A few months ago a jury recommended that Randal Deviney be executed for the murder of Delores Futrell who by all accounts was never anything but kind to him. The judge has yet to pass sentence but in reality he was sentenced long ago, but he is not the only one.
With the Florida State legislature following all over itself to avoid doing the right thing by properly funding education, they have been trying to get the federal government to do it instead. They have been doing so by applying for over a billion dollars through Washington’s race to the top grants. Part of the application depends on how teachers are evaluated and as result there has been a lot of talk about how to do so. So much that the legislation has proposed and fast tracked without much discussion, that fifty percent of a teacher’s salary be tied to how their children perform on the various standardized tests. What people may be failing to recognize and I am sure that includes our myopic state government is that teacher’s evaluations have never been based on how children do on standardized tests.
Teachers all over the district have been getting their evaluations over the last few weeks, months before the results of the F-cat are known. This includes ESE teachers, history teachers, elective teachers and so many other teachers that teach subjects that don’t have standardized tests. In truth the powers-that-be have no idea how to properly evaluate teachers and this insistence that it be mostly determined by children’s gains on a test just opens a whole new can or worms.
Currently evaluations typically depend on a principal or their designee getting a snap shot of what is going on in a classroom. They come in and observe and review lesson plans, this year data notebooks were thrown into the mix as well. This year I had two thirty minute observations and two or three pop ins where the principal or a designee stayed just five minutes or so, neither of the longer visits was done by the principal. That’s it; a total of seventy-five minutes over the course of a year will determine my evaluation. Some teachers got more visits and longer observations and some teachers got less.
Duval County in the past has what’s called Map tests to determine if teachers should get merit pay. They are supposed to be given at the beginning and at the end of the school year. One of the problems is they are never given when they are supposed to. This year they arrived most unexpectedly about week eight and teachers were given a few days to give them, regardless of what they had going on in their classrooms. I saw one map test that was supposed to be given to a group of intellectually impaired children that can’t even read their names. Some kids ask is this the test “I am supposed to do bad on so you can get money later”, while others just Christmas tree it because it does not affect their grade in the class. Teachers don’t grade them they collect them and turn them in. Finally with both money and very little oversight involved I have heard other stories as well.
It gets better, say you are a teacher and do everything right. You give the map tests and have your kids take it seriously. Then at the end of the year after pouring your heart and soul into your classroom your kids make gains on the MAP tests, impressive gains, well there is still a good chance you won’t be eligible for performance pay. In order to get performance pay your principal must rate you high performing, satisfactory won’t cut it. If you are not rated HP right there the journey ends and any chance for extra pay is over.
Why might you be rated satisfactory after all that? Well in schools all over the county teachers are being told it’s because they have given to many f’s or d’s they can’t be high performing. A teacher in disbelief told me; well had I known that nobody would have failed. Sometimes bad grades can result from ineffective instruction but more often than not they result from apathy and lack of effort on a student’s part. If teachers are going to lose money or potentially their jobs because they have expectations for kids and expect their classes to be rigorous, they will lower their expectations and friends before this I would have said it would be nearly impossible to do so but as usual the district finds a way. Say the latter from above is the case and the teacher gives effective instruction, this now means the district has just told teachers not to give kids bad grades any more. They have just said student performance no longer matters.
Friends if attendance doesn’t matter because now kids can get grade recovery for any reason, behavior doesn’t matter because the district refuses to discipline and now student performance doesn’t matter, what exactly does? Please don’t say your children, because if they are pushed along without the skills and the discipline needed to be successful then the district is doing them no favors. On the contrary we have set them up for a lifetime of mediocrity at best.
I’ll tell you what matters here in Duval County, that’s appearances. The school board wants the public to believe they are doing a good job with their strategic plan and their map tests. They want us to think that discipline and attendance are improving and programs like compass odyssey are making a difference. Sadly the truth is Rome burning down around us and like Nero they are just putting out pleasant music.
There are so many great things going on here in the county and I can’t think of one that is happening at 1701 Prudential drive, instead they are the interactions between students and teachers. Even the worse schools in the toughest neighborhoods hardest hit by apathy and violence have tremendous things going on and would have more if the powers-that be would either do their job or get out of their way.
There are some things you should know about Ed Pratt-Dannals as you consider what he has written. First he makes a 100 thousand more than the mayor and has every incentive to keep things the way they are. At a salary of 270 thousand dollars there has been no mention of him taking a salary cut. Of the 33 members of the school board that make over 100k the vast majority are on his staff. Please don’t say that we need to pay for talent when all teachers make so much less.
Ed Pratt-Dannals is a politician and one that doesn’t represent teachers and doesn’t represent children, the only people he speaks for are the school board and the administration that is beholden to him. Since he has become superintendant in the district student performance isn’t important, attendance isn’t important and behavior isn’t important. The only thing that matters is if he and the school board can manipulate the data enough to make the slumbering masses believe they are doing good enough of a job to justify them keeping them.
Showing posts with label school funding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label school funding. Show all posts
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Should we really be experimenting with education?
