Quality Public Education for All New Jersey Students

 

 
     GSCS Statement Condemning Violence Motivated by Race, Ethnicity or Sexual Orientation
     Latest Testimonies and Letters
     Virtual and In-Person Meeting Calendar for 2023-2024
     GSCS Critical Issues
     3-28-24 Education in the News
     3-27-24 Education in the News
     3-26-24 Education in the News
     3-25-24 Education in the News
     3-22-24 Education in the News
     3-21-24 Education in the News
     3-20-24 Education in the News
     3-19-24 Education in the News
     3-18-24 Education in the News
     3-15-24 Education in the News
     3-14-24 Education in the News
     3-12-24 Education in the News
     3-11-24 Education in the News
     3-8-24 Education in the News
     3-7-24 Educaiton in the News
     3-6-24 Education in the News
     3-5-24 Education in the News
     3-4-24 Education in the News
     3-1-24 Education in the News
     2-29-24 Educaiton in the News
     2-28-24 Education in the News
     2-27-24 Education in the News
     2-26-24 Education in the News
     2-23-24 Education in the News
     2-22-24 Education in the News
     2-21-24 Education in the News
     2-20-24 Education in the News
     2-19-24 Education in the News
     2-16-24 Education in the News
     2-15-24 Education in the News
     2-14-24 Education in the News
     2-13-24 Education in the News
     2-12-24 Education in the News
     2-9-24 Education in the News
     2-8-24 Education in the News
     2-7-24 Education in the News
     2-6-24 Education in the News
     2-5-24 Education in the news
     2-2-24 Education in the News
     2-1-24 Education in the News
     1-31-24 Education in the News
     1-30-24 Education in the News
     1-29-24 Education in the News
     1-26-24 Education in the News
     1-25-24 Education in the News
     1-24-24 Education in the News
     1-23-24 Education in the News
     1-22-24 Education in the News
     1-19-24 Education in the News
     1-18-24 Education in the News
     1-17-24 Education in the News
     1-16-24 Education in the News
     1-12-24 Education in the News
     1-11-24 Education in the News
     1-10-23 Education in the News
     1-9-24 Education in the News
     1-8-24 Education in the News
     1-5-24 Education in the News
     1-4-24 Education in the News
     1-3-23 Education in the News
     1-2-24 Education in the News
     2023-2024 Announcement Archive
     Older Archives
Updated 9-2-13...Recent Education Issues in the News: Compendium
(GSCS Note: GSCS opposed S1191 particularly as it would have restricted school districts' ability make fiscally responsible decisions...GSCS appreciates the administration's recognition that districts need options to reduce spending as needed.)Governor casts "Abosolute Veto" on S1191 on 8-19-13: S1191 ScaScsAca (SCS/1R) Allows establishment of county-wide purchasing system for certain school district services; offers employment protections for certain food or custodial services employees; and regulates subcontracting by districts and public higher education institutions.* Click below on More to see bill voting history. Education Week - March on Washington Inspires Educators, 50 Years Later … Arne Duncan Attaches More Strings to NCLB Waiver Renewals

Education Week - Florida Virtual School Faces Hard Times…Enrollment declines for country's largest state-run e-school

The Record - Tougher N.J. teacher evaluations aim to highlight the best

Star Ledger - Back to school: Teachers frustrated, nervous about new evaluation system set to take effect this fall

(GSCS Note: GSCS opposed this bill when it was originally proposed in 2010.)Courier Post - N.J. Lawmaker calls for end to school activity fees…Districts point to cuts in state aid… “Burzichelli…first introduced the bill in 2010 with no success.” Star Ledger - 190 Newark teachers get merit pay bonuses Asbury Park Press - Middletown schools cut workers hours to avoid Obamacare

Phillyburbs.com - Westampton launches program for autistic students

Toms River Patch - Toms River Regional School District Approves Sandy Aid...Township still recovering from $19,916,775 loss in property tax revenue following Superstorm Sandy

S1191 ScaScsAca (SCS/1R) Allows establishment of county-wide purchasing system for certain school district services; offers employment protections for certain food or custodial services employees; and regulates subcontracting by districts and public higher education institutions.*

 

 

Identical Bill Number: A2974    (ACS)
Last Session Bill Number: S2083  

Lesniak, Raymond J.   as Primary Sponsor
Sarlo, Paul A.   as Primary Sponsor
Mosquera, Gabriela M.   as Primary Sponsor
Diegnan, Patrick J., Jr.   as Primary Sponsor
Greenwald, Louis D.   as Primary Sponsor
Quijano, Annette   as Primary Sponsor
Giblin, Thomas P.   as Primary Sponsor
Sumter, Shavonda E.   as Primary Sponsor
Van Drew, Jeff   as Co-Sponsor
Whelan, Jim   as Co-Sponsor
Turner, Shirley K.   as Co-Sponsor
Cunningham, Sandra B.   as Co-Sponsor
Scutari, Nicholas P.   as Co-Sponsor
Vitale, Joseph F.   as Co-Sponsor
Gordon, Robert M.   as Co-Sponsor
Greenstein, Linda R.   as Co-Sponsor
Pou, Nellie   as Co-Sponsor
Conaway, Herb, Jr.   as Co-Sponsor
Beach, James   as Co-Sponsor

 

 

 

 


1/23/2012 Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Education Committee
2/21/2013 Reported from Senate Committee with Amendments, 2nd Reading
2/21/2013 Referred to Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee
3/4/2013 Reported from Senate Committee as a Substitute, 2nd Reading
3/18/2013 Passed by the Senate (22-15)
3/21/2013 Received in the Assembly, Referred to Assembly Education Committee
6/13/2013 Transferred to Assembly Budget Committee
6/17/2013 Reported out of Assembly Comm. with Amendments, 2nd Reading
6/24/2013 Substituted for A2974 (ACS)
6/24/2013 Passed by the Assembly (50-27-1)
6/24/2013 Received in the Senate, 2nd Reading on Concurrence
6/27/2013 Passed Senate (Passed Both Houses) (25-10)
8/19/2013 Absolute Veto, Received in the Senate

