Sign up for our newsletter

Newark Union Approves Merit Pay

“Newark Teachers Vote ‘Yes’ on Precedent-Setting Contract”
by John Mooney
NJ Spotlight
November 15, 2012

After a year of negotiations and three weeks of sometimes-brutal internal debate, Newark public school teachers and other staff ratified a historic labor agreement yesterday that will reshape pay and many rules for New Jersey’s largest school district.

Nearly 2,900 members of the Newark Teachers Union voted in the day-long balloting at the NTU’s downtown offices, a nearly unprecedented turnout, and the vote was closer than many expected. The final tally was 1,767 in favor to 1,088 against, or roughly 62 percent to 38 percent.

Union leaders who had backed the deal appeared as much relieved as celebratory when the numbers were announced, citing both the accomplishment of the pact but also the sizable numbers not on board.

Joseph Del Grosso, the NTU’s longtime president, said the agreement is only the first step in developing a workable system to fulfill it. That includes new teacher and staff evaluations and a program for performance bonuses to the most exemplary members, the controversial centerpiece of the deal.

“It’s a great vote, but it’s going to take a lot of work to put this together, that’s the tough part,” Del Grosso said.

Looking tired from a long day in which voting started at 6:30 a.m., Del Grosso said he didn’t entirely blame a third of his voting membership for casting “no” votes.

“It’s a difficult contract; it’s a leap of faith, it really is,” he said. “They took the leap, which I am grateful for. But we now have to show the members how it will work.”

Job Well Done

The plaudits came in from elsewhere, including Newark Superintendent Cami Anderson, who had staked much of her own standing on final passage of the deal.

“Congratulations to the teachers, parent coordinators, teacher’s aides, child study teams, and paraprofessionals who will benefit from the success of this contract, and especially to the students and families of Newark,” she said in a statement released by her office.

“As a lifelong educator, I am thrilled for our teachers here in Newark and for the teaching profession as a whole,” she said.

Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, the national union for the NTU, issued her own press release within minutes of the final vote. Weingarten, one of the country’s preeminent labor leaders, had participated in the final negotiations.

“This contract demonstrates the willingness of Newark’s teachers and the school district to find innovative ways to ensure that quality and experience are recognized and rewarded, making it a full, professional compensation system,” Weingarten said.

“When you put all this together, you come out with a unique, innovative plan that will help boost teaching and learning and will strengthen the teaching profession,” her statement said. “Newark can now be added to the growing list of districts nationwide that are using collective bargaining as vehicles for education reform.”

Beyond Bonuses

The five-year contract has a number of highlights beyond just the performance bonuses, which would bestow an extra $5,000 to those gaining the highest evaluation ratings. They would gain an additional $5,000 on top of that if they work in a low-performing school, and another $2,500 for working in a high-need field like science and math.

In addition, it includes an average pay raise of close to 13 percent over the next three years, one of the higher increases in the state. At the same time, the union would gain a say in those evaluations, with teachers part of the actual evaluation teams, and checks and balances for monitoring the results and providing a process for appeals.

But the membership’s misgivings were evident in interviews with nearly a dozen teachers and other staff as they left the union hall after voting in the late afternoon, many with their children in tow.

Most of those willing to talk said they voted in favor of the deal, but some with concerns over a number of uncertainties still to be resolved with the development of the evaluation system and the peer-review process.

And most concurred it was likely the best deal they were going to get in the state-run district with Gov. Chris Christie at the helm.

“It really was a no-win for us,” said a kindergarten teacher with 20 years in the district who asked not to be identified. “We either turn it down and start over with a governor who won’t hear anything else from us. Or we vote ‘yes,’ and we take whatever they give us.”

“At least we now have something on the table, like it or not,” she said.

Others weren’t so hesitant in their support, including Rosemary Taylor, a psychologist at the McKinley Elementary School and 25-year veteran of the district. She said the performance pay was worth attempting, noting that the extra money could prove a powerful incentive.

“I think it is something that should be tried,” she said. “I think people are worried about who will be judging them, will they be judged fairly. I just trust enough to say let’s try it. Nothing is set in cement.”