Experiments are like a quaterback throwing a pass, two bad things can happen. Do we really want to experiment with our children's future at stake. -cpg
From Education Week
By Sean Cavanaugh
Despite bleak fiscal conditions that could thwart some of their priorities, governors and state lawmakers—bolstered in some cases by new Republican majorities—are expected to press forward this year with ambitious education proposals that could include changing teacher job protections and expanding school choice.
Newly elected and returning officeholders go to work this month as states struggle to climb out of the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression, with many warning that K-12 education—historically insulated from the budget ax—is likely to face severe cuts.
While state tax revenues have improved somewhat recently, 15 states already have reported new budget shortfalls since the fiscal 2011 year began last summer, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. And states are likely face continuing budget gaps over the next two years as well, according to the Denver-based research and policy organization.
California Gov. Jerry Brown, a newly inaugurated Democrat, already has warned school officials to expect deep reductions as his state tries to close a $28 billion, two-year deficit, out of a total yearly state budget of about $92.5 billion.
“This is really a huge challenge, unprecedented in my lifetime,” Mr. Brown said at a forum last month on education funding at the University of California, Los Angeles. The governor, 72, is returning to the office he last held in 1983. “You’re looking at a lot of things that a lot of people care very deeply about, and very much depend on,” he added, “and those are the things that are going to be cut back, because we have no other choice.”
California is hardly alone. So far in fiscal 2011, 13 states have made midyear budget cuts to K-12 schools, according to a recent survey by the National Governors Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers.
At the same time, legislative sessions are convening during a period of rapid change in education policy at the state level, pushed along by forces that defy easy political categorization.
Last year, legislatures in several states, including Colorado and Louisiana, approved potentially sweeping changes to teacher evaluation and other school policy areas with at least some degree of bipartisan support. And this year, Republicans and Democrats in several states have spoken in favor of making other potentially broad changes to teacher evaluation and tenure.
“We see people who really want to shake up the system,” said Julie Bell, the NCSL’s education program director, describing the mood in statehouses. “There’s an impatience with the way things are.”
The attitude among lawmakers in both major parties seems to be “we need better results,” she said. “Let’s experiment.”
Election Aftershocks
The new sessions will play out in the wake of elections characterized by powerful anti-incumbent sentiment, which brought major turnover to governors’ offices and state legislatures—and historic gains for the Republican Party.
Before the fall elections, Democrats controlled a majority of governorships, 27, while the GOP was in charge of 23. On Nov. 2, voters upended that partisan split by electing Republican candidates to 29 governorships, leaving Democrats with 20, and choosing one Independent, former Republican Lincoln D. Chafee, in Rhode Island.
State legislative control also swung decisively to the Republicans. Heading into the elections, Democrats held majorities in 60 state legislative chambers and Republicans controlled 36, with two chambers evenly split. Now, the GOP controls 57 chambers, leaving just 39 to Democrats, with two split lawmaking bodies and a nonpartisan, unicameral legislature in Nebraska. Republicans now control both chambers in 25 states, 11 more than they had before the 2010 election, according to the NCSL, and they hold more state legislative seats nationwide than at any time since the late 1920s.
In some states, the emergence of new or stronger Republican majorities could embolden leaders to push for far-reaching policies in areas such as school choice and teacher evaluation.
In Florida, incoming Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, takes office with the GOP having built upon its majorities in both legislative chambers in November’s elections. Florida has long been a laboratory for voucher programs, and Mr. Scott’s transition team has called for a major expansion of public funding for private school choice, through an approach described as “education savings accounts.” Those accounts would provide taxpayer funding of up to 85 percent of traditional per-student aid to families to pay for private school tuition, as well as for private tutoring and virtual education services, among other options.
Related Blog
Visit this blog.Mr. Scott has also voiced support for reviving a version of a bill passed last year that would have phased out teacher tenure for new hires and implemented merit pay, which was vetoed by his predecessor, Republican Gov. Charlie Crist. That measure, Senate Bill 6, drew opposition from the state’s largest teachers’ union, the Florida Education Association, as well as school district officials and others who argued that it was rushed through the legislature with little input from the public.
The state’s speaker of the House, Republican Dean Cannon, would like to see a bill that addresses many of the goals of SB 6 but is also vetted by legislative committees, said his spokeswoman, Katie Betta. The speaker’s goal is to “move forward on how we want to reward our best teachers,” Ms. Betta said last month.
The FEA, which has 140,000 members, is wary of lawmakers’ claims that they will take a more inclusive approach to drafting another version of the bill. The FEA is an affiliate of both the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers.
“Right now, everyone is playing nice,” said FEA spokesman Mark Pudlow. “Everybody’s saying they want to gather input. ...We expect to see the ‘Son of Senate Bill 6,’ or ‘Senate Bill 6.1,’ but we don’t know what form it will take.”