Statement - SED 2/21/13 - 2 pages PDF Format    HTML Format
Reprint - 3 pages PDF Format    HTML Format
Statement - SBA 3/4/13 SCS - 2 pages PDF Format    HTML Format
Introduced - 4 pages PDF Format    HTML Format
Senate Committee Substitute - 7 pages PDF Format    HTML Format
Statement - ABU 6/17/13 SCS - 3 pages PDF Format    HTML Format
Reprint Of Substitute - 8 pages PDF Format    HTML Format


Committee Voting:
SED  2/21/2013  -  r/Sca  -  Yes {4}  No {1}  Not Voting {0}  Abstains {0}  -  Roll Call

 

Ruiz, M. Teresa (C) - Yes

Turner, Shirley K. (V) - Yes

Allen, Diane B. - Yes

 

Beach, James - Yes

Doherty, Michael J. - No


SBA  3/4/2013  -  r/SCS  -  Yes {7}  No {5}  Not Voting {0}  Abstains {1}  -  Roll Call

 

Sarlo, Paul A. (C) - Yes

Stack, Brian P. (V) - Yes

Beck, Jennifer - No

 

Bucco, Anthony R. - No

Cunningham, Sandra B. - Yes

Greenstein, Linda R. - Yes

 

O'Toole, Kevin J. - No

Oroho, Steven V. - No

Pennacchio, Joseph - No

 

Pou, Nellie - Yes

Ruiz, M. Teresa - Abstain

Van Drew, Jeff - Yes

 

Weinberg, Loretta - Yes


ABU  6/17/2013  -  r/Aca  -  Yes {8}  No {4}  Not Voting {0}  Abstains {0}  -  Roll Call

 

Prieto, Vincent (C) - Yes

Schaer, Gary S. (V) - Yes

Brown, Christopher J. - No

 

Bucco, Anthony M. - No

Burzichelli, John J. - Yes

Coutinho, Albert - Yes

 

Fuentes, Angel - Yes

Johnson, Gordon M. - Yes

O'Scanlon, Declan J., Jr. - No

 

Watson Coleman, Bonnie - Yes

Webber, Jay - No

Wimberly, Benjie E. - Yes



Session Voting:
Sen.    3/18/2013  -  3RDG FINAL PASSAGE   -  Yes {22}  No {15}  Not Voting {3}    -  Roll Call

 

Addiego, Dawn Marie - No

Allen, Diane B. - Not Voting

Bateman, Christopher - No

 

Beach, James - Yes

Beck, Jennifer - No

Bucco, Anthony R. - No

 

Buono, Barbara - Yes

Cardinale, Gerald - No

Codey, Richard J. - Yes

 

Connors, Christopher J. - No

Cunningham, Sandra B. - Yes

Doherty, Michael J. - No

 

Gill, Nia H. - Yes

Gordon, Robert M. - Yes

Greenstein, Linda R. - Yes

 

Holzapfel, James W. - No

Kean, Thomas H., Jr. - No

Kyrillos, Joseph M., Jr. - No

 

Lesniak, Raymond J. - Yes

Madden, Fred H., Jr. - Yes

Norcross, Donald - Yes

 

O'Toole, Kevin J. - No

Oroho, Steven V. - No

Pennacchio, Joseph - No

 

Pou, Nellie - Yes

Rice, Ronald L. - Yes

Ruiz, M. Teresa - Not Voting

 

Sacco, Nicholas J. - Not Voting

Sarlo, Paul A. - Yes

Scutari, Nicholas P. - Yes

 

Singer, Robert W. - No

Smith, Bob - Yes

Stack, Brian P. - Yes

 

Sweeney, Stephen M. - Yes

Thompson, Samuel D. - No

Turner, Shirley K. - Yes

 

Van Drew, Jeff - Yes

Vitale, Joseph F. - Yes

Weinberg, Loretta - Yes

 

Whelan, Jim - Yes


Asm.  6/24/2013  -  SUBSTITUTE FOR A2974 Acs   -  Yes {0}  No {0}  Not Voting {80}  Abstains {0}  -  Voice Vote Passed
Asm.  6/24/2013  -  3RDG FINAL PASSAGE   -  Yes {50}  No {27}  Not Voting {2}  Abstains {1}  -  Roll Call

 

Albano, Nelson T. - Yes

Amodeo, John F. - Yes

Andrzejczak, Bob - Yes

 

Angelini, Mary Pat - No

Barnes, Peter J., III - Yes

Benson, Daniel R. - Yes

 

Bramnick, Jon M. - No

Brown, Chris A. - Yes

Brown, Christopher J. - No

 

Bucco, Anthony M. - No

Burzichelli, John J. - Yes

Caputo, Ralph R. - Yes

 

Caride, Marlene - Yes

Carroll, Michael Patrick - No

Casagrande, Caroline - No

 

Chivukula, Upendra J. - Yes

Ciattarelli, Jack M. - No

Clifton, Robert D. - No

 

Conaway, Herb, Jr. - Yes

Connors, Sean - Yes

Coughlin, Craig J. - Yes

 

Coutinho, Albert - Not Voting

Cryan, Joseph - Yes

Dancer, Ronald S. - No

 

DeAngelo, Wayne P. - Yes

DeCroce, BettyLou - No

DiMaio, John - No

 

Diegnan, Patrick J., Jr. - Yes

Egan, Joseph V. - Yes

Eustace, Timothy J. - Yes

 

Fuentes, Angel - Yes

Giblin, Thomas P. - Yes

Gove, DiAnne C. - No

 

Green, Jerry - Yes

Greenwald, Louis D. - Yes

Gusciora, Reed - Yes

 

Handlin, Amy H. - No

Jasey, Mila M. - Yes

Jimenez, Angelica M. - Yes

 

Johnson, Gordon M. - Yes

Kean, Sean T. - Yes

Lampitt, Pamela R. - Abstain

 

Mainor, Charles - Yes

McGuckin, Gregory P. - No

McHose, Alison Littell - No

 

McKeon, John F. - Yes

Moriarty, Paul D. - Yes

Mosquera, Gabriela M. - Yes

 