And still others said after two years without a contract or any raises, it was time to get what they could. Teachers with advanced degrees could opt to remain on a standard salary track that would not have the performance pay, with 30 days to decide.

“We have been without a contract for so long,” said Leonie Cammock, a fourth grade teacher at the Hawthorne Avenue Elementary School. “For those like us who went back to school and have student loans to pay, we have an added burden and what we have can stretch so far.”

Selling Out

A dissident faction of the NTU had emerged out of the protracted negotiations, openly challenging Del Grosso and the union’s leadership for what they said was selling out their members. Called the Newark Education Workers Caucus, the group has become an ever-vocal presence in public meetings, contending that the deal will only split the union at a time when Anderson is closing and consolidating schools.

Several of its leaders were on hand for much of the balloting yesterday, acting as unofficial poll watchers.

“If we had a multimillion national organization behind us [the national AFT], we would have had a much better outcome,” said Brandon Rippey, a history and sociology teacher at Science Park High School. “They spent a lot of money to convince their members.”

“But the members are scared, fearful, ambivalent,” he said. “I think ambivalent is the best word. They had no confidence in the leadership to do anything better. This is the best we could get.”

Push by D.C. Teachers Union Sign of Worsening Environment for Charters

CER Press Release
Washington, D.C.
November 15, 2012

Center for Education Reform Founder and President Jeanne Allen provided the following statement on the announcement by D.C. teachers unions that they would press to unionize charter school teachers.

“Washington, D.C. has traditionally provided the fertile ground charter schools need to thrive, but the push by the D.C. teachers unions is another ominous sign that D.C. is becoming a less hospitable environment for charters. A fundamental reason for charters succeeding where traditional schools have failed is the freedom from onerous union restrictions.

“This announcement followed closely on the heels of news that D.C. Public Schools would close 20 public schools without giving them a surplus designation. The school system would be able to allow the buildings to decay rather than allowing charters to open, despite a law that says that charter schools should receive equal operational dollars and equity in facilities.

“The forces arraying against charter schools are not strong enough to thwart the will of parents, who insist on better choices for their children. But it’s a shame there must always be a fight.”

Teachers’ Unions Win a Defensive Victory

by Mike Antonucci
Intercepts
November 2012

I toyed with the idea of writing an entire blog post this morning on how the GOP recaptured the Wisconsin state senate, since NEA seemed to think control of that chamber was such a big deal back in June, but I won’t be (such) a wise-ass.

The unions did what they needed to do. They helped re-elect the President and they brought to a halt any momentum there may have been for more serious and wide-ranging threats to their power base. They defeated hostile ballot measures in California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan and South Dakota, and were even able to put a tax hike over the top in the Golden State. There will be no mass movement into voucher systems, merit pay, tenure reform and collective bargaining limits. Those are big wins.

From a practical standpoint, however, we have the same President, the same Secretary of Education, virtually the same Senate composition, virtually the same House composition, virtually the same split of governorships, and virtually the same split of state legislatures. And unlike 2008, there is no prospect of card check, stimulus packages and edujobs bills on the horizon.

Where NEA and AFT tried to gain ground, they experienced very tough sledding. They couldn’t get tax hikes for education passed in South Dakota or Arizona. They failed to enshrine collective bargaining in the Michigan constitution. Spread thin, they couldn’t stop charter initiatives in Georgia or Washington. It’s too soon to evaluate the effect of all the state legislative races, but nothing indicates an ideological shift toward renewed public sector hiring – the only thing that can replenish union membership.

In short, the unions drove the barbarians from the gates, but not across the border. NEA and AFT spent a lot of money to ensure another four years like the last four. Is that a good thing for them? We’ll see.

Mike Antonucci: Defensive Victory for Teachers Unions

The unions did what they needed to do. They helped re-elect the President and they brought to a halt any momentum there may have been for more serious and wide-ranging threats to their power base. They defeated hostile ballot measures in California, Florida, Idaho, Michigan and South Dakota, and were even able to put a tax hike over the top in the Golden State. There will be no mass movement into voucher systems, merit pay, tenure reform and collective bargaining limits. Those are big wins. READ MORE

Statement on Closure of D.C. Public Schools

Another Example of Charter Schools Not Receiving Equal Operational Dollars and Equity in Facilities

CER Press Release
Washington, D.C.
November 14, 2012

Center for Education Reform Founder and President Jeanne Allen made the following statement regarding the announcement that D.C. Public Schools proposes closing 19 facilities, and not giving the buildings a surplus designation.

