BoardBlog

As the parent of two children, I could always tell how important something was to my kids by how much they were willing to work for something. For example, I knew that music was important to them because they were willing at a young age to go to school an hour early to participate in band and then take lessons and practice at night. It was a high priority for them.

When something is a priority, you make time for it and allocate resources. As parents, when we see something we think is worthwhile for our kids, we allocate the money and time to match their interest.

This lesson, which families know so well, is one that the New Jersey Legislature would be wise to learn. The best example of this is the Anti-Bully Bill of Rights, which the Legislature passed almost unanimously and the governor signed into law.

When the law was first enacted, the same question came up at many meetings around the state:  Is this an unfunded mandate? To school administrators and board members, the law seemed to mean more work for individuals and more training. The proponents of the law have always said that it could be implemented through current funds.  Those in the field were never convinced. Read the rest of this entry »

At the beginning of this week, I thought I might write a blog about the Governor’s State of the State Address. Then I got a reminder about an event in January that I did not want to overlook and an email from a board member that triggered a thought.

For those who want to know what happened in the State of the State speech, here is an abbreviated synopsis of the governor’s message for the education community:  Tax cuts are good. Tenure is bad and must be changed.  Charter schools are good and we need them, especially in our districts that are not performing. The Abbott Court rulings are very bad and unfair.  The practice of Last in First Out (LIFO) needs be eliminated when districts have to reduce staff. We need the Opportunity Scholarship Act (voucher bill) passed now.  None of this is new, but it is important for us to know that the governor has made education reform a priority this year.

I am not trying to minimize the importance of the governor’s words but something else came across my computer which I felt was more timely.  Plus I am pretty sure that over the course of 2012 I will have ample opportunity to address the governor’s education agenda.

I was corresponding with a board member about some legislative issues, as well as trying to convince her to get more involved on an NJSBA committee. She said she would think about getting involved more, but she first has to decide whether or not to run for reelection. She said that the six years she has spent on her board had been very time consuming and been hard work, so she was undecided. Then she told me “You do a terrific job and I am very honored to be able to work with you.” As I read those nice words, I also had a page about January being School Board Recognition month up on my computer screen.  I thought that the board member, Angela, who emailed me those kind words, had it backwards. The honor is mine, not hers.  So I replied to her “Angela working for dedicated volunteers like you makes my job seem worthwhile. So the honor is mine to do my best to represent you and work on your behalf.”  I really mean what I said to my friend Angela and let me explain. Read the rest of this entry »

With the passage of S3148/A4394, school boards may soon have a decision to make about when to hold their board elections and if they want to eliminate the school budget vote.

Actually, they are not the only ones who can make that decision unilaterally. The legislation would also give municipal officials authority to move school board elections to November without the board having any say in the matter. I am sure that many board members do not understand this provision nor do they agree with it

I completely support a board having this ability to choose because when they make that decision, it will probably involve a discussion on what is best for their students. But I am less confident that the best interest of the students will be included in the debate if the municipal body is making the decision unilaterally. The municipality’s focus and responsibility by law is more inclined towards budgetary issues than education issues.

Nevertheless, the question now is: Read the rest of this entry »

Sweeney hit the nail on the head when he talked about how few school boards in his district have actually met with him over the years. …. As school board members, we should be fighting for our kids, but over the years I have learned that this is not always the case! 

-        A local board member’s comment to me after listening to Senator Sweeney on Conversations on New Jersey Education

Through my years with the New Jersey School Boards Association I have heard many legislators speak. Most of the time, when the legislator is asked a question – whether that question is coming from me or from someone else – I have a pretty good idea what their response is going to be.  They usually play it safe and do not deviate much from their “script.”

But there are times when a legislator does and it is rather refreshing and usually very honest.  During my podcast show, A Conversation on Education with Senate President Sweeney, I have to admit that Senator Sweeney did take by surprise when he responded to a question on how he sees the role of the board member in the legislative process.  It was his response that elicited the above quote from a board member who agreed with Senate President Sweeney.