Munoz, Nancy F. - No

O'Donnell, Jason - Yes

O'Scanlon, Declan J., Jr. - No

 

Oliver, Sheila Y. - Yes

Peterson, Erik - No

Prieto, Vincent - Yes

 

Quijano, Annette - Yes

Ramos, Ruben J., Jr. - Yes

Rible, David P. - Yes

 

Riley, Celeste M. - Yes

Rudder, Scott - No

Rumana, Scott T. - No

 

Rumpf, Brian E. - No

Russo, David C. - No

Schaer, Gary S. - Yes

 

Schepisi, Holly - Yes

Schroeder, Robert - No

Simon, Donna M. - No

 

Singleton, Troy - Yes

Space, Parker - No

Spencer, L. Grace - Yes

 

Stender, Linda - Yes

Sumter, Shavonda E. - Yes

Tucker, Cleopatra G. - Not Voting

 

Vainieri Huttle, Valerie - Yes

Wagner, Connie - Yes

Watson Coleman, Bonnie - Yes

 

Webber, Jay - No

Wilson, Gilbert L. - Yes

Wimberly, Benjie E. - Yes

 

Wisniewski, John S. - Yes

Wolfe, David W. - No


Sen.    6/27/2013  -  CONCUR ASMB AMEND   -  Yes {25}  No {10}  Not Voting {5}    -  Roll Call

 

Addiego, Dawn Marie - No

Allen, Diane B. - No

Bateman, Christopher - No

 

Beach, James - Yes

Beck, Jennifer - No

Bucco, Anthony R. - Not Voting

 

Buono, Barbara - Yes

Cardinale, Gerald - Not Voting

Codey, Richard J. - Yes

 

Connors, Christopher J. - Yes

Cunningham, Sandra B. - Yes

Doherty, Michael J. - No

 

Gill, Nia H. - Yes

Gordon, Robert M. - Yes

Greenstein, Linda R. - Yes

 

Holzapfel, James W. - Yes

Kean, Thomas H., Jr. - No

Kyrillos, Joseph M., Jr. - No

 

Lesniak, Raymond J. - Yes

Madden, Fred H., Jr. - Yes

Norcross, Donald - Yes

 

O'Toole, Kevin J. - No

Oroho, Steven V. - No

Pennacchio, Joseph - No

 

Pou, Nellie - Yes

Rice, Ronald L. - Not Voting

Ruiz, M. Teresa - Yes

 

Sacco, Nicholas J. - Yes

Sarlo, Paul A. - Yes

Scutari, Nicholas P. - Yes

 

Singer, Robert W. - Yes

Smith, Bob - Yes

Stack, Brian P. - Not Voting

 

Sweeney, Stephen M. - Yes

Thompson, Samuel D. - Not Voting

Turner, Shirley K. - Yes

 

Van Drew, Jeff - Yes

Vitale, Joseph F. - Yes

Weinberg, Loretta - Yes

 

Whelan, Jim - Yes

Education Week -March on Washington Inspires Educators, 50 Years Later Arne Duncan Attaches More Strings to NCLB Waiver Renewals

Michele McNeil

Two years after offering states waivers under the No Child Left Behind Act, the U.S. Department of Education is expecting states to up the ante on teacher quality if they want another two years of flexibility.

Barring a reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the current version of the law, this waiver renewal process marks the last opportunity for the Obama administration to put its stamp on the ESEA and shape a future law.

To get a two-year extension of their waivers, states must reaffirm their commitment to college- and career-ready standards and tests, and to implementing differentiated accountability systems that focus on closing achievement gaps, according to new state guidance issued today.

States getting a waiver renewal must also continue implementing new teacher-evaluation systems by the 2014-15 school year—but the waiver renewals would take these requirements a step further. States must, by October 2015, use teacher-evaluation data to ensure that poor and minority students are not taught by ineffective teachers at a higher rate than their peers. This issue of teacher distribution is a very important one to civil rights groups.

What's more, under a renewal, states and districts must improve the use of Title II funds for professional development, with a requirement that districts spend the money on "evidence-based" programs and link them to new college- and career-ready standards. (Importantly, "evidence-based" is not defined.)

So far, 41 states, the District of Columbia, and a group of eight districts in California have flexibility waivers under NCLB. Thirty-five of them were approved in the first two rounds, which means their waivers expire at the end of the 2013-14 school year. These 35 will be the first to go through the renewal process.

Renewal applications will be accepted in three phases, beginning Jan. 2 and ending Feb. 21. The renewal applications will be judged internally, and not turned over to outside peer reviewers, department officials said on a press call today.

"We want to be sure to provide states with the flexibility they need to continue to implement their reform efforts," said Deborah S. Delisle, the assistant secretary for the office of elementary and secondary education, in the call. But, she added, "We want to ensure states continue to meet a high bar."

In addition to the new requirements on teacher quality, the waivers wade farther into one other new territory: district-level accountability. The district-role in intervening in low-performing schools has been identified as a weakness in federal frameworks, and so the waiver renewal process requires states to develop a "high-quality plan" for holding districts accountable for their efforts in turning around struggling schools.

The waiver renewal process seeks to beef up existing key areas as well:

Standards and tests—The department wants to ensure states are on track with implementing college- and career-ready standards and assessments, including backup plans for states that may have dropped out of the Common Core State Standards or common-testing consortia.

Student goalsAmid complaints that states must set "annual measurable objectives," or AMOs, for schools and districts but do little to enforce them, the guidance seeks to boost the power of the AMO. States will need to spell out exactly what their plan is for intervening in schools where subgroups of at-risk students miss those AMOs (or graduation-rate targets). These AMOs often exist outside of a state's regular school-grading or accountability systems.

Low-performing schools—Federal officials are keenly interested in states' and districts' plans for long-term interventions in "priority" schools, which are in the bottom 5 percent for student performance.

Worth noting is that federal officials are requiring states to consult with key stakeholders (such also as teacher unions) as part of the renewal process, as they did in their initial applications.

Interestingly, the guidance also reveals that the department is in the process of analyzing data in all waiver states to confirm that schools and subgroups are being properly identified and supported under state accountability systems. Those results will be used as part of the renewal process, and federal officials are saying they may make states change their accountability systems if flaws are found.

