education. “We can improve our public schools, but you don’t do that by abandoning them and disinvesting in them,” she said. “I will fight with every fiber in my being to make sure” the bill doesn’t pass.
Earlier this week, Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver, D-Essex, said that if the bill passed the commerce committee, she expected to assign it to a second committee rather than posting it to a vote by the full Assembly. She said she had several concerns about the bill and didn’t “think something like this can be fast-tracked.”
“The biggest question mark is the governor’s budget,” Coutinho said, referring to the 2012 budget to be announced Feb. 22. “Serious cuts to urban public education could complicate the passage of this bill.”
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
Published on Friday, Jan. 28, 2011
On January 20, the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee voted to release S-1872, a private school voucher bill known to supporters as the Opportunity Scholarship Act. This bill would divert up to $1 billion in tax revenue away from public schools and into the hands of private and parochial school operators.
Now comes word that the Assembly version (A-2810) is scheduled to be heard on February 3 in the Commerce and Economic Development Committee. Should it pass that committee, only the Assembly Budget Committee stands between this bad bill and possible votes by the entire Senate and Assembly.
Time is short. NJEA members and all those who support public education in New Jersey must act now to stop this harmful legislation which drains much-needed resources from our public schools.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
Jan. 28, 2011
On January 20, the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee, by a 8-5 vote, approved S-1872, which would create New Jersey’s first-ever private school voucher program. Don’t be fooled by its title (the so-called “Opportunity Scholarship Act”). This is a voucher bill, pure and simple. You may hear people claim that corporations are paying for it with donations. That is not true, because corporations will get a dollar-for-dollar tax credit from the state treasury for their donations, as an NJEA chart shows. It will cost corporations nothing, with the entire tab picked up by state taxpayers. The ugly truth is that the $1 billion in education cuts in this year’s state budget have already led to higher property taxes, and diverting another $1 billion to private and religious schools will only drive them higher. This legislation now moves to Assembly committees as A-2810, and if it ever becomes law – and Governor Christie has vowed to sign it – it will drain up to $1 billion from the state treasury for diversion to private and religious schools, while public schools struggle under the impact of at least $1 billion in state funding cuts. Please visit njea.org to get more information on this proposal. NJEA is fighting back, with a massive media blitz and statewide lobbying effort, which we need each and every one of our members to join. We need you to enlist parents and others who care about public education in this struggle, which threatens the very future of public education in New Jersey. Our radio spot will be up and running statewide on Monday morning, and our full-page ad will be in every daily newspaper on Tuesday, Feb. 1. Print it out and share it with your colleagues. We will also have ads up on numerous websites, including Facebook and Google. Things are moving fast, and we are now looking at a critical Feb. 3 vote in the Assembly Commerce and Economic Development Committee. If it passes there, it heads to the Assembly Budget Committee, which is the final hurdle before it heads to the full Assembly and Senate. This is a terrible piece of legislation, and I encourage you to read a fact sheet that explains just how bad it is. And, if you want to learn even more, read this terrific article by former State Senator and Assistant Education Commissioner Gordon MacInnes, which exposes this bill for what it is. Please get informed, get involved, and get active in the fight to beat back this attack on public education and your future. We need every member in every local to join this fight. Thank you! |
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
Watch a video of the Democratic leadership’s response to Christie’s State of the State:
Filed under: Uncategorized | Comments Off
NJEA News