“The Chancellor of D.C. Public Schools has gotten a pass from reformers because of her work on teacher evaluations, and for being tough on failure. But even in these she has shown herself more interested in fixing a system than boosting solutions – like charters – that will give children access to any good alternative. In this latest move, she is effectively sitting on buildings that belong to the public, not to the system. It provides yet another example of charter schools in D.C. not receiving equal operational dollars and equity when it comes to facilities, despite a law that explicitly says they should. Equity demands that all public school children share in the pie.

“Ms. Henderson has made it clear that she wants more control over charter schools. In this, the Council, which supports her, is not engaged in fighting for real justice for kids. Whereas the Mayor, the Council, the business community and parents once stood resolved that choice through charters would be an essential element of education in D.C., today they operate to preserve their power, not parent power.

“The recent school closure announcement should have fused the districts corrective action with expanded opportunity for kids. Instead the issues are divided, and so are our leaders.

“I urge the media to look closely at this incident and how it reveals a chasm between the Chancellor and the Council’s rhetoric and their actions. It’s time the Chancellor was asked to account for her unequal treatment of the public good.”

Los Angeles Charter Moratorium Rejected

“LAUSD rejects voluntary moratorium on new charter schools”
by Barbara Jones
Contra Costa Times
November 13, 2012

Following a flood of protests from parents and charter supporters, the Los Angeles Unified board on Tuesday soundly rejected a resolution seeking a voluntary moratorium on new charter applications while a strategic plan is developed to better govern their explosive growth.

Board member Steve Zimmer said he saw the need for an in-depth study of the district’s charter system, which now educates some 110,000 students and has thousands more on waiting lists. He wanted to monitor how well charter schools are educating students and ways to share methods for closing the achievement gap and boosting parental involvement.

“The milestone of 100,000 is a moment in which we should step back and reflect on what is working in our role as (charter) operator and what isn’t,” he said. “We need to have a real strategy and a real plan.”

But parents and charter supporters saw his resolution as a challenge to their right to choose the appropriate school for their child, with speakers sharing personal stories of how charters had changed their lives.

“You shouldn’t just vote against the resolution,” said parent Katrina George, whose handicapped son struggled at a traditional school but thrived once he was enrolled in a charter. “You should do the opposite and open more charters. At the end of the day, this should be about the kids.”

Zimmer’s colleagues said they’d tried to talk him out of pursuing the resolution, and Superintendent John Deasy said it was unnecessary.

“The work can be done without the resolution,” Deasy said.

In the end, Zimmer and board member Bennett Kayser cast the only yes votes for the resolution. Board member Marguerite Poindexter LaMotte had left during the debate and was not present for the vote.

Zimmer’s original resolution, introduced in September, called on the board to postpone or refer new charter applications to the Los Angeles County Office of Education. Critics noted that would be illegal, and he revised the proposal to ask charter operators to voluntarily hold off on submitting new applications until a timetable was in place for the suggested reforms.

Parents signed petitions and as many as 2,000 demonstrators flooded the street in front of LAUSD during a lunchtime protest. Most were gone by the time the board got through a lengthy agenda.

“We’re not the enemy,” said charter pioneer Joe Lucente, repeating comments he made during the demonstration. “Our very existence benefits all students, whether in traditional or charter schools… Don’t fear us, embrace us.”

The board also wrestled with arequest to renew the charter for Gabriella Charter, which shares space with Logan Span School in Echo Park. Parents from both schools – both of them thriving – said there just wasn’t room on the campus to meet the needs of the students.

The board OK’d the extension with the charter, which boasts an arts education program and an API of 894, with the understanding that Deasy will try to find additional space for Gabriella.

Zimmer said it was just this sort of situation – “a collision of goodness” – he wanted to avoid when he introduced his resolution.