Federal officials are also forewarning that this is the only waiver renewal that will give states a free pass on student outcomes.

"After only a year and a half of implementation, it is too early to use student outcomes in making renewal decisions," the guidance reads, "however the Department anticipates that any future extension of these waivers will be outcomes-driven, based primarily on whether or not [a state] has improved student achievement and made progress towards closing achievement gaps."

But it's unclear just how much weight is behind this warning. The first round of renewals will expire at the end of the 2015-16 school year, by which time the Obama administration will be in its twilight.

Among education-policy experts, the waiver renewal process raises more questions than answers.

"After reading the guidance, it strikes me that the big question—since changes in student performance won't be considered—is how will the department determine whether each state's implementation is faithful and strong enough to warrant renewal," said Andy Smarick, a partner at Bellwether Education Partners in Washington. "The department now finds itself in a very tricky situation. Hold states' feet to the fire on rigorous implementation and run the risk of being seen as heavy-handed; allow states to slide by and raise the ire of those who say meaningful accountability has been gutted."

Anne Hyslop, a policy analyst at the New America Foundation who has been closely tracking the waivers, said the department is pretty much staying the course here. "I think at the end of the day we are going to see every state get a waiver renewal," said Hyslop, noting that it's far easier for the department to effect change by working with states than by revoking their waivers.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa and the Senate education committee chairman, reiterated his call to put a reauthorization of the bill on the floor of the Senate this fall. "This new phase of extending existing waiver agreements is an urgent reminder that Congress must act," he said.

U.S. Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the senior Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, called this waiver renewal process a "critical juncture."

"During the renewal process, I will continue to focus on ensuring that the core principles of equity and civil rights in education are upheld," he said. "In particular, I will be taking a close look at whether schools will be held accountable for graduating students, whether students with disabilities are taught to and assessed on the same standards as their peers, and whether schools take significant action when students are not achieving at grade level."

Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., wasn't happy at all. The top Republican on the Senate education committee rekindled his criticism that the Education Department is becoming a national school board. Of Duncan, he said: "He still has states over a barrel, so he's claiming even more detailed control over everything from when and how they evaluate their teachers to which schools they identify as low-performing, and he's forcing them to complete what looks like hundreds of extra pages of paperwork."

 

 

Education Week - Florida Virtual School Faces Hard Times…Enrollment declines for country's largest state-run e-school

By Benjamin Herold

The Florida Virtual School—the largest state-sponsored online K-12 school in the country—is facing troubled times, a sign of major policy shifts now reshaping the world of online education.

On the heels of new state legislation aimed at containing costs and promoting competition among providers offering individual online courses to students, Florida Virtual School officials expect to see a 20 percent drop in state revenue this school year and announced this month that they have shed one-third of their workforce.

Experts in online education say the cuts reflect a national trend.

"States are moving away from singularly funding a state virtual school," said Susan D. Patrick, the president and CEO of the International Association for K-12 Online Learning, or iNACOL, in Vienna, Va. "They want to have multiple providers for students to choose from."

She cited as another example the Louisiana education department's recent decision to replace the Louisiana Virtual School with a broader menu of course options for students. ("'Course Choice' Venture Gets Started in Louisiana," this issue.)

An analogous shift occurred in the recording industry following the launch of iTunes and the "debundling" of music albums, said John Bailey, the executive director of Digital Learning Now, a national advocacy group based in Tallahassee, Fla.

"Students are now assembling a playlist of courses offered by different providers," Mr. Bailey said. "But the way the funding mechanism works, there's tension" among established state virtual schools, private operators looking to expand, and traditional districts, he added.

Less State Money

New state legislation changing the way virtual schools are funded reduces the amount of money that the Florida Virtual School will receive for those students it serves this school year. Proponents of the measure argued that it will level the playing field for online education providers.

In Florida, proponents of the "iTunes" model tout the legislative changes as key to spurring innovation and efficiency.

"In my world, competition has never been a bad thing," said state Sen. Jeff Brandes, a Republican who sponsored legislation to expand online educational options. The bill, a version of which was included in legislation enacted this summer, allowed for conditional state approval for providers of online education that do not have prior experience. The legislation also opened the door for the authorization of massive open online courses, or MOOCs, in four K-12 subject areas. This summer, Florida also enacted legislation changing the way virtual schools are funded, resulting in less revenue for the state-run Florida Virtual School.

But while embracing a market-based approach can generate more options for families, Ms. Patrick said, there is also a danger of creating a "race to the bottom," with online schools competing to educate children at the lowest possible cost, with little regard for academic rigor and educational quality.

"Is every single one of these providers going to offer world-class education, or are students just clicking through software?" she said.

The new Florida legislation is also affecting the state's traditional school districts, many of which rely heavily on the Florida Virtual School to satisfy state requirements that students in all grades be offered online education options and that all students complete at least one online course in order to graduate.

"The tragedy here is that we've taken something that's been nationally recognized and stripped it of its funding," said Chris McGuire, the principal of the Broward Virtual School, a district-run online school in Broward County that was forced to quadruple its capacity overnight in response to the new state funding model and accompanying problems for flvs.

"Why fix something that's not broken?" Mr. McGuire said.

'The New Realities'

Established in 1997, the Florida Virtual School, or FLVS, functions as its own statewide public district. In 2012-13, more than 206,000 students from traditional public schools, charters, private schools and homeschool environments across Florida also enrolled in an online class offered by FLVS, completing a total of almost 411,000 individual courses.

Since last July, however, new enrollments have plummeted by 32 percent compared with July of 2012.

In addition, new state legislation changing the way virtual schools are funded reduces the amount of money that FLVS will receive for those students it does serve this school year. Under the old formula, when a full-time student in a traditional district completed an online course with the online school, the home district continued to receive the full per-pupil allotment for that student, and the online school received an additional per-course amount.

The arrangement constituted a considerable advantage for FLVS: when a student enrolled in an online course elsewhere, that other provider and the home district were required to split the single per-pupil allotment, resulting in less money for the provider and an incentive for the home district to discourage students from enrolling anywhere but FLVS.