‘Flexibility and Authority’
In Indiana, where the GOP previously controlled one chamber but now controls both, Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels said publicly that he would like lawmakers to approve a private-school-voucher system. Along with the state’s elected Republican superintendent of public instruction, Tony Bennett, the governor also has backed an agenda that includes performance pay for teachers and principals, charter school expansion, and allowing students who graduate early from high school to receive a college scholarship equal to the amount the state would have spent on them during their senior year.
“We have to have the courage to provide flexibility and authority to local officials to operate in a highly accountable system,” Mr. Bennett, who also supports vouchers, said in an interview. “We have to approach this in a comprehensive nature. I’ve never been one to say it’s about school choice first, or it’s about teacher quality first.”
In other states, elected officials from both parties have shown an interest in tackling thorny issues.
In New Jersey, where Democrats control both chambers of the legislature, state Sen. M. Teresa Ruiz, a Democrat, held a hearing last month on making changes to the state’s system for granting tenure for teachers, a major focus of many elected officials and school reform advocates across the country recently. Republican Gov. Chris Christie, who has feuded with the New Jersey Education Association, has also called for changing tenure provisions, saying the current system protects ineffective teachers and fails to reward talented ones.
“If we all come together and coalesce, ... we can make dramatic, positive change,” Ms. Ruiz said at the hearing. While she spoke of “supporting and respecting teachers across the board,” she added: “Something must change. Our students can’t wait any longer.”
The NJEA has said the state should consider some changes to tenure rules, which would make the dismissal of ineffective teachers less costly and less time consuming. But it also has said the process must ensure that teachers are not pushed out unfairly, or without just cause.
In Illinois, lawmakers are also considering potentially big changes that would make it easier to fire ineffective teachers, fill new positions based on performance rather than seniority, and make it more difficult for teachers to strike. A pair of special, bipartisan committees that were created by Speaker of the House Michael Madigan and Senate President John J. Cullerton, both Democrats, are studying those issues.
Last year, Illinois lawmakers approved a measure that ties teacher and principal evaluation more closely to student performance, a move that some lawmakers believed would help the state’s chances for winning some of the $4 billion in state grants under the federal Race to the Top competition. Illinois was not named a winner, but it was one of at least 34 states to approve new education laws or policies as a result of the Race to the Top, according to the Obama administration, which initiated the competition.
Following up on that legislative effort by giving school districts more authority to hire and fire teachers based on performance is “the next logical step,” said state Rep. Roger L. Eddy, a Republican, who co-chairs one of the special committees.
Balancing Interests
Mr. Eddy, who is also the superintendent of Hutsonville Community Unit School District 1 in eastern Illinois, said he wants the legislature to approve legislation that is fair to teachers, and he predicted that any proposals that emerge from his committee’s work will go through several iterations, when it comes to provisions dealing with strikes and other issues. While Mr. Eddy said there have been relatively few teacher strikes in Illinois, he also believes the threat of a walkout gives unions undue leeway in contract negotiations.
“We have to look at how we can improve the balance,” he said. “I don’t believe we have balance now.”
The Illinois Education Association has voiced concerns about such a proposal, telling its members in a statement on its website that they should “insist that the voices of Illinois teachers be heard in this process,” and fight plans that would “diminish the collective bargaining rights of education employees.”
Many new elected officials have pledged to reduce the costs of state pension plans, including those that cover teachers. A 2010 Pew Center on the States report estimated that states face $1 trillion in unfunded pension and retiree health care liabilities, and a recent study by researchers at the University of Rochester and Northwestern University, which used a different methodology, puts states’ unfunded pension tabs at $3 trillion.
During last year’s legislative sessions, 18 states either cut pension benefits or increased employee contributions in an effort to reduce liabilities, and in 2009, 11 made similar changes.
One such state was New Jersey, where lawmakers approved a proposal, signed by Mr. Christie, that increased required contributions and cut some benefits, including those of teachers, and was designed to reduce the state’s pension and health-care costs. The governor has called for lawmakers to take further steps this session to reduce state retirement expenses. New Jersey’s unfunded pension liability for its teachers’ retirement system stands at $24.5 billion; it is $54 billion for all state and local workers, combined, according to recent estimates.
New Jersey Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney, however, has said Mr. Christie should commit to having the state pay more than $500 million to help cover the state’s current retirement obligations, before the state makes more cuts.
Sen. Sweeney “is committed to working on further pension reforms, as that is what is needed to ensure workers who have been promised a pension get one,” said his spokesman, Derek Roseman, in a statement. But first, he added, the governor needs to “commit to paying the state’s long-overdue pension bill.”
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/01/04/15legislatures_ep.h30.html?tkn=NXYF1yVVN%2BmVpXZLeZ3irCtClGEDbNXtV/i4&cmp=clp-edweek
From Education Week
By Sean Cavanaugh
Despite bleak fiscal conditions that could thwart some of their priorities, governors and state lawmakers—bolstered in some cases by new Republican majorities—are expected to press forward this year with ambitious education proposals that could include changing teacher job protections and expanding school choice.
Newly elected and returning officeholders go to work this month as states struggle to climb out of the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression, with many warning that K-12 education—historically insulated from the budget ax—is likely to face severe cuts.
