| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Njspotlight.com ‘Teacher Seniority Policy Continues to Vex Administration Attempts at Reform’ br
The Record – Columnist Alfred ‘Doblin: Waiting for Superman, finding Clark Kent’
Star Ledger ‘Ex-education chief Schundler openly blames Gov. Christie for Race to the Top loss’
Njspotlight.com ‘Teacher Seniority Policy Continues to Vex Administration Attempts at Reform’
Four little words -- ‘last hired, first fired’ -- protect teachers, but do they plague reform?
, October 8 in Education |Post a Comment
It’s known in education circles as the “last hired, first fired” clause for teacher layoffs, where seniority rules and dismissals start with the least experienced laid off first, no matter how good or bad they are.
Related Links
In New Jersey, it’s one sentence in state law, technically Title 18A:28-10, that dates back to 1967.
Ultimately, it looks like the policy principle that touched off New Jersey’s Race to the Top drama -- and a point of debate not likely to fade anytime soon.
Schundler Before Senate Panel
In new testimony over the failed federal applications, ousted education commissioner Bret Schundler yesterday brought forward to a Senate panel more detail as to what led to his disagreements with Gov. Chris Christie, ultimately costing Schundler his job.
And for all the talk of the politics and “vendettas” along the way and a certain editing error that cost a critical five points in the competition, Schundler said it often came back to a fundamental difference over how much teacher seniority should remain a driving force in New Jersey state law, or at least in the federal application.
Christie remains adamant that it should be removed as a protection for teachers, and they should be judged – and retained – solely on their performance. It is one of the central tenets of his six-point education reform plan announced last week.
But Schundler last spring brokered a deal with the state teachers union that would have left the provision’s fate out of the Race to the Top bid, a decision that Christie ultimately rejected.
“The governor told me it was horrible policy and horrible politics,” Schundler said after his three hours of testimony.
Willing to Bend
But during that testimony, the commissioner said he had been willing to bend on it with the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA), feeling the administration could tackle the policy separately and it should not jeopardize the rest of the agreement revamping how teachers are judged and students assessed.
“The teachers union was dead set against the change,” he said. “It was make or break for them. And in order to get the endorsement, I agreed to drop that.”
“It didn’t mean we had to drop the agenda,” Schundler added.
Teacher seniority has become a focal point of debate across the country as school budgets grow tight and school leaders look for some flexibility in how they determine what teachers go first.
Pulling Back on Protection
Chicago, New York City and Los Angeles have all been embroiled in attempts to pull back on teacher seniority as a defining protection. A federal judge in California this week approved a settlement that would have removed the seniority protection, a deal the district’s teachers union is challenging.
In a state where an estimated 3,000 teachers may have been laid off in the last year, New Jersey is one of about a dozen states with seniority protections written into law.
“Experience counts,” said Ginger Gold Schnitzer, chief lobbyist for the NJEA.
“It’s all related to tenure,” she said. “Honestly, I think it’s their way to get around the tenure issue and get rid of so-called bad teachers. But who are the ones they don’t want? Those at the top of the [salary] guide.”
That has been where the issue gets complicated, with the disagreement on what measure could be used instead of seniority.
Christie and Schundler both pressed – with the NJEA’s initial support – for rewriting how teachers are evaluated, with a big emphasis on student achievement. Christie continues to push the plan, but such a review is only just underway.
“The seniority issue is huge and something that state and district budget crises and layoffs over the past two years have really put a spotlight on,” said Patrick McGuinn, an associate professor of political science and education at Drew University.”
“But of course it's tied up and dependent on the broader evaluation and tenure fights,” he said. “You have to be able to show that a senior teacher is not effective, or less effective than a younger one, and then have the power to act on it.”
Weighing In
In New Jersey, others are also starting to weigh in, with state Sen. Teresa Ruiz (D-Essex) taking a lead role and working with legislative staff to craft a bill or even a structure for discussion.
As chair of the Senate education committee, Ruiz said Senate hearings on tenure reform – including the role of seniority -- would likely be one of her next orders of business.
“Very soon,” she said. “I want to bring all the stakeholders to the table, the administration, the NJEA, the principals, everyone, to figure out what really works.
“Seniority is a huge issue, and we haven’t even begun to dissect it,” she said. “But we need to talk about it in a tangible way. What are the benefits or not? There are ups and downs to everything that we need to look at.”
The Record – Columnist Alfred ‘Doblin: Waiting for Superman, finding Clark Kent’
Friday, October 8, 2010
Last updated: Thursday October 7, 2010, 7:09 PM
By ALFRED P. DOBLIN
RECORD EDITORIAL COLUMNIST
CHILDREN in failing public schools shouldn’t have to wait for Superman. That’s the message in Davis Guggenheim’s documentary “Waiting for Superman.” I would also add my own admonition: They should blame Canada.
I’m not referring to our neighbor to the north. The Canada to blame is Geoffrey Canada, one of the most outspoken supporters of charter schools. The much-touted film is powerful and manipulative. It is a one-sided view of why public education doesn’t always work.