Under the new funding formula, Florida Virtual School will have to operate under the same conditions as other online providers.

Florida Virtual School "is really a gem, but it's been treated differently for many, many years," said Mr. Brandes, the state senator. "So what we did is change it, so that everyone gets funded [the same]."

The impact has been dramatic.

Florida Virtual School officials say the combination of declining enrollment and decreased funding will result in a net reduction of about $40 million in state revenue compared with last year. That means the first layoffs in the school's 16-year-old history: A total of 802 staff members, most of whom are adjunct teachers of individual courses for part-time online students, were let go, and more than 84 open positions will remain unfilled.

"The entire [Florida Virtual School] family is saddened by the new realities we are facing," said Tania Clow, a community-relations specialist for the virtual district.

A full-time online school operated by FLVS, which last year enrolled more than 5,000 students, will not be affected by the layoffs, Ms. Clow said.

Critics have called the changes a vehicle for privatizing online education in Florida. In May, The Miami Herald reported that for-profit operators of virtual schools—including K12 Inc., Kaplan, and V Schoolz, a company affiliated with South Florida entrepreneur Wayne Huizenga—all lobbied for the new legislation.

Sen. Brandes voted in support of the new formula, but said the harmful short-term effects on FLVS did catch him and others off guard.

"I think the question is: Should we have phased this in over time, or flicked the switch, as we did?" he said. "That's something we need to come back and review."

'Turned Upside Down'

Twenty-seven states currently operate virtual schools that provide online courses to students, said Ms. Patrick of iNACOL.

In most cases, she said, the funding mechanism ensures that traditional districts are "held harmless" when their students enroll in part-time online courses at the state virtual school.

That approach, employed until recently in Florida, has its advantages, Ms. Patrick argued.

"What that did was create room for innovation without it being win-lose," she said.

Officials of the 261,000-student Broward County district agree.

Last year, nearly 25,000 Broward County students completed an online course in FLVS's statewide program, at no cost to the county district.

Under the new funding formula, though, similar enrollment this year could mean a significant cost increase for the Broward County schools. In response, the district has invested heavily in expanding its own Broward Virtual School— a franchise, ironically, of the state virtual school, established in 2001 because of Broward officials' high regard for the quality of FLVS's offerings.

In the 2012-13 school year, about 450 Broward County students were enrolled full time at the district's virtual school, and a "couple hundred" more took individual online courses there, said Mr. McGuire, the school's principal.

Now, to save money and to meet the state requirement that all high school students complete at least one online course, Broward Virtual is attempting to grow by roughly 400 percent almost overnight. It hired 50 new teachers last month alone.

"Everything has been turned upside down," Mr. McGuire said.

For some virtual education advocates, like Ms. Patrick, the rapid changes raise concerns about accountability.

"State virtual schools have always served a really important role in leveling the playing field across the state and doing a tremendous job of quality assurance," she said, but an influx of new providers could open the door for "some providers that could really damage the whole field" by seeking to cut corners.

Mr. Bailey of Digital Learning Now said the fundamental shift underway—moving to an iTunes-like approach in which students select individual courses, rather than a single school—will necessarily change the way states think about accountability, too.

"What we don't do well is hold schools accountable for each course they're teaching," he said.

Coverage of the education industry and K-12 innovation is supported in part by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Education Week retains sole editorial control over the content of this coverage.

 

The Record - Tougher N.J. teacher evaluations aim to highlight the best

Saturday, August 31, 2013    Last updated: Sunday September 1, 2013, 12:21 AM

BY  LESLIE BRODY.

After years of pressure from sources as varied as President Obama and Governor Christie, teachers in New Jersey will face more stringent evaluations than ever when schools open in the coming days.

The push to improve teacher quality through tougher evaluations has intensified across the country in response to widespread concern that too many American students lag far behind their competitors abroad.

Success by formula

New Jersey’s new tenure law requires teachers to be rated annually on a four-tier scale like highly effective, effective, partially effective, and ineffective. If a teacher is rated poorly for two consecutive years, a district must take steps to revoke tenure.

For the time being, only about 20 percent of New Jersey teachers will have evaluations affected by their students’ progress on standardized tests because only certain grade levels are tested, and the annual tests cover only math and language arts.

Starting in 2014-15, however, almost all grade levels will have standardized tests, so many more teachers will be rated by test-score growth, as soon as year-over-year data are available.

State officials said that in January districts will receive reports showing how successful certain teachers — those in Grades 4-8 in math and language arts — were in helping students learn last year. Colleagues who covered untested subjects, like social studies, chemistry and music, will not get such growth data.

Some teachers call this disparity unfair, but state officials say this plan will suffice while districts experiment with new ideas for assessing gains in those other courses.

For teachers in Grades 4-8 in math and language arts, evaluations will have three main ingredients:

30 percent will come from their “student-growth percentiles” — a measure tied to their students’ gains on state tests.

55 percent will come from classroom observations.

15 percent will come from progress meeting goals teachers set for their students, called “student-growth objectives.” For example, a second-grade teacher can say that if 90 percent of her students improve in reading by one proficiency level, she will get a top score for that goal. Supervisors must approve those targets.

For teachers in subjects without state tests, there will be two ingredients:

85 percent of their evaluations will be based on classroom observations.

15 percent will come from meeting the “student-growth objectives” they choose for themselves, with a supervisor’s approval.

— Leslie Brody

If all goes as Trenton officials intend, school administrators will spend more time in classrooms, checking how well their teachers engage students and prod them to think analytically. Teachers will also be judged by their students’ progress — not just on academic tests, but also in tasks like singing scales in music and doing sit-ups in gym.

Both Obama and Christie have expressed faith that changing the “drive-by” evaluations of the past, which blessed nearly everyone with a good rating, will create pressure for better instruction.

Many teachers, however, are leery. Their unions across the country have been adamant in arguing that one linchpin of new evaluations in many states — using test scores to isolate a teacher’s impact on students’ growth — has serious flaws in methodology. And many principals, who face more rigorous reviews themselves, wonder how they will find time to orchestrate more frequent, time-consuming classroom observations.