While state tax revenues have improved somewhat recently, 15 states already have reported new budget shortfalls since the fiscal 2011 year began last summer, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. And states are likely face continuing budget gaps over the next two years as well, according to the Denver-based research and policy organization.
California Gov. Jerry Brown, a newly inaugurated Democrat, already has warned school officials to expect deep reductions as his state tries to close a $28 billion, two-year deficit, out of a total yearly state budget of about $92.5 billion.
“This is really a huge challenge, unprecedented in my lifetime,” Mr. Brown said at a forum last month on education funding at the University of California, Los Angeles. The governor, 72, is returning to the office he last held in 1983. “You’re looking at a lot of things that a lot of people care very deeply about, and very much depend on,” he added, “and those are the things that are going to be cut back, because we have no other choice.”
California is hardly alone. So far in fiscal 2011, 13 states have made midyear budget cuts to K-12 schools, according to a recent survey by the National Governors Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers.
At the same time, legislative sessions are convening during a period of rapid change in education policy at the state level, pushed along by forces that defy easy political categorization.
Last year, legislatures in several states, including Colorado and Louisiana, approved potentially sweeping changes to teacher evaluation and other school policy areas with at least some degree of bipartisan support. And this year, Republicans and Democrats in several states have spoken in favor of making other potentially broad changes to teacher evaluation and tenure.
“We see people who really want to shake up the system,” said Julie Bell, the NCSL’s education program director, describing the mood in statehouses. “There’s an impatience with the way things are.”
The attitude among lawmakers in both major parties seems to be “we need better results,” she said. “Let’s experiment.”
Election Aftershocks
The new sessions will play out in the wake of elections characterized by powerful anti-incumbent sentiment, which brought major turnover to governors’ offices and state legislatures—and historic gains for the Republican Party.
Before the fall elections, Democrats controlled a majority of governorships, 27, while the GOP was in charge of 23. On Nov. 2, voters upended that partisan split by electing Republican candidates to 29 governorships, leaving Democrats with 20, and choosing one Independent, former Republican Lincoln D. Chafee, in Rhode Island.
State legislative control also swung decisively to the Republicans. Heading into the elections, Democrats held majorities in 60 state legislative chambers and Republicans controlled 36, with two chambers evenly split. Now, the GOP controls 57 chambers, leaving just 39 to Democrats, with two split lawmaking bodies and a nonpartisan, unicameral legislature in Nebraska. Republicans now control both chambers in 25 states, 11 more than they had before the 2010 election, according to the NCSL, and they hold more state legislative seats nationwide than at any time since the late 1920s.
In some states, the emergence of new or stronger Republican majorities could embolden leaders to push for far-reaching policies in areas such as school choice and teacher evaluation.
In Florida, incoming Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, takes office with the GOP having built upon its majorities in both legislative chambers in November’s elections. Florida has long been a laboratory for voucher programs, and Mr. Scott’s transition team has called for a major expansion of public funding for private school choice, through an approach described as “education savings accounts.” Those accounts would provide taxpayer funding of up to 85 percent of traditional per-student aid to families to pay for private school tuition, as well as for private tutoring and virtual education services, among other options.
Related Blog
Visit this blog.Mr. Scott has also voiced support for reviving a version of a bill passed last year that would have phased out teacher tenure for new hires and implemented merit pay, which was vetoed by his predecessor, Republican Gov. Charlie Crist. That measure, Senate Bill 6, drew opposition from the state’s largest teachers’ union, the Florida Education Association, as well as school district officials and others who argued that it was rushed through the legislature with little input from the public.
The state’s speaker of the House, Republican Dean Cannon, would like to see a bill that addresses many of the goals of SB 6 but is also vetted by legislative committees, said his spokeswoman, Katie Betta. The speaker’s goal is to “move forward on how we want to reward our best teachers,” Ms. Betta said last month.
The FEA, which has 140,000 members, is wary of lawmakers’ claims that they will take a more inclusive approach to drafting another version of the bill. The FEA is an affiliate of both the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers.
“Right now, everyone is playing nice,” said FEA spokesman Mark Pudlow. “Everybody’s saying they want to gather input. ...We expect to see the ‘Son of Senate Bill 6,’ or ‘Senate Bill 6.1,’ but we don’t know what form it will take.”
‘Flexibility and Authority’
In Indiana, where the GOP previously controlled one chamber but now controls both, Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels said publicly that he would like lawmakers to approve a private-school-voucher system. Along with the state’s elected Republican superintendent of public instruction, Tony Bennett, the governor also has backed an agenda that includes performance pay for teachers and principals, charter school expansion, and allowing students who graduate early from high school to receive a college scholarship equal to the amount the state would have spent on them during their senior year.
“We have to have the courage to provide flexibility and authority to local officials to operate in a highly accountable system,” Mr. Bennett, who also supports vouchers, said in an interview. “We have to approach this in a comprehensive nature. I’ve never been one to say it’s about school choice first, or it’s about teacher quality first.”