The children who are put under the microscope in the film have something in common; a caregiver determined that their child will not fail. That makes a whole world of difference.
In New Jersey, there are stellar schools, solid schools and places no child should ever be sent to for an education. The idea that some superhero will rescue you is childhood fiction. That is Canada’s point. He says that when he realized there was no Superman, he was filled with dread.
Yet the whole point of “Waiting for Superman” is that there is a superhero en route and he or she will take you to a charter school. I’ve listened to the power of Newark Mayor Cory Booker’s voice when he talks about his education initiative in Newark. A $100 million matching grant from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has shone the national spotlight on Newark.
Governor Christie is equally eloquent on the need to fix failing schools. But Christie has spent much of his time attacking poorly performing teachers and their inflexible unions. Guggenheim paints with a broader brush.
He is no fan of teacher unions, but he also acknowledges the great teachers out there, something the governor doesn’t do often enough. Public schools are massive bureaucracies and they should not be. But what is the alternative? We are being told by the gurus of culture – people like Oprah Winfrey – that charter schools offer children the best chance to achieve excellence.
Charters can do that. And some of them do that. But all of them can purge students who fail to meet the criteria of the school. They may have to accept everyone like a public school, but they don’t have to keep them. Public schools do – they do not have the luxury of retaining only the children who follow the rules. They do not have the luxury of having only students whose parents or guardians had the wherewithal to register them for a charter school education.
The deck is stacked against public schools for many reasons. Some are controllable. Christie’s war on teacher unions may result in more flexible contracts and in work practices that retain the best teachers. Teachers – even great ones – are not superheroes either. Unruly students disrupt classes. Students who fear for their personal safety as they walk to and from school each day cannot easily learn.
Canada’s charter-school vision works for him and his students. He is dynamic, motivated and he attracts dynamic, motivated parents who want the best for their children. That is a formula for success.
What I fear is that in the rush to embrace if not Superman, but Canada, we leave behind the children without advocates. They will remain in public schools with fewer resources. I’m not a fan of all the trendy academies that are sprouting like weeds inside public schools. I don’t get the idea of a boutique education. Children need to be educated in a wide range of subjects. It is not just teaching to the test and it is not just teaching them what they like. Children need a broad enough education to help decide what it is they want to do in life and also to appreciate and respect what others do.
Public, charter and private schools are pretty much all failing at that. They may succeed in raising little adults proficient in the one thing that will enable them to make millions of dollars. But there are a whole range of experiences and skills that more often than not are ignored because they do not appear on standardized tests or guarantee placement in the Ivy League. And that is failure as well.
Our children do not need Superman. They need Clark Kent. They need a mild-mannered regular guy or gal to argue with teachers and administrators, to push other parents to become involved in school activities, and most important, our children need us to push them.
They say a three-year-old standing on his bed wearing a makeshift cape doesn’t know he can’t fly across the room. Ironically, we tell them they can’t fly and then we expect them to soar. Maybe at age three we know something we forget too quickly. Maybe we were Superman all along.
Alfred P. Doblin is the editorial page editor of The Record. Contact him at doblin@northjersey.com. Follow AlfredPDoblin on Twitter.
CHILDREN in failing public schools shouldn’t have to wait for Superman. That’s the message in Davis Guggenheim’s documentary “Waiting for Superman.” I would also add my own admonition: They should blame Canada.
I’m not referring to our neighbor to the north. The Canada to blame is Geoffrey Canada, one of the most outspoken supporters of charter schools. The much-touted film is powerful and manipulative. It is a one-sided view of why public education doesn’t always work.
The children who are put under the microscope in the film have something in common; a caregiver determined that their child will not fail. That makes a whole world of difference.
In New Jersey, there are stellar schools, solid schools and places no child should ever be sent to for an education. The idea that some superhero will rescue you is childhood fiction. That is Canada’s point. He says that when he realized there was no Superman, he was filled with dread.
Yet the whole point of “Waiting for Superman” is that there is a superhero en route and he or she will take you to a charter school. I’ve listened to the power of Newark Mayor Cory Booker’s voice when he talks about his education initiative in Newark. A $100 million matching grant from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has shone the national spotlight on Newark.
Governor Christie is equally eloquent on the need to fix failing schools. But Christie has spent much of his time attacking poorly performing teachers and their inflexible unions. Guggenheim paints with a broader brush.
He is no fan of teacher unions, but he also acknowledges the great teachers out there, something the governor doesn’t do often enough. Public schools are massive bureaucracies and they should not be. But what is the alternative? We are being told by the gurus of culture – people like Oprah Winfrey – that charter schools offer children the best chance to achieve excellence.
Charters can do that. And some of them do that. But all of them can purge students who fail to meet the criteria of the school. They may have to accept everyone like a public school, but they don’t have to keep them. Public schools do – they do not have the luxury of retaining only the children who follow the rules. They do not have the luxury of having only students whose parents or guardians had the wherewithal to register them for a charter school education.
The deck is stacked against public schools for many reasons. Some are controllable. Christie’s war on teacher unions may result in more flexible contracts and in work practices that retain the best teachers. Teachers – even great ones – are not superheroes either. Unruly students disrupt classes. Students who fear for their personal safety as they walk to and from school each day cannot easily learn.