But like it or not, the New Jersey tenure law passed a year ago means these new evaluations will be more consequential because earning tenure and keeping it will be tied to getting good ratings.

Newark has gone a step further; a contract signed last year gives teachers raises only if they are rated “effective” or “highly effective,” replacing automatic bumps for longevity. For the first time, 190 Newark teachers who got the best reviews or took on particularly hard jobs got bonuses last month worth $2,500 to $12,500. Paterson Superintendent Donnie W. Evans says he wants to start paying employees according to their performance as well, but the city teachers union is vehemently opposed.

“We have to make teaching and learning our highest priority,” said Michael Kuchar, the superintendent in Bergenfield, which experimented with new evaluations the past two years in a New Jersey pilot project. He said the new system statewide should shine a light on the best performers and help others get better; it is not intended as a “gotcha” for firing a small handful of incompetents.

“This is to move the wide range of mediocrity to the next level,” he said.

In New Jersey, districts have some flexibility choosing their approach, but teachers are supposed to be watched in action by a principal or supervisor at least three times a year, with one surprise visit. That’s a jump from the past, when tenured teachers, for example, often had just one formal observation a year, announced in advance.

Jonathon Regan, a social-studies teacher in Demarest, said those scheduled visits didn’t lead to much valuable feedback.

“I would put together a circus with elephants, juggling and fireworks,” he said. “I got an evaluation that said ‘You were great.’ What was the purpose? So I could have someone pat me on the back?”

This year several Bergen County districts, including Regan’s, plan to give each teacher eight to 10 observations, with some visits lasting 10 minutes and others a full period. After each, a debriefing with the teacher is supposed to cover what went well and how to fix weaknesses. The goal is pushing principals back into the classroom as coaches — and cutting the time they spend on red tape, low-level discipline problems and supervising the lunchroom.

But some school leaders wonder where they will find the time for the extra work. Chris Kirkby, principal of two elementary schools in Demarest, estimates the time he spends on evaluations will quadruple this year. He has to review about 45 teachers and wonders how he will carve out an extra hour a day for doing so.

“I pride myself in being present for the kids and parents,” he said. “I hope that’s not what loses out.”

For some teachers, quantifying the nuances of their craft is a nerve-wracking prospect. They hope imaginative lessons won’t be sacrificed to satisfy observers who are scoring them on a scale of one to four on a range of specific categories, like clarity and use of technology.

“Being reduced to a number is threatening to teachers,” said Jeannie Ryan, an instructional coach with the English department at the Northern Valley Regional High School District in northeastern Bergen County. “You don’t want to miss a creative lesson because you are tied to a rubric.”

Dispute over tests

The most controversial aspect of the new evaluations involves using students’ results on standardized tests to rate teachers. The state has created a new measure, called a “student growth percentile,” to reflect how much each child in Grades 4-8 progressed on annual tests in math and language arts.

The figure is calculated by comparing students statewide who started out with similar test-score histories and seeing who improved more. For example, if Johnny did better on the latest tests than children in his peer group, he is in a high-growth percentile. Furthermore, Johnny’s teacher will get a high-growth score if her students fared better than their peers statewide.

For the teachers of tested subjects, this growth score will make up 30 percent of their evaluations. The New Jersey Education Association and other critics have protested fiercely; they dispute the state’s new computer model for isolating a teacher’s impact on a child’s success and note that many outside factors come into play, like family poverty, private tutoring and a fever on test day. They also say competition for numerical ratings will hurt professional collaboration.

Some are suspicious of the motivation behind the push for data-heavy evaluations.

“We think the evaluation system is built to make people fail,” said Peter Tirri, head of the Paterson Education Association.

Even those who support using test scores to measure teachers have trouble with the state’s growth data, partly because it takes so long to arrive. Bergenfield officials have asked Trenton for permission to use their own version, instead. Superintendent Kuchar said his district can measure progress much more precisely using frequent online quizzes from a software vendor called Renaissance Learning. Results are immediate and can drive quick changes in teaching methods. By contrast, the state’s growth scores become available more than six months after the May tests.

The state’s data are “flawed with internal reliability issues,” Kuchar said. The district’s assessments “are more accurate.”

‘Growth objective’

For the first time, 15 percent of each teacher’s rating will come from how well he attains a personal goal, called a “student growth objective.” For example, a reading teacher might set a goal — with a supervisor’s approval — that if 90 percent of his students improve by one level of proficiency, he would score well for that element of his review.

At Northern Valley Regional High School in Demarest on a recent morning, dozens of teachers met to learn how to set such objectives. A consultant, Laura Wood, told them the process was not as “scary as it sounds.”

“People want to be angry … but it is manageable,” Wood said. “You do it every day. You give a student a pre-test and post-test and show their growth. But now you’re putting it on paper.”

One music teacher said she would check each student’s ability to read notes, sing a folk song and perform scales and see how many improved from fall to spring. A gym teacher said she might use FitnessGram, a software program that tracks how many sit-ups, push-ups and other exercises students can do. And a social-studies teacher considered rating how well students analyzed historical documents at the start of his course, then again at the end. Some said the mounting pressure would spur teachers to trade more tips.

Whether the new evaluations will actually lead to harsher ratings is unclear. In Tennessee, Florida and Michigan, where new teacher evaluation systems were used last year, nearly everyone continued to be rated “effective.”

Similarly, when Bergenfield used its new method for observing classrooms last year, no teacher received an overall rating of “unsatisfactory.” These ratings did not yet include student test data. But when supervisors watched teachers at work, few were deemed “basic.” Most were called “proficient” or “distinguished.”

Email: brody@northjersey.com
Twitter: @lesliebrody

 

Star Ledger - Back to school: Teachers frustrated, nervous about new evaluation system set to take effect this fall

 

By Jessica Calefati/The Star-Ledger The Star-Ledger

HOPEWELL— Heidi Olson has been teaching special education students for 27 years. Every summer, she says, ends pretty much the same way: In eager anticipation to get back to work.

Fresh faces fill the halls, colorful bulletin boards line the walls and there are new challenges.

But this year it’s a little different.

The 49-year-old Hopewell Elementary School teacher is frustrated, confused and just plain nervous.