What did Senate President Sweeney say? Board members must be much more active in talking to their legislators on issues of importance….. To be honest with you; there isn’t a whole lot of interaction between my office and school districts… Board members need to make a greater effort to let your legislators know what is going on in your district.”  Sen. Sweeney also mentioned that while NJSBA staffers do a good job of informing the legislators on positions, it would be more helpful if local board members communicated more with their legislators.

Sen. Sweeney was not trying to be critical of board members. I believe he was just trying to provide an honest assessment of his dealings with school districts and probably what he has heard from some of his colleagues. Obviously the board member who contacted me agrees with Sen. Sweeney’s assessment because she also indicated that she has urged her board to meet with their senator but the board has been reluctant because some of the members were upset with their representative’s politics. So they chose not to meet with him. Are school board members and school administrators active advocates for their school district or are they, as the board member and Sen. Sweeney indicated, passive advocates?

While I have had the distinct pleasure to work with some very active board members and school administrators over the years, in this case perception is reality. If the legislators are saying that they do not often hear from their school districts, then their perception is correct.

While some board members may not lobby their legislator because they do not like that person,  I think that is a big mistake. As the board member said “As school board members, we should be fighting for our kids,” and I add another sentiment: If you don’t do it, who will?  Part of your duty is to represent your district before other government entities, and if state leaders only hear from the state association and not their local districts, they may get the idea that a particular issue does not impact local districts.

I tend to think that many board members do not engage in advocating on education issues because it is not in their nature. Many people run for the school board because it is “non-political” and they are not comfortable with partisan politics nor do they think it should be part of the education discussion. While board members may not want advocacy to be part of their responsibilities, as Sen. Sweeney pointed out, legislators see it as part of a board member’s responsibilities.

The board members’ perspective is too often overlooked when decisions in Trenton are made.  I know that many board members are offended at laws such as the criminal background check law and the anti-bullying law, even when they pass the legislature by huge margins. That is not because they disagree with the law’s premise but because they wish legislators would view the proposed legislation from their perspective. While NJSBA staff does advocate for boards, as Sen. Sweeney indicated, legislators would like to hear from their constituents too.

Understand that there is no guarantee that if you communicate with your legislators you will win all the legislative battles. If the political climate is right, once they are introduced, some bills are almost a fait accompli. Legislative battles are marathons; victory and defeat can come on the same day and it takes patience. But it also takes getting and staying involved.

If the voice of the local districts gets louder, then NJSBA’s influence grows because the legislators know that the issue rises to another level. I remember interviewing Assemblywoman Mila Jasey shortly after she was elected to the Assembly after serving on her local board of education She said that she did not know the power she had to influence legislation as a local board member until she sat in the state legislator’s seat.

My question to school board members: If the legislators think you have influence, are you wielding it?

After I graduated from college, I took the summer off and back- packed through Europe because I figured that it might be the last time I could travel without time constraints (Of course, I was right about this).  Not being able to speak the native languages provided some funny and not-so- funny incidents. In any case, I am sure most of you have been in a situation where the discussion is hampered by the two people not speaking the same language. It can be frustrating at times and shows how simple things can become so complicated.

Last week I described an education reform program I attended,  Rethinking Education Governance for the Twenty-First Century, which was sponsored by the Fordham Institute.  The presenters were for the most part academics with impressive credentials. For those who have been part of public education for a while, some of these concepts may just turn your world upside down. That is because they are seriously considering “rethinking” education, not just tweaking it.

Most of you know that the commissioner and governor both want to change teacher tenure and teacher evaluations, as well as provide more charter school opportunities for parents. What was fascinating about the program at the Fordham Institute was the thrust of the discussion: that the next reform we need to consider involves changing how school districts are governed. Read the rest of this entry »

Public views on some education reform efforts have become so polarized that it’s a little like everyone is in a boat together and paddling as hard as they can – in opposite directions.