“The system has become about competitionand not innovation,” he said.

“I want to know what we can do best when we collaborate.”

Board members Tamar Galatzan and Nury Martinez admonished Zimmer that he could not work around Proposition 39, the voter-approved measure that requires school districts to accommodate space requests from independent charters.

“Ten years ago, voters approved Prop. 39,” Martinez said. “To continue to have these debates when you know what the law is polarizes hundreds of thousands of parents … Be done with it, Mr. Zimmer.”

Letter to LAUSD Board: Updating Charter Authorizing and Oversight

November 13, 2012

Board of Education
Los Angeles Unified School District
333 South Beaudry Avenue, 24th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017

Dear Members of the Los Angeles Unified School Board:

I am writing you this morning to caution the Los Angeles Unified School Board on a measure that would set the city back over a decade in progress. The Resolution before you today, “Updating Charter Authorizing and Oversight,” proposed by Mr. Zimmer, lacks sound policy and would severely hurt a large population of students in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

The 110,000 students currently being served by charters authorized by LAUSD have not declined enrollment for the district, but rather, are students who have been retained by the district through the creation of options for parents and adding 232 charter schools to the district’s portfolio of educational offerings.

Requiring all charter schools to use the District’s ISIS system by January 1, 2013 is an unreasonable mandate and timeline that goes against the operational autonomy defined by California’s charter school law. It is commonly known that ISIS is a work in progress, full of bugs and lacks the technical support schools need to integrate. Charter schools can and have generated the data LAUSD needs using current structures and internal reporting mechanisms.

There’s also no question that charter schools are meeting performance goals and in most cases, are outperforming conventional district schools. Consider The Accelerated Schools boast a 93 percent four-year graduation rate. Granada Hills Charter High School serves nearly 4,300 students with an in-seat attendance rate of 97.4 percent. GHCHS scored an 878 on the 2012 API and is the only comprehensive high school in Los Angeles with an API above 850. These are just two examples out of 232 charter schools improving outcomes for your students.

In our nearly 20-year experience at the Center, the formation of a Charter Oversight Commission is not a sound policy for the District to adopt. Too often these commissions, while well intentioned, never get the projected results but cost more time and resources and as proposed in the resolution before you, is only a stall tactic to limit options for parents and the portfolio of schools LAUSD is known for offering.

Finally, we strongly urge you to not postpone the review of new charter school applications. There are thousands of parents in Los Angeles still on charter school waiting lists and it is important for this body to continue to explore ways to meet that demand. New charter schools play an important role in the robust charter school movement LAUSD has supported. Halting growth would set the city back at least a decade in progress.

The Center for Education Reform, since 1993, is the leading voice and advocate for lasting, substantive and structural education reform in the U.S. We know the nation looks to a majority of your charter schools as national models of success and both traditional public schools and charters across the country work to emulate these programs. We encourage you to continue to explore ways to share best practices that the charter sector has to offer LAUSD in its own backyard.

Respectfully,
Kara Kerwin
Vice President of External Affairs
 

CLICK HERE for board members’ emails and information about the RALLY TODAY at 11:00am!

Districts Wonder if Race to Top is Worth Cost

by Pauline Liu
Times Herald-Record
November 12, 2012

The federal Race to the Top competition is making school districts dole out far more money than they’re receiving from the program, according to school officials and experts.

For some districts, it’s wreaking havoc.

“Race to the Top has turned the district upside down,” said Monticello School Superintendent Daniel Teplesky. “The teachers are anxious.”

It seems that the program has teachers in Newburgh so anxious that some aired their grievances at a Board of Education meeting recently. “Teachers are depressed, demoralized, and that serves no one, especially not our students,” said teachers association president Art Plichta to the school board.

As for Newburgh Schools Superintendent Ralph Pizzo, he’s blaming mandates, though not specifically RTTT, for soaring costs that have put the district “roughly $10 million above the tax cap.”

In an open letter that he posted online a couple of weeks ago, he expressed concerns about cutting programs and closing a school. He did not return calls for comment.