When school starts this week for Olson and thousands of other teachers, they will be judged under a tough new set of rules that evaluate teachers based on student performance, including, for the first time, standardized test scores.

"My evaluation has always been a valuable tool that helps me improve my teaching, but I have so many questions about how I’ll be assessed next year that no one can answer," Olson said.

The shift marks the first changes to the state’s teacher tenure law in a century, and educators whose evaluations don’t measure up in this new era for public schools will face serious consequences.

They’ll lose their tenure and possibly their jobs.

Superintendents and state education officials say districts are prepared for the shift, but the state’s largest teachers union has criticized the state for rushing to implement the changes.

"Many teachers have not yet been trained on this new system, and that’s causing a great deal of anxiety," said Wendell Steinhauer, president of the New Jersey Education Association. "We supported this bill, but we would rather take things slow and get this right. If we rush into this, it might not be successful."

Under the landmark tenure reform law Gov. Chris Christie signed last summer, districts had to revamp the way they observe teachers in the classroom, start judging them on student performance, and implement the changes by the start of the 2013-2014 school year.

For fourth- through eighth-grade teachers, standardized test scores will count for 35 percent of the rating; classroom observations aligned to new statewide standards will count for the rest, according to regulations released by the state Education Department earlier this year.

Teachers of other grades and subjects will follow a different evaluation rubric based solely on classroom observations and teachers’ ability to meet student growth objectives, such as improving the quality of essay writing.

According to the tenure law, teachers who receive the lowest evaluations on a four-tier scale will lose their tenure no matter how many years they’ve been teaching.

Secaucus Superintendent Robert Presuto said the frustration felt collectively by teachers across the state is normal and will diminish during the school year as they become more familiar with the new standards.

He would know.

Two years ago, Secaucus became one of 11 districts, including Elizabeth, Monroe and Alexandria, to win grants from the state to pilot the evaluation system. This year will be Secaucus’ third year in using the new standards that are brand new to so many other districts.

"Initially, people were upset," Presuto said. "They didn’t understand how the system would work and how the test score data would be used. They asked, "'Why are you doing this to us?'"

"But with lots of professional development and an open dialogue, we changed those perceptions," he said.

In spite of widespread fear that students of top teachers might get low test scores that skew their evaluations, Presuto said most educators who demonstrated effective teaching during classroom observations also boosted kids’ test scores at a desirable rate.

Even so, South Brunswick middle school teacher Susan Berkey said administrators looking to save money and "clean house" by laying off teachers with the highest salaries and most experience could use test scores against them unfairly.

State Education Department officials held conference calls and seminars across the state last year to educate teachers about the new law and allay their concerns. Assistant Education Commissioner Pete Schulman said those sessions will continue throughout the upcoming school year.

"This is a paradigm shift," Schulman said. "We expect teachers’ concerns to be mitigated by learning and doing. Those most aware of the new system’s intricacies seem to be doing the best."

Kenilworth Superintendent Scott Taylor said it’s tough to know how many teachers will receive low ratings that result in loss of tenure, but as he gears up for the school year he has tried to remind his staff that the new system is a reality they must embrace.

"I’m very cognizant of our need to take things slowly and carefully," Taylor said. "There has been some criticism of the law, but it’s here to stay. We have to make the best of it."

 

 

(GSCS Note: GSCS opposed this bill when it was originally proposed in 2010.)Courier Post - N.J. Lawmaker calls for end to school activity fees…Districts point to cuts in state aid… “Burzichelli…first introduced the bill in 2010 with no success.”

 

Aug. 29, 2013   |  Written by Phil Dunn  Courier-Post Staff

 

South Jersey legislator wants to end participation fees for after-school clubs and athletics at districts statewide.

Assemblyman John Burzichelli proposed legislation to block the fees Monday. He said charging for extracurricular activities spoils the “spirit of public education.”

“I don’t see public schools as the ‘bad guys’ in all this. But they need to look elsewhere for efficiencies.”

The Gloucester County Democrat also contends the fees circumvent the 2 percent tax levy cap, by charging parents in addition to the normal school tax.

“These are public schools, not private clubs,” Burzichelli added. “New Jersey residents pay enough property taxes, which largely support our public schools. They expect their children to get all the benefits that come with a public education, including after-school activities.”

Local school officials say otherwise, contending the need to impose fees started three years ago when state education aid was drastically cut.

The Cherry Hill School District has been charging students activity fees since the 2010-11 school year.

Spokeswoman Susan Bastnagel said the district lost $12.8 million in state aid that year.

“We cut approximately 100 positions, reduced capital expenditures and implemented a variety of cost-savings initiatives to make up for the loss in state aid,” she said.

The district charges an annual high school fee of $80 per student, and the middle school fee is $70 per student. There is a $150 cap on families with multiple children in the district.

“Generally speaking, parents have been supportive of the policy; they understand the constraints that state aid reductions and the 2 percent levy cap place on school districts,” Bastnagel said.

“I believe they’d prefer to pay a modest fee if it helps to preserve the rich, diverse offering of activities available to our students.”

Burzichelli, who first introduced the bill in 2010 with no success, said the fees create “barriers” in education.

“Charging these fees is not only unfair to taxpayers, but also creates inequity among students,” he noted.

 

Star Ledger - 190 Newark teachers get merit pay bonuses

The Associated Press By The Associated Press The Associated Press
on August 27, 2013 at 5:23 PM, updated August 27, 2013 at 9:31 PM

NEWARK — Dozens of Newark teachers have some extra cash in their pockets.

Officials say 190 teachers have received $1.3 million overall in merit pay bonuses that are part of a landmark teacher's contract ratified last year.

Part of the bonus money is funded through a $100 million gift given to the Newark schools by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

The bonuses, given on a four-tiered system, range from $5,000 to $12,500.

Seventeen teachers received top bonuses.

Newark Superintendent Cami Anderson sent out letters and checks to the recipients last week.

 

Asbury Park  Press - Middletown schools cut workers hours to avoid Obamacare

Aug. 29, 2013   |   Written by Susanne Cervenka | @scervenka

 

MIDDLETOWN — The township school system is the latest local government agency to cut hours for part-time employees because of the Affordable Care Act, often called Obamacare.