In other states, elected officials from both parties have shown an interest in tackling thorny issues.
In New Jersey, where Democrats control both chambers of the legislature, state Sen. M. Teresa Ruiz, a Democrat, held a hearing last month on making changes to the state’s system for granting tenure for teachers, a major focus of many elected officials and school reform advocates across the country recently. Republican Gov. Chris Christie, who has feuded with the New Jersey Education Association, has also called for changing tenure provisions, saying the current system protects ineffective teachers and fails to reward talented ones.
“If we all come together and coalesce, ... we can make dramatic, positive change,” Ms. Ruiz said at the hearing. While she spoke of “supporting and respecting teachers across the board,” she added: “Something must change. Our students can’t wait any longer.”
The NJEA has said the state should consider some changes to tenure rules, which would make the dismissal of ineffective teachers less costly and less time consuming. But it also has said the process must ensure that teachers are not pushed out unfairly, or without just cause.
In Illinois, lawmakers are also considering potentially big changes that would make it easier to fire ineffective teachers, fill new positions based on performance rather than seniority, and make it more difficult for teachers to strike. A pair of special, bipartisan committees that were created by Speaker of the House Michael Madigan and Senate President John J. Cullerton, both Democrats, are studying those issues.
Last year, Illinois lawmakers approved a measure that ties teacher and principal evaluation more closely to student performance, a move that some lawmakers believed would help the state’s chances for winning some of the $4 billion in state grants under the federal Race to the Top competition. Illinois was not named a winner, but it was one of at least 34 states to approve new education laws or policies as a result of the Race to the Top, according to the Obama administration, which initiated the competition.
Following up on that legislative effort by giving school districts more authority to hire and fire teachers based on performance is “the next logical step,” said state Rep. Roger L. Eddy, a Republican, who co-chairs one of the special committees.
Balancing Interests
Mr. Eddy, who is also the superintendent of Hutsonville Community Unit School District 1 in eastern Illinois, said he wants the legislature to approve legislation that is fair to teachers, and he predicted that any proposals that emerge from his committee’s work will go through several iterations, when it comes to provisions dealing with strikes and other issues. While Mr. Eddy said there have been relatively few teacher strikes in Illinois, he also believes the threat of a walkout gives unions undue leeway in contract negotiations.
“We have to look at how we can improve the balance,” he said. “I don’t believe we have balance now.”
The Illinois Education Association has voiced concerns about such a proposal, telling its members in a statement on its website that they should “insist that the voices of Illinois teachers be heard in this process,” and fight plans that would “diminish the collective bargaining rights of education employees.”
Many new elected officials have pledged to reduce the costs of state pension plans, including those that cover teachers. A 2010 Pew Center on the States report estimated that states face $1 trillion in unfunded pension and retiree health care liabilities, and a recent study by researchers at the University of Rochester and Northwestern University, which used a different methodology, puts states’ unfunded pension tabs at $3 trillion.
During last year’s legislative sessions, 18 states either cut pension benefits or increased employee contributions in an effort to reduce liabilities, and in 2009, 11 made similar changes.
One such state was New Jersey, where lawmakers approved a proposal, signed by Mr. Christie, that increased required contributions and cut some benefits, including those of teachers, and was designed to reduce the state’s pension and health-care costs. The governor has called for lawmakers to take further steps this session to reduce state retirement expenses. New Jersey’s unfunded pension liability for its teachers’ retirement system stands at $24.5 billion; it is $54 billion for all state and local workers, combined, according to recent estimates.
New Jersey Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney, however, has said Mr. Christie should commit to having the state pay more than $500 million to help cover the state’s current retirement obligations, before the state makes more cuts.
Sen. Sweeney “is committed to working on further pension reforms, as that is what is needed to ensure workers who have been promised a pension get one,” said his spokesman, Derek Roseman, in a statement. But first, he added, the governor needs to “commit to paying the state’s long-overdue pension bill.”
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/01/04/15legislatures_ep.h30.html?tkn=NXYF1yVVN%2BmVpXZLeZ3irCtClGEDbNXtV/i4&cmp=clp-edweek
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Why wear red to support education
From the SOS million teacher march Facebook page
A conversation has popped up questioning our choice of color, red, for Tuesday's showing of support for public education. It seems that some are concerned because red is the color that Tea-Partiers and Republicans wear. They are afraid that when Rick Scott looks out at a sea of red on Tuesday as he is being inaugurated as Florida's newest governor, he and the news cameras will see nothing but support. I understand this argument but do not agree with it.
First, why should we let those who disagree with our views control what color we wear to voice our opinion? Haven't we let others do the talking for us for far too long? Haven't they been able to pick the colors, the policies, the laws, and newspaper headlines long enough? I, for one, am tired of letting others make my decisions for me. It is time that normal, red-blooded Americans take back this country, and I see no better place to start than with the color red. Why should "they" get it? Because "they" say so? Because the media says so? Because history says so? I say it's time to rewrite history.
