Archives for category: New Jersey

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

A reader sends this note, relevant today, but relevant beyond today. It is part of the rightwing assault on the teaching profession. The state gets to define “effective,” then can take the right to due process away from those who don’t meet the benchmarks arbitrarily created by the state, which is eager to fire teachers and make room for teaching temps. I have said it before and I’ll say it again. Teachers without the right to due process may be fired for any reason or for no reason. Teachers without the right to due process will never teach anything controversial. Teachers without due process rights will never disagree with their principal. Teachers without due process rights have no academic freedom.

IN NEW JERSEY TODAY (6/18), tenure reform bill S-1455 (the TEACHNJ Act) will be voted on in committee. But not by the Senate Education Committee which discussed this bill at length during its March meeting. No, on Thursday 6/14 this tenure reform bill was “transferred” to the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee for a quickie vote to be held Monday 6/18. The main purpose of this tenure reform bill is to dismantle the right to due process by making it not only something a teacher can earn but also something a teacher can lose. If an administrator should give a teacher two summative performance ratings on the lower half of a 4-point scale (“ineffective” or “partially effective”), that teacher will then lose his/her previously earned right to due process and can be fired without the opportunity to appeal the decision to a third party. So in other words, in New Jersey a teacher will be able to EARN the right to due process but it will then be TAKEN AWAY precisely when the teacher might actually need to exercise that right.

Yesterday I heard from a teacher in New Jersey, who read my blog about giving tests in the arts and physical education. I said in no uncertain terms that giving state tests in the arts is wrong. It diminishes teacher professionalism. It has nothing to do with improving education. It’s just the mindless need to test everyone and create data so that teachers can be evaluated by numbers.

This teacher described the nightmare of testing that is descending on her state under the leadership of Chris Cerf. Not only will students be constantly pre-tested, tested, test-prepped, and post-tested, they will be tested in everything to measure their “growth.” They will be tested in dance, physical education, art, etc.

This teacher knows that what is happening is wrong. Other teachers know it is wrong too, but they are afraid to speak up. As the movement accelerates to strip teachers of tenure and any job protections, the climate of fear takes hold. Who will risk their job to do what is right? Who has the courage to stand up to the powerful? Who will defend the defenseless children who are the victims of all this obsessive measurement?

She will. Who will stand with her?

It is funny that you say that because my school is piloting the new teacher evaluation in NJ. NJ has chosen to go with the Student Growth Percentile (SGP) model in the teacher evaluation. So, with SGP, students are given pre-midterms, midterms, pre-final, and final to measure the growth of our students.Here is the breakdown of how it is calculatedQ: How does New Jersey measure student growth?
A: New Jersey measures growth for an individual student by comparing the change in his or her NJ ASK achievement from one year to the
next to that of all other students in the state who had similar historical results (the student’s “academic peers”). This change in achievement
is reported as a student growth percentile (abbreviated SGP) and indicates how high or low that student’s growth was as compared to that
of his/her academic peers. For a school or district, the growth percentiles for all students are aggregated to create a median SGP for the
school or district. The median SGP is a representation of “typical” growth for students in the school or district.However, since we do not have longitudinal tests in the high school, our district/school chose to create their own tests for every content area.
I’m talking dance, physical education, art, musical theatre, graphic arts, sculpture, play-writing etc. This week, our students are taking multiple choice tests mixed with open ended responses in dance and all those other areas I mentioned, and I found myself think, “this is absurd” yet I’m the only one saying anything. Am I the only one who thinks this is DEAD WRONG! No I am not, but I found out yesterday everyone else in our school is afraid to say anything. They are afraid to take a stand because they are not willing to suffer any repercussions from the administration. However we are doing our children a disservice by keeping silent.So, I’ll stand alone and take the stand with one or two other teachers. It may not make a big impact, but I will make a point. We owe this to our children and future generations.

This has to be the stupidest question of the 2012 testing season. Third grade students in New Jersey were asked to reveal a secret. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57432728/nj-school-exams-secret-question-angers-parents/

What exactly is the point of this question? It does not ask the students to explain what he or she has learned. It is not related to what they were taught or should have learned.

It is intrusive, nosy, pointless, and stupid.

Questions like this add fuel to the popular outrage against high-stakes testing.

Someday, people will look back on this era and wonder: “What were they thinking?”

Diane