The school board voted 6-3 Tuesday night on temporary hours for its roughly 300-member paraprofessional staff for the 2013-14 school year. But many on the list had asterisks in the place of hours with a notation that their hours, which will be finalized at a special meeting Tuesday, won’t be more than 29.75 hours per week.

The document that lists paraprofessional employee hours notes that all hours are subject to modification or reduction to meet the health care reform laws.

“It is the Board’s intention that every paraprofessional will be working less than thirty (30) hours per week,” the document states.

The health care reform act requires companies with 50 or more employees to offer insurance to full-time employees, which under the law is 30 hours per week, or face fines.

So far locally, municipal officials in Middletown Township, which is separate from the school district, and Toms River have said they either are or intend to reduce part-time employee hours to avoid the cost of offering the employees health insurance.

Middletown Schools Superintendent William George could not say how much it would cost to offer health insurance to the paraprofessionals who previously worked more than 30 hours per week. These staffers had not been getting health benefits. George said would not be able to provide, until today,Thursday the cost and coverage details of health benefits provided to the district’s full-time employees.

He said the district’s administrative team did not prepare cost estimates because “that was not a direction the board was looking to go.”

“It was not the board’s intention. They stated it with paraprofessionals in the contract negotiations and publicly that they would not be looking to go down the road of offering health benefits.”

Paraprofessionals include staff members who work individually with special-needs students.

The cuts were worrisome for at least one parent whose child worked one-on-one with a paraprofessional.

Vera Piasecki said the paraprofessional who worked with her daughter had to look for another job after she was told her hours were being cut. Now, the Middletown mom will have to start over to train a new paraprofessional about her daughter’s needs.

Piasecki got choked up as she spoke to the board about the woman who had been working for three years with her daughter.

“There is nothing more valuable than a paraprofessional who understands your child,” she said.

Piasecki said she understands the board’s position, of trying to avoid the added expense of offering all employees health insurance, but she said the board should make certain exceptions in certain circumstances.

Three board members — James Cody, Vincent Brand and Ernest Donnelly — voted against implementing the reduced hours now, preferring to delay the start until January to give the district more time to implement the new schedule. They said the district should take advantage of the delay of the so-called “employer mandate,” which the federal government pushed back to January 2015.

“I think the administration is doing a great job to trim the hours back, and I think we need to give the administration the time to do it right,” Brand said.

George said, however, that the district would be ready for the start of school on Sept. 9 and that the changes would meet the details of students’ individualized education plans. To do so, the school district will increase the number of paraprofessionals from 276 to 304.

And other board members said they have been discussing the change for more than a year with the intention of starting the reduced hours at the start of this school year.

Cody agreed with Piasecki, saying there may be situations where it would be worth it to allow certain paraprofessionals to work more than 30 hours, even if it requires offering them health benefits. “We are not looking at every individual case and every individual need of our children,” he said.

 

Phillyburbs.com - Westampton launches program for autistic students

By Steven Hart Staff Writer | Posted: Wednesday, August 28, 2013 5:00 am

WESTAMPTON — When the district’s schools open their doors next week, a quiet but very important change will have taken place.

For the first time, the school system will have an in-district program in place for autistic students.

Six students are enrolled in this year’s kindergarten-to-third-grade program, according to Debra Keeney, the district’s interim supervisor of special services.

The significance is that previously, students on the autism spectrum had to be taught out of district, with Westampton footing the bill for tuition and transportation — an amount that could be anywhere from $45,000 to $55,000 per student.

Now the district pays the salary of a single instructor, special education teacher Katie Hicks, and two classroom aides.

“The children are going to be educated in a less restrictive environment,” Keeney said, “and they’ll also be able to interact with their peers on a supervised basis.”

Hicks previously worked for the Burlington County Special Services School District, which has campuses in Westampton and Lumberton.

This inaugural class will consist of two kindergartners, two first-graders, and one student each in second and third grades.

The students range all over the autism spectrum, which can be as mild as a child who seems disconnected from others to a youngster who acts out and “self-stimulates” by repeatedly striking objects and people.

 

 

Toms River Patch - Toms River Regional School District Approves Sandy Aid

Township still recovering from $19,916,775 loss in property tax revenue following Superstorm Sandy

Posted by Daniel Nee (Editor) , August 27, 2013 at 05:30 AM

 

The Toms River Regional school district has formally accepted a $12.5 million state grant to help plug a budget hole that would have developed due to a loss of the township's tax base following Superstorm Sandy.

The Board of Education approved the measure at its Aug. 20 meeting.

State officials said the grant will enable the school district to continue providing essential education services to students while limiting the property tax increase to 2 percent, on average, for taxpayers.

Popular Stories

·         Tiffany's In Toms River Must Give Up Liquor License In…

·         UPDATE: Lavallette Police Chief Charged With Assault On…

·         Crash Victim's Attorney Holds Martell's Tiki Bar…

·         Feds: Princeton Dunkin Donuts Franchise Violated Pay Laws


The Essential Services Grant, as it is called, differs from FEMA's Community Disaster Loan program, which many local municipalities have used to help balance their budgets this year. Under the FEMA program, a loan of up to $5 million could be used to make up for a loss of ratable base; the loans have been forgiven in past storms.

But in Toms River's case, officials have said the community's need far exceeded the $5 million limit, prompting the state to step in to help.

"These grants will ensure that Toms River residents continue to have access to local public works, emergency and education services that are so vital to their own recovery," Gov. Chris Christie said in a statement announcing the school district's grant, as well as a $15,510,417 grant to the municipal government aimed at preventing layoffs.

The Essential Services Grants are funded through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Disaster Recovery allocations included in the multi-billion dollar Sandy aid package passed by Congress in early 2013.

In all, about $44.5 million in grant money was distributed to 11 communities in New Jersey, though the bulk of it went to Toms River in the form of both the school district and municipal grants.

Toms River suffered a 15.3 percent reduction in its ratable base in Sandy, which amounted to a $19,916,775 loss in property tax revenue, according to state records.