Red is the color my skin turns when I see reforms put into place that punish teachers and hurt students . Red is the color I bleed when injured, and right now I feel as if I've been being injured again and again as a teacher, a parent, and a citizen. When I see red I stop, just as those currently making the decisions about public education need to stop destroying it and stop leaving common Americans out of the decision-making process. Red is one of the colors I see when I look at our nation's flag and wonder, will there come a day when I am no longer proud to be an American? When party lines decide what color I will wear to support my cause, when public education turns into something that no teacher with morals can remain a part of, when being an American means doing what you're told instead of telling our government there's a better way to do it?
Red can stand for many things, some of which I would proudly stand to support and others which I would earnestly stand to argue against. Red can stand for many things because red is just a color. I, on the other hand, can only stand for what I believe in because I am a person. But I am just one person, and it will take many more to stand with me on January 4th and beyond to say we believe in public education, that it can be saved by fairly funding all schools instead of just some, that it can be saved by including all opinions instead of just a select few, that it can be saved by returning it to the public and letting us decide what is best for our children instead of laws being made that require teachers to teach to a test instead of to their students.
So I ask that you stand with me across America on Tuesday, January 4, 2011 wearing your brightest red and exclaiming in your strongest voices, "We support public education because we support ALL of America, the red, the white, and the blue!"
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/note.php?note_id=169631993079229&id=114683658572227
A conversation has popped up questioning our choice of color, red, for Tuesday's showing of support for public education. It seems that some are concerned because red is the color that Tea-Partiers and Republicans wear. They are afraid that when Rick Scott looks out at a sea of red on Tuesday as he is being inaugurated as Florida's newest governor, he and the news cameras will see nothing but support. I understand this argument but do not agree with it.
First, why should we let those who disagree with our views control what color we wear to voice our opinion? Haven't we let others do the talking for us for far too long? Haven't they been able to pick the colors, the policies, the laws, and newspaper headlines long enough? I, for one, am tired of letting others make my decisions for me. It is time that normal, red-blooded Americans take back this country, and I see no better place to start than with the color red. Why should "they" get it? Because "they" say so? Because the media says so? Because history says so? I say it's time to rewrite history.
Red is the color my skin turns when I see reforms put into place that punish teachers and hurt students . Red is the color I bleed when injured, and right now I feel as if I've been being injured again and again as a teacher, a parent, and a citizen. When I see red I stop, just as those currently making the decisions about public education need to stop destroying it and stop leaving common Americans out of the decision-making process. Red is one of the colors I see when I look at our nation's flag and wonder, will there come a day when I am no longer proud to be an American? When party lines decide what color I will wear to support my cause, when public education turns into something that no teacher with morals can remain a part of, when being an American means doing what you're told instead of telling our government there's a better way to do it?
Red can stand for many things, some of which I would proudly stand to support and others which I would earnestly stand to argue against. Red can stand for many things because red is just a color. I, on the other hand, can only stand for what I believe in because I am a person. But I am just one person, and it will take many more to stand with me on January 4th and beyond to say we believe in public education, that it can be saved by fairly funding all schools instead of just some, that it can be saved by including all opinions instead of just a select few, that it can be saved by returning it to the public and letting us decide what is best for our children instead of laws being made that require teachers to teach to a test instead of to their students.
So I ask that you stand with me across America on Tuesday, January 4, 2011 wearing your brightest red and exclaiming in your strongest voices, "We support public education because we support ALL of America, the red, the white, and the blue!"
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/note.php?note_id=169631993079229&id=114683658572227
Saturday, January 1, 2011
A lack of funding
Texas and many states are facing the same funding issues as Florida. -cpg
From my San Antonio's home page.
Public school finance is in serious trouble and was heading off the rails even before the recession started battering the state's budget. Observers are pessimistic about whether lawmakers will tackle the structural problems next year in a session that faces a budget shortfall of more than $20 billion.
Still, a protracted lawsuit and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees shouldn't be required to get the issue addressed. The economic future of the state of Texas is at stake; how much more serious can it get?
And Sylvester Vasquez, a member of the Southwest Independent School District board and president of the Texas Association of School Boards, warns it would be devastating for school districts if they are forced to make additional budget reductions that are being contemplated as part of the state's belt-tightening efforts.
School districts already are expecting to face $3.2 billion in recurring expenses the state sent their way last session, when lawmakers earmarked some of the federal stimulus dollars for salary increases for school personnel.
School district and school board officials are now concerned the state might not give them needed additional funding for student population growth, which would carry a $2.5 billion price tag for the new biennium.
Already, rapidly growing school districts such as Northside, one of the largest school districts in the state, are trying to calculate what a state funding cut would mean. It is not pretty.
Northside ISD Superintendent John Folks said a 5 percent cut would affect the jobs of 275 teachers and 45 administrators. There is not much else to cut, he said, when 86 to 87 percent of a school district budget is tied to personnel.
The cuts would impact not only large districts. In the Southwest ISD, which has only 12,000 students, a 5-percent cut would affect 42 teachers and 20 maintenance workers and custodians, Vasquez said.
