By

Ray Pinney

I was having a conversation with a board member who was lamenting all the proposed changes. “How are we going to promote 21^st century learning?” she asked. “With 20^th century funding!” I glibly replied. We laughed and agreed that this conundrum would make a great topic for a blog, so here we are. Actually I was planning on discussing the issue of the 2.5 percent hard cap that the governor is proposing anyway. 

Many educators are very concerned about this cap proposal.  The issue is not the idea of a cap itself. A cap can be an effective way to limit property tax impact but still maintain an excellent programming base for school districts.  Caps force school districts to decide their priorities in spending.  If the board agrees on a teachers’ settlement that is above the cap, it means costs have to be trimmed in other areas.  The current 4 percent cap is reasonable since it has exemptions for areas that a district has no control over, such as health care costs. Although the cap discourages drastic tax increases, it does permit increases which, over time, can begin to build up.

We often overlook what is a key component in making the caps effective: (more…)

By

Ray Pinney 

I’ve always admired people who are handy and can build or repair almost anything. My father was one of those people. He was a builder and built the house that I grew up in. I’m sorry to say I inherited very few of his skills, but I did absorb a good lesson or two. One of them is on the uses and importance of using the right tools.  Since the governor has proposed a “toolkit” for school districts, it’s useful to review just what tools can do.

Remember that specific tools are designed for a specific purpose. A Phillips head screwdriver (as my daughter says, that’s the one with the star end) and a flat head screwdriver are designed for different screws.  So what is the purpose of the tools the governor is proposing?  

Most of the Christie administration tools do have a definite design.  (more…)

By

Ray Pinney

Those of you who are dyed-in-the-wool Democrats or Republicans may want to stop reading now since I am about to be critical of both political parties.  While I think it is fair criticism, I know some might take offense.   

A few weeks ago Gov. Christie took some heat for a comment that he made about schools and teachers sometimes using students as “drug mules” to carry their position to the parents and community.  He adamantly believes that the use of students for political purposes, especially by the NJEA, is entirely inappropriate.  Or at least it is inappropriate when they use students against his policies. Would he hold the same belief if the students  were brought out to support him?  We may soon find out.

Yesterday, at the Senate Economic Growth Committee meeting was held outside the statehouse (yes, that’s right – outside ) before a crowd assembled to rally for school choice. They were there to hear the bill S-1872, a school voucher bill – oops, I mean an “opportunity scholarship” bill.  I am not going to get into the merits of this bill because I believe most people have made up their mind on this issue one way or the other. But that’s not what I am intrigued by at the moment. What struck me as I looked out into the crowd, was that I saw a large number of religious and private school students in the crowd holding posters and chanting for vouchers. Then a thought crossed my mind: are these students being used as “drug mules” like the public school students?  (more…)

By Frank Belluscio 

New Jersey is a state populated by an “argumentative people,” with children enrolled in a “wretched” school system, governed by elections set up to “rig the game.”

Forget the high property taxes.  That image by itself would drive people out of this state.  Why would anyone want to live here? Why would any business invest here?

What’s surprising is this negative image is resulting not from God-awful reality TV shows or talk radio that specializes in blasting government.  It’s being promoted by the government itself…at least inadvertently.  Thankfully, it’s not accurate.

Let’s look at some recent examples of poor choices of words from state politicians and the people who work for them.

(1)  ‘Rig the Game’ In announcing his “toolkit” on Monday, Governor Christie made the following comment about the proposal to move school elections to November.  “We need more voters to participate in the school board and fire district process in order to have it reflect in a much greater way than it does today, the interest of all the people in New Jersey and not just the special interest who organize and set up those elections in order to rig the game.  To rig the game so that they get the result that they want.”

I’m not a spokesman for the administration, but I think the message (which NJSBA would not agree with) that the governor intended to convey is this: ”Too few people vote in the April election; it gives special interests, like teacher unions, the ability to impact the outcome.  We can eliminate that influence by moving the school election to November.”

Unfortunately, bringing the expression “rig the game” into the discussion conjures up images of fixed elections, electioneering and the cliché, “vote early and often.”