There are a lot of changes, including a new teacher- and principal-evaluation system, a new curriculum that’s aligned with new learning standards as well as more tests for students and more training for teachers.

The costs of implementing RTTT have been outlined in a new report by Ken Mitchell, a schools superintendent in Rockland County.

He looks at districts in the Lower Hudson and offers hard numbers illustrating the huge disparity been what they actually receive from the program and what they must spend in order to participate in it.

The study was done for SUNY New Paltz’s Center for Research, Regional Education and Outreach and has been posted on its website.

“This is what happens when you have folks running federal and state educational systems, when they have never really been around the systems they are purporting to run,” said Middletown School Superintendent Ken Eastwood, who called the study “dead on.”

Middletown, as well as Monticello, Florida and Wallkill all expect to spend somewhere in the neighborhood of $250,000 this school year in order to meet the requirements of the program.

Some districts, such as Wallkill, will spend as much as nine times what they actually receive. Wallkill’s annual grant is $25,000. Florida’s annual grant is $4,415.

Still, superintendents are not about to pan the program totally.

“We believe the changes being promoted are responsive to the changing world for which we are preparing our students,” said Florida Schools Superintendent Diane Munro.

“While we are deeply concerned about the costs, we see the potential payoff for the investment, and are hopeful that the state will take action on the many other unfunded mandates that drain funds from instructional programs.”

Likewise, Wallkill Schools Superintendent Bill Hecht feels the program is worthwhile.

“I like the Common Core curriculum and the implementation of teacher and principal evaluations,” said Hecht. “My concern is that the timeline is an aggressive timeline that is causing stress on the system.”

While the jury is still out on whether the program will work, administrators are continuing their efforts to put it in place. “Once the bureaucratic setup of it is done, it will have to be reviewed and … it may take the four years to evaluate to see if it’s effective or not,” said Mary-Stephanie Corsones, Kingston’s assistant superintendent for curriculum.

Missed Opportunity: Education Reform Could’ve Been Winning Issue

So where was the issue of education reform during the presidential campaign? Republicans didn’t even visit the cities that owe their education salvation to this leadership. While strong reformers who are Republicans continue to run and win elections in states, Republicans at the national level seem not to understand that in supporting educational choice they are supporting a civil right, and that they are the leaders in this support. Republican embrace of individual freedom and liberties over government at the local, state and federal level is an anchor for education reform. And it is repulsive to those who manage and protect the status quo.

Tuesday’s results are not the only wake-up call. Here’s another one: Democrats are working hard to own this issue. Do they deserve the credit? Will they advance the movement? No, but President Obama and his party have vowed to make their party the party of education reform. A recent missive from the Democrats for Education Reform declared Obama “EdReformer in Chief.” He has done little to merit such a title.

We’ve praised Obama’s candor and vocalization of the problems facing American education. We’ve commended the power his Education secretary has wielded to talk about issues that most reformers embrace. But his Administration is conspicuously quiet on the issue of real school choice. And while they talk about ensuring real performance pay for teachers, underneath the talk, the teachers unions are still in charge.

Think about the Democratic Party and this bedrock constituency. Unions once helped those most in need, but today they are keeping those poorest children, those who cannot afford to change zip codes or pay tuition to escape, in failing schools.

President Obama and his majority at the national level continue to oppose attempts to give those students choices. Absent leadership, the nation sits quietly as we shutter hundreds of exceptional Catholic schools that have educated Black and Latino communities, and that educated the Greatest Generation prior to them.

And what were we treated to this election cycle? While Romney’s platform supported parents and students over union prerogatives, neither candidate ran on the issue of ensuring children are educated by whatever means necessary. It almost seems it’s not politically correct to acknowledge that Republicans do something about education reform, while Democrats are forced to negotiate with their supporters, always to reduced effect.

So now what? READ MORE

Education Reform Could Have Been A Winning Issue

by Jeanne Allen
Politico
November 10, 2012

The question of the week seems to be, how can the GOP appeal to a wider variety of Americans? Here’s an idea: They can boast more about their leadership on education reform.