The downsizing of the teaching staff will probably result in increased class sizes and could affect summer school.
Public school educators should not be forced to take the state to court to get relief. We have been there and done that. The solutions that were served up are not working and need to be reworked.
Ignoring the public education problems for yet another legislative session is a disservice to the schoolchildren in the state. And making the situation worse by cutting funding for public education would be outrageously short-sighted. Students are the future of this state, and shortchanging them on their educational opportunities is shortchanging the state economy.
State lawmakers need to make public school education a priority in the next session.
Filing bills aimed at micromanaging teacher education and what goes on in the classroom is inconsequential when the big issues are ignored.
Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/School-funding-needs-protection-838712.php#ixzz19pN29Dup
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/School-funding-needs-protection-838712.php
From my San Antonio's home page.
Public school finance is in serious trouble and was heading off the rails even before the recession started battering the state's budget. Observers are pessimistic about whether lawmakers will tackle the structural problems next year in a session that faces a budget shortfall of more than $20 billion.
Still, a protracted lawsuit and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees shouldn't be required to get the issue addressed. The economic future of the state of Texas is at stake; how much more serious can it get?
And Sylvester Vasquez, a member of the Southwest Independent School District board and president of the Texas Association of School Boards, warns it would be devastating for school districts if they are forced to make additional budget reductions that are being contemplated as part of the state's belt-tightening efforts.
School districts already are expecting to face $3.2 billion in recurring expenses the state sent their way last session, when lawmakers earmarked some of the federal stimulus dollars for salary increases for school personnel.
School district and school board officials are now concerned the state might not give them needed additional funding for student population growth, which would carry a $2.5 billion price tag for the new biennium.
Already, rapidly growing school districts such as Northside, one of the largest school districts in the state, are trying to calculate what a state funding cut would mean. It is not pretty.
Northside ISD Superintendent John Folks said a 5 percent cut would affect the jobs of 275 teachers and 45 administrators. There is not much else to cut, he said, when 86 to 87 percent of a school district budget is tied to personnel.
The cuts would impact not only large districts. In the Southwest ISD, which has only 12,000 students, a 5-percent cut would affect 42 teachers and 20 maintenance workers and custodians, Vasquez said.
The downsizing of the teaching staff will probably result in increased class sizes and could affect summer school.
Public school educators should not be forced to take the state to court to get relief. We have been there and done that. The solutions that were served up are not working and need to be reworked.
Ignoring the public education problems for yet another legislative session is a disservice to the schoolchildren in the state. And making the situation worse by cutting funding for public education would be outrageously short-sighted. Students are the future of this state, and shortchanging them on their educational opportunities is shortchanging the state economy.
State lawmakers need to make public school education a priority in the next session.
Filing bills aimed at micromanaging teacher education and what goes on in the classroom is inconsequential when the big issues are ignored.
Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/School-funding-needs-protection-838712.php#ixzz19pN29Dup
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/School-funding-needs-protection-838712.php
Monday, December 27, 2010
School funding: Should Georgia parents follow Florida's parents lead and sue?
by Luis A. Velez, the parent of two children in the Coweta public schools.
A political firestorm regarding public education in Florida may soon hit Georgia.
What do you do if you’re a public school parent who is fed up with the inferior quality of education your children are receiving? How do you deal with budget cuts that are crippling the system and even forcing teachers to beg for essential supplies, like crayons and pencils? If you’re a public school parent in Florida, you sue the state.
The Florida Supreme Court recently made history by holding that the Florida legislature can be held accountable for the quality of the state’s public schools. Specifically, the Court held that citizen-plaintiffs had stated a claim worth pursuing at trial, namely, that the Florida legislature is violating its “paramount duty” to provide and fund a “high quality” system of free public schools, as required by Article IX, Section 1 of Florida’s Constitution.
The Florida lawsuit promises to be instructive to Georgians on several fronts. First, Florida’s “paramount duty” to provide a “high quality” public education for its children sets one of the highest standards for state support of public schools in the nation. Most states only guarantee an “efficient” system of public education. In comparison, Georgia’s Constitution requires the provision of an “adequate” education. The suit might help clarify the differences in each standard.
The lawsuit also calls into question the crucial issue of whether public school education represents a fundamental right, like Free Speech. If not, what is the state’s legal duty to educate its children? The answers to these questions are of great interest to many disaffected Georgian parents of public school students who wonder what kind of education their children are being “guaranteed,” and are prepared to challenge the “adequacy” of the education their children are being provided.
These issues were previously litigated. In the 1973 case of San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the U.S. Supreme Court held that education is not a fundamental right and the Equal Protection Clause does not require absolute equality in school funding or prohibit “rational” disparities in educational funding. Thus, it refused to overturn Texas’ educational funding system that provided public schools with a “foundation” level of state funding, and enabled districts to augment state public school funding using revenues from local property taxes. This created funding disparities between wealthy and poor school districts.