So, just in case anyone asks you, here are some facts about the Annual School Elections–whether they take place in April or at any other time of year:

• School elections are conducted by the state’s 21 county boards of election, not local school districts.  Any concern about “rigging the game” should immediately be brought to the attention of the county clerk.
• A long line of court decisions, dating from 1953, prohibits the expenditure of public funds to encourage citizens to vote “yes” or “no” on any public question, including the proposed school budget, or to vote in favor or against any candidate for office.  If such violations occur, a complaint could be filed with Superior Court.
• The state Accountability Regulations prohibit the name or photo of any school board member from appearing in school district-issued material during the 90 days preceding school election. (I’m not aware of similar restrictions for municipalities or counties.)
• School board candidates must file the same financial disclosures and campaign contribution reports with the state’s Election Law Enforcement Commission as do all other candidates for political office.
• Prohibitions against electioneering and other actions to intimidate voters apply to school elections as they do to all elections.

But let’s face it.  The governor wasn’t really talking about election fraud or electioneering.  He was talking about the NJEA and, maybe, us too.

(2)  A ‘Wretched System’  He’s the new guy, who recently came over to the “dark side” (i.e., government public relations) after years as a reporter.  So, maybe we should cut him a break.  Unfortunately, the commissioner of education’s spokesman definitely chose the wrong adjective when communicating with a Star-Ledger columnist not known for giving government officials breaks of any sort.

Let me recount the column: When asked to address New Jersey’s performance on the U.S. Department of Education’s National Assessment of Educational Progress, the spokesman called the results “irrelevant.” According to the Star-Ledger, he stated, “We should not take solace in the fact that we score well in a wretched system that fails to adequately teach such a high percentage of children.”

Somehow, I don’t think superintendents in places like Livingston or Westfield believe their students are being taught in a wretched system.  In fact, New Jersey’s continued excellent performance on the NAEP–one of the few “apples-to-apples” comparisons of public school students’ performance nationwide–illustrates the overall success of our state’s public schools.

So, here is the message that I think the Department of Education spokesman meant to deliver or, at least, should have conveyed: “We should not be satisfied with the NAEP results because there are many students whose educational needs are not being met under the current system.  Until we change the system so that these students also have the opportunity to succeed, we cannot celebrate.”

Of course, part of the administration’s proposed solution–vouchers–is something NJSBA cannot support, based on long-standing policy against the use of public funds for non-public schools.  But dismissing a valid measure of student achievement and “dissing” the success of high performing schools will not help achieve the goal–educational opportunity for all–that we all share.

(3) ‘Malfeasance.’ Don’t think for a minute that the administration is the only branch of government guilty of choosing its words indiscriminately.  It has a long way to go before meeting the “standard” set by certain committees of the state Legislature.  My “favorite” example came from a member of the Assembly Budget Committee, when he charged local school boards with “malfeasance”–not a particular board, but school boards in general.  That’s a powerful–and, frankly, awful–accusation to make against 588 public bodies, with 4,800 unpaid members.  (Sometimes, there seem to be two classes of elected officials: those who are paid and have the bully pulpit, and those who are unpaid and become undeserved targets.)

Of course, the legislator who made the “malfeasance” remark fell into the practice, common among politicians, of taking an isolated incident (if I recall right, it was the time a school district was found to have paid its bus drivers for the time it took them to charge their cell phones) and applying it to everyone.

We might expect unfounded, irresponsible statements from radio talk show hosts.  Elected officials should operate at a higher level.  Unfortunately, they’re choosing not to, and public discourse is the worse for it.

By

Ray Pinney

Sometimes, as we all know, behind a little argument is a big issue. At home, an argument about a towel left on the bathroom floor may really be an argument about whether partners in a marriage are supportive of each other.

With the ongoing heated arguments over wage freezes and budget cuts in school districts, I believe that there is a bigger issue simmering underneath all this which we are not discussing. Is it possible to provide the same quality of education to our New Jersey students at a lower cost than we do now? Gov. Christie and many of his supporters believe that it can be done.  Many in the education community do not believe that and are afraid that the result of education cuts will be decreased student achievement.  (more…)