Earlier today, I posted a blog about a bill in the New Jersey legislature that would remove seniority and tenure from teachers in that state and require that they be fired after two consecutive negative evaluations.. I just received the latest report from a reader in New Jersey.
You will notice two bad things about this “victory”:
1. Teachers and school boards have been pitted against each other. This is wrong. They should be working together.
2. Teachers have been pushed so far into a corner defending due process and seniority that they have acceded to demands to be evaluated by test scores. Interesting that the US will be the only nation to accept this untried, unproven teach-to-the-test approach to teacher evaluation.
I have reports from two teachers in New Jersey. There are differences in what they say, but there is concurrence that the political leadership of the state wants to cut teachersdown by making their jobs less secure. Bear in mind that New Jetsey is consistently among the top three states (the others being Massachusetts and Connecticut) on the federal NAEP. Why teachers need to be humbled in a high-performing state is anyone’s guess (I’d say the same in any state, actually).
So, from teacher #1:
Here’s an update regarding how NJ tenure reform bill S-1455 fared in committee today.
The text of tenure reform bill S-1455 as posted on the legislative web site at this hour still includes a provision requiring principals to revoke teacher tenure after two low performance evaluations.
However, today the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee advanced a substitute bill in which unilateral tenure revocation no longer appears to be a factor. Instead, an inefficiency charge leveled against a teacher after two low performance ratings would result in binding arbitration. The New Jersey Education Association supports the substitute version of the bill because, in addition to respecting due process rights, the bill no longer aims to weaken seniority.
The New Jersey School Boards Association (NJSBA) is not happy to know that experienced, more highly paid teachers will retain the benefit of seniority. NJSBA governmental relations director Michael Vrancik was quoted as saying, “The war is on. There’s more to fight.” http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/06/state_senate_committee_approve.html
And now another take from teacher #2:
http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2012/06/tenure-confusion-in-nj.html
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I think we have a problem of a few too many versions of the bill floating around, and some imprecise reporting:
http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2012/06/tenure-confusion-in-nj.html
While test scores are not specifically cited in the bill, “student achievement” is. This will be a big problem going forward.
Jazz, I’m an avid reader of your blog! I agree that the introduction of a substitute bill resulted in confusion here in New Jersey. To expand on what you said, standardized tests are briefly mentioned in the substitute bill but the use of multiple measures of “student learning” is clearly required. Funny how “student learning” takes center stage in a teacher’s performance evaluation when it’s the one element that only the student can contribute. We disempower students when we underestimate their role in their own success. Interestingly, the ostensible purpose of a teacher’s performance evaluation – to inform instructional development – is relegated to last place among 14 requirements that an evaluation rubric will be expected to meet. Rather than list them all here, I’ll just include a few highlights. The evaluation rubric must:
* be partially based on multiple objective measures of student learning that use student growth from one year’s measure to the next year’s measure;
* allow the district, in grades in which a standardized test is not required, to determine the methods for measuring student growth;
* use multiple measures of practice and student learning in rating effectiveness with specific measures and implementation processes;
* be based on the professional standards for that employee;
* ensure that all performance measures used in the rubric are linked to student achievement; and
* ensure that the results of the evaluation help to inform instructional development.
Keep up the great education coverage here in NJ, Jazz! Like Diane, you are a valuable resource to many.
Have the people in NJ lost their minds?
Well, we did vote for Chris Christie, so…
And the war goes on…
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-education-triggerbre85h0j6-20120618,0,6681233.story
Cynthia, here’s the part that really stuck out to me: “Though it has not yet been shown to work, parent trigger has support from many of the big players seeking to inject more free-market competition into public education, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation.” Surprise, surprise.
Or, as in the case of merit-pay, value-added, etc. “Though it has been shown not to work.”
The latest news from New Jersey:
http://www.njea.org/issues-and-political-action/tenure-q-a