It may be time for the Court to revisit these issues. Part of what is driving the Florida suit is that the state’s share of education funding has dropped from nearly 62 percent to about 44 percent, as lawmakers have shifted the responsibility for funding public schools to local communities through property taxes. This has made it virtually impossible for poor school districts to provide a “high quality” education. Even wealthy school districts are balking at their ever increasing funding burden.
What does all of this mean to Georgians? Before the parents of Georgia’s public school students rush to file comparable suits, they should understand a few things. First, Georgia’s Constitution only calls for the state to provide an “adequate” education, which is a much easier standard for the state to meet than in Florida. Also, in Georgia, state funds still account for over 60 percent of public education expenses, much higher than in Florida.
Nonetheless, the overall quality of public education in Georgia remains poor and its high school graduation rate is dismally low. Also, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rodriguez that education is not a fundamental right, the Court has consistently stated that education is, “perhaps the most important function of state and local government…and the very foundation of good citizenship.” One wonders how can an uneducated populace properly exercise fundamental rights, such as First Amendment freedoms or the right to vote? Doesn’t this place the right to an education on the same footing as these other fundamental rights? They seem inexorably linked.
Given the anti-government furor that is sweeping the nation, this may be enough for Georgian parents to have a Howard Beale moment, in which they throw open their windows and shout, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!” To borrow a metaphor from Sarah Palin, perhaps it’s time for Georgia’s Mama (and Papa) Bulldogs, Panthers, and other public school parents to test the legal waters again to ensure our children receive an adequate public education. Some argue our kids deserve at least that much.
– From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog: http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/12/27/school-funding-should-georgia-parents-sue-the-state/
.
A political firestorm regarding public education in Florida may soon hit Georgia.
What do you do if you’re a public school parent who is fed up with the inferior quality of education your children are receiving? How do you deal with budget cuts that are crippling the system and even forcing teachers to beg for essential supplies, like crayons and pencils? If you’re a public school parent in Florida, you sue the state.
The Florida Supreme Court recently made history by holding that the Florida legislature can be held accountable for the quality of the state’s public schools. Specifically, the Court held that citizen-plaintiffs had stated a claim worth pursuing at trial, namely, that the Florida legislature is violating its “paramount duty” to provide and fund a “high quality” system of free public schools, as required by Article IX, Section 1 of Florida’s Constitution.
The Florida lawsuit promises to be instructive to Georgians on several fronts. First, Florida’s “paramount duty” to provide a “high quality” public education for its children sets one of the highest standards for state support of public schools in the nation. Most states only guarantee an “efficient” system of public education. In comparison, Georgia’s Constitution requires the provision of an “adequate” education. The suit might help clarify the differences in each standard.
The lawsuit also calls into question the crucial issue of whether public school education represents a fundamental right, like Free Speech. If not, what is the state’s legal duty to educate its children? The answers to these questions are of great interest to many disaffected Georgian parents of public school students who wonder what kind of education their children are being “guaranteed,” and are prepared to challenge the “adequacy” of the education their children are being provided.
These issues were previously litigated. In the 1973 case of San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, the U.S. Supreme Court held that education is not a fundamental right and the Equal Protection Clause does not require absolute equality in school funding or prohibit “rational” disparities in educational funding. Thus, it refused to overturn Texas’ educational funding system that provided public schools with a “foundation” level of state funding, and enabled districts to augment state public school funding using revenues from local property taxes. This created funding disparities between wealthy and poor school districts.
It may be time for the Court to revisit these issues. Part of what is driving the Florida suit is that the state’s share of education funding has dropped from nearly 62 percent to about 44 percent, as lawmakers have shifted the responsibility for funding public schools to local communities through property taxes. This has made it virtually impossible for poor school districts to provide a “high quality” education. Even wealthy school districts are balking at their ever increasing funding burden.
What does all of this mean to Georgians? Before the parents of Georgia’s public school students rush to file comparable suits, they should understand a few things. First, Georgia’s Constitution only calls for the state to provide an “adequate” education, which is a much easier standard for the state to meet than in Florida. Also, in Georgia, state funds still account for over 60 percent of public education expenses, much higher than in Florida.
Nonetheless, the overall quality of public education in Georgia remains poor and its high school graduation rate is dismally low. Also, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rodriguez that education is not a fundamental right, the Court has consistently stated that education is, “perhaps the most important function of state and local government…and the very foundation of good citizenship.” One wonders how can an uneducated populace properly exercise fundamental rights, such as First Amendment freedoms or the right to vote? Doesn’t this place the right to an education on the same footing as these other fundamental rights? They seem inexorably linked.
Given the anti-government furor that is sweeping the nation, this may be enough for Georgian parents to have a Howard Beale moment, in which they throw open their windows and shout, “I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!” To borrow a metaphor from Sarah Palin, perhaps it’s time for Georgia’s Mama (and Papa) Bulldogs, Panthers, and other public school parents to test the legal waters again to ensure our children receive an adequate public education. Some argue our kids deserve at least that much.
– From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog: http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2010/12/27/school-funding-should-georgia-parents-sue-the-state/
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)