Last week I was in Washington, D.C. where an education ‘think tank,’ the Fordham Institute, hosted a symposium called “Rethinking Education Governance.” The keynote speaker was none other than our own Acting Commissioner of Education Christopher Cerf, who was praised for his education reform efforts in New Jersey.

Just 48 hours earlier I had been in Highland Park, Middlesex County, where the school board, municipal officials, legislators and parents were meeting. They were united in their opposition to a proposed charter school that would involve students from Highland Park, Edison and New Brunswick.  The group is planning to conduct a protest at the New Jersey Department of Education offices (an “Occupy NJDOE” protest) on Dec.16, which is the day by which the comments on the charter school’s application are due to NJDOE.  

Proponents of charter school expansion may interpret the opposition as just a group of well-organized NIMBYs (Not in My Back Yard) or community members being used as a front by some education special-interest group. That would be a mistake on their part. As an observer at several of these events, I am seeing this movement grow. There are community members up in arms, not only in the three districts I mentioned, but in many others such as Princeton, Teaneck, and Cherry Hill. I have seen the crowds, and this movement is not made up of education professionals such as teachers and administrators. It is comprised of the community members. Anyone in the education community who has tried to organize parents and community members en masse knows how hard it is to engage people in the process for any length of time. The movement against charters has been in place for a couple of years and seems to be growing. So this issue is striking a nerve with many community members. What is that nerve?

For the most part the objection is not against the concept of charter schools, although there are many who have an issue with a charter school that focuses its curriculum on a specific ethnic group. The objection is based more on not having any input in the decision, especially since most of the money to run the schools in these communities comes from local property taxes, not state aid. Many speakers at the Highland Park rally viewed this as a “state mandate – state pay” issue, since it affects how they allocate local resources for their public schools. The funding mechanism for charter school forces districts to cut funds from their own operating budgets to pay the charter school. Many parents feel that their child’s education is being compromised for a charter school that they did not ask for. They want the right to vote on this local issue.

The other issue is that many community members believe that their schools are high-performing and that the concept behind charter schools is to give choices to students in so-called “failing” schools. Since they do not view their own schools as failing, they see the proposed charter as an unneeded program.

This opposition, which is reflected in Highland Park and other communities, is having an effect on public policy. Gov. Christie has already stated that while he thinks that charter school placement is a state decision, he wants to “focus” his efforts in those areas where the students need it the most. That may be an indication that he has noticed the opposition to charter schools and he is adjusting his policy a bit because, to him, it has been primarily about improving educational outcomes in our poorest communities. The governor may have tweaked his position (something that he made public in an interview with NJSBA) because he noticed the same thing that I did: that the protests are not coming from his normal opponents (the NJEA or other education groups) but parents and the community.

So will the community group’s December 16 protest called “Occupy NJDOE” have a short term or even long term impact?  In the short term, this charter school’s application may be impacted. It has been rejected three times before, and may be rejected for a fourth time. Over the long term, the question is more difficult. That is because Acting Commissioner Cerf has a different philosophy than previous commissioners of education and I doubt that he will change his beliefs dramatically. He represents a new type of educational leader. At the Fordham Institute I was able to see the new philosophy that is being pushed not only in New Jersey but nationally. What is the new philosophy?  That will have to wait until next week’s blog.

Sometimes when you see a large protest, it’s hard to believe that it is not going to change things.

Recently, I have been thinking of the very loud and well-populated protests that NJEA, as well as other public employee unions, staged last June over the pension and health benefit reform measures passed by the Legislature. It was an impressive sight. Thousands of people were standing and shouting in brutally hot weather to make their opinion known. I thought about them, not so much when the November legislative election results came in, but during the Legislature’s internal elections to determine who would fill each party’s leadership spots.