Canada’s charter-school vision works for him and his students. He is dynamic, motivated and he attracts dynamic, motivated parents who want the best for their children. That is a formula for success.
What I fear is that in the rush to embrace if not Superman, but Canada, we leave behind the children without advocates. They will remain in public schools with fewer resources. I’m not a fan of all the trendy academies that are sprouting like weeds inside public schools. I don’t get the idea of a boutique education. Children need to be educated in a wide range of subjects. It is not just teaching to the test and it is not just teaching them what they like. Children need a broad enough education to help decide what it is they want to do in life and also to appreciate and respect what others do.
Public, charter and private schools are pretty much all failing at that. They may succeed in raising little adults proficient in the one thing that will enable them to make millions of dollars. But there are a whole range of experiences and skills that more often than not are ignored because they do not appear on standardized tests or guarantee placement in the Ivy League. And that is failure as well.
Our children do not need Superman. They need Clark Kent. They need a mild-mannered regular guy or gal to argue with teachers and administrators, to push other parents to become involved in school activities, and most important, our children need us to push them.
They say a three-year-old standing on his bed wearing a makeshift cape doesn’t know he can’t fly across the room. Ironically, we tell them they can’t fly and then we expect them to soar. Maybe at age three we know something we forget too quickly. Maybe we were Superman all along.
Star Ledger ‘Ex-education chief Schundler openly blames Gov. Christie for Race to the Top loss’
Published: Thursday, October 07, 2010, 9:16 PM Updated: Friday, October 08, 2010, 5:17 AM
TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie and the education commissioner he fired in August were again at each other’s throats today in a public display that proved the controversy over the administration’s loss of $400 million in federal school aid will not disappear any time soon.
As Bret Schundler told a state Senate committee the governor placed fighting with the state teachers unions and his persona on talk radio above education reform, Christie told reporters Schundler was trading in "revisionist history" and interested only in seeking "the spotlight."
In different corners of the Statehouse, Schundler and Christie took their public shots at each other to new levels while the governor’s allies and adversaries in the state Senate engaged in a rare, open display of hostility.
The showcase was a hearing of the Senate Legislative Oversight Committee, called as part of an investigation into what caused the state to lose the Race to the Top competition this summer.
Under subpoena, Schundler returned to Trenton to testify that he took responsibility for a clerical error that cost the state up to 4.8 points on a scorecard that determines which states get grants for education reforms. New Jersey was 3 points shy of getting the money. The error ultimately cost Schundler his job.
For the first time, Schundler openly blamed Christie for reneging on a compromise application for the grant that Schundler worked out with the New Jersey Education Association teachers union — something he said cost the state 14 points.
"It was intolerable for him to be perceived as giving in to the NJEA," Schundler said of the governor’s reaction to the compromise. After having battled with the NJEA through last year’s campaign and in his first months as governor, Schundler said Christie called him after learning about the negotiated application and said "he was not going through the fire, with all the attacks on him, merely to cave into the union ... the money was not worth it."
Schundler added that Christie was most upset after he heard the coverage of the compromise on Jim Gearhart’s morning radio show on New Jersey 101.5 FM.
As the hearing progressed, Christie’s office summoned reporters for a major announcement — the governor’s decision to kill the long-awaited trans-Hudson train tunnel to Manhattan.
Christie insisted there was no ulterior motive to the timing of his announcement but proceeded to tee off on Schundler and his opponents in the Senate who had called the hearing.
"This (tunnel) decision was timed based upon the 30-day timetable that I gave almost 30 days ago," Christie said. "I didn’t know 30 days ago that Bret Schundler was to be subpoenaed this morning to be before that partisan circus."
Christie would not discuss Schundler’s specific points, saying "I’m not going to waste any more of my time continuing to respond to Bret Schundler." Christie added: "I understand his yearning for the spotlight. I really do."
Christie’s comments came at the end of a dramatic day that started at the Mercer County Courthouse, where Superior Court Judge Linda Feinberg ordered the state’s consultant on the Race to the Top application to appear before the Senate under the terms of the legislative subpoena. The consultant, Wireless Generation, had made a motion to have the subpoena thrown out.
Once Feinberg issued her ruling, the committee hearing began with partisan sniping between Majority Leader Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex) and Minority Leader Tom Kean Jr. (R-Union). Kean, a Christie ally, made procedural moves to slow down the hearing and limit Schundler’s testimony. Buono grew openly impatient with Kean, telling a staffer to turn off his microphone and threatening to throw him out of the hearing.
Kean said "no new information has been derived today." Buono said Schundler offered a troubling "portrait painted today of a governor who has sacrificed $400 million for education reform for our children to further a personal vendetta with the NJEA."
Some of Schundler’s time was spent explaining the clerical error, how it happened, and what he told Christie and the governor’s senior staff about it. Wireless Generation did provide many of the documents subpoenaed and senators said they would reconvene after they have a chance to review the records.
By Josh Margolin and Jeanette Rundquist / The Star-Ledger