Education reform is and has always been a bipartisan issue. But while the movement numbers a handful of Democrats among its truly committed, it was built on the intellectual energy of conservatives, and has been propelled by the energy, for the most part, of Republican elected officials. Success in making fundamental changes to educate poor and minority children and strengthening the quality of education for all kids has been, and continues to be, primarily a Republican achievement.

It is positive that many people in the myriad and growing number of education reform groups and foundations have differing political views. But it was, and continues to be, Republicans who shattered the common myths that have stymied reform. For decades, these myths – about class sizes mattering, about teacher tenure being critical for success, about money being the answer, to name a few – had been propped up by traditional civil rights and child-centered organizations.

Republicans challenged the education establishment to account for decades of failure and started talking about providing alternatives, and about closing failing public schools. The initial impetus – the first ideas and first law for charter schools – were from liberal academics and a liberal Minnesota. But it was conservatives who took up the banner and provided the leadership that led to the best charter school laws in the most populous states. It was Republican governors who found common ground with African-American democrats to bring about publicly funded scholarships for kids – vouchers – in Milwaukee and Cleveland, a trend followed in fourteen states.

Some Democratic state legislators bolstered the work of their Republican Governors. But one wouldn’t have happened without the other.

So where was this issue during the presidential campaign? Republicans didn’t even visit the cities that owe their education salvation to this leadership. While strong reformers who are Republicans continue to run and win elections in states, Republicans at the national level seem not to understand that in supporting educational choice they are supporting a civil right, and that they are the leaders in this support. Republican embrace of individual freedom and liberties over government at the local, state and federal level is an anchor for education reform. And it is repulsive to those who manage and protect the status quo.

Tuesday’s results are not the only wake-up call. Here’s another one: Democrats are working hard to own this issue. Do they deserve the credit? Will they advance the movement? No, but President Obama and his party have vowed to make their party the party of education reform. A recent missive from the Democrats for Education Reform declared Obama “EdReformer in Chief.” He has done little to merit such a title.

We’ve praised Obama’s candor and vocalization of the problems facing American education. We’ve commended the power his Education secretary has wielded to talk about issues that most reformers embrace. But his Administration is conspicuously quiet on the issue of real school choice. And while they talk about ensuring real performance pay for teachers, underneath the talk, the teachers unions are still in charge.

Think about the Democratic Party and this bedrock constituency. Unions once helped those most in need, but today they are keeping those poorest children, those who cannot afford to change zip codes or pay tuition to escape, in failing schools.

President Obama and his majority at the national level continue to oppose attempts to give those students choices. Absent leadership, the nation sits quietly as we shutter hundreds of exceptional Catholic schools that have educated Black and Latino communities, and that educated the Greatest Generation prior to them.

And what were we treated to this election cycle? While Romney’s platform supported parents and students over union prerogatives, neither candidate ran on the issue of ensuring children are educated by whatever means necessary. It almost seems it’s not politically correct to acknowledge that Republicans do something about education reform, while Democrats are forced to negotiate with their supporters, always to reduced effect.

So now what? Republicans should be loudly boasting of their continuing leadership. They can rip a page from the playbook of Jeb Bush. He challenged the education establishment, pushed and later enacted school choice programs and tough evaluations for schools and teachers in Florida, and won handily – twice! In the last election cycle, solid, reform-minded Governors were elected in 18 of 37 states. This election brought another two. These Governors appealed to minority voters who, exit polls tell us, helped President Obama. They could help future Republican candidates.

And think of the women voters who helped sweep President Obama back into the White House. Rather than hearing about vital education issues, women were told someone was tampering with their rights.

This was a colossal missed opportunity: Our polls show it is women between the ages of 25 and 45, not yet moms but intending to be, who consider educational choice almost as critical as any other issue. The Romney education agenda was more in line with the views of women, Hispanics and even African-Americans. But we only began to hear about in the final days of the campaign. By then it was too late to go to Cleveland to discuss the importance Republicans place on empowering parents to make better education choices. Too late to articulate that Republican leadership yielded, and continues to yield, the strongest charter laws. Too late to make the point that performance pay and accountability are issues Republicans took up, in the face of strenuous objection from the unions (who campaign for their opponents).

This is what they should have done. This is what they still could do. Next time.