If you remember back in June when thousands of union members filled the street, their anger was not aimed solely at Gov. Christie. Much of it was focused on the Democrats who supported the pension and health benefit reforms–most notably Senate President Stephen Sweeney and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver. The unions held signs that assured the legislators that come November the workers would remember their support for the reforms. The Democratic Party seemed split and, in fact, I wrote an article, called Governor Christie and the Democrats – Divide and Conquer, which outlined this event and the divide it created among the Democrats in the Legislature. Many observers wondered if Sweeney and Oliver would survive this discord and retain their leadership positions. Others wondered if it would affect the legislative races also.

In the November elections, the NJEA withheld support for the two Democratic leaders, as well as others who had supported the reforms.  Since most Democrats in the Legislature had not supported the bills and the public employee unions were upset, it was plausible that their leadership might be challenged, especially in the Assembly where it was reported that some lawmakers were seriously pursuing the possibility of changing leadership.  After all, doing that might placate the unions which are a core base of the Democratic Party.

So what happened – less than six months later? Read the rest of this entry »

There is a debate beginning quietly about whether we can best improve student achievement through strategies at the district level or the school level..  While we all want to increase student achievement, we find that when theory is put into practice, it gets messy. When we devise proposals, it also reveals who we believe is the key to education.

Some recent proposals by both the legislators and the state seem to indicate that, from their perspective, the most important person is the school principal. They think reform needs to happen at the building level and not the district level. For example, the tenure reform proposal most likely to gain traction in the lame duck legislative session (and beyond) is Sen. Teresa Ruiz’s TEACH NJ legislation. Among that bill’s key provisions is a proposal to give the building principal exclusive authority in the hiring of, and removal of, employees, making personnel decisions a building-level decision.

This proposal, in conjunction with the recent Education Transformation Task Force recommendation to monitor schools and not districts, would focus the reform effort on the school, disregarding the district-level perspective.

I think these two proposals are a bit misguided on several levels. But before I proceed, Read the rest of this entry »

First they came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn’t a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

Rev. Martin Neimoller

I had almost finished writing my latest blog entry when I flipped on the television after coming home from a very informative meeting on the Anti-Bullying law.  I was thinking about something one of the speakers said: In most instances even when people (not just kids) see something wrong, they don’t speak up.  I flipped the channel to ESPN to see if there was a college basketball game on when I saw the press conference announcing the firing of the legendary Penn State football coach Joe Paterno.  It was then that it hit me how much our society is changing and that silence is no longer an option, not even for legends.

While school administrators, board members, and teachers are all fretting over the implementation of the anti-bullying law, it should not be lost on us that silence is considered an offense in itself, especially when it involves not reporting incidents that victimize children.

That thought brought to mind the Rev. Neimoller’s quote, which I opened with.  It was written about Nazi Germany, but its lessons are timeless. It was a quote that my father had hung prominently in our house as a reminder to not be afraid to speak up when others are silent in the face of injustice. Read the rest of this entry »

There I was on Halloween night, tapping away on my laptop, but using candles to see the keyboard.  I felt like a cross between Bill Gates and a pilgrim at Plymouth Rock.  It struck me once again that we often take things for granted because they are always there, things like running water, heat, light and a working refrigerator and stove. I have been without power at home since last weekend’s snowstorm. In my case that means no running water since my well is powered by an electric pump. Power went out on Saturday and as I write this blog it’s Thursday. I guess I shouldn’t let the fact that I am cold and dirty affect my disposition, but I guess I am not that big a person. (The funny thing is that even though I know I have no power, I still automatically turn the light switch on or off as I enter or leave a room.)

In the same way I take the basic comforts of home for granted, I believe that some state leaders take NJSBA’s support for tenure reform for granted. Yes, I am a strong supporter of tenure reform and NJSBA has been one for decades, but that does not mean we can automatically support any proposal that changes tenure.

The tenure reform proposal most likely to gain traction in the lame duck legislative session, Senator Teresa Ruiz’s TEACH NJ legislation is a case in point. Read the rest of this entry »