NJ Spotlight - Agenda: State Board of Education…Test scores, charters, graduation rates, administrative code, Newark's groundbreaking contract, and public comment will make for a hectic meeting

By John Mooney, December 5, 2012 in Education|Post a Comment

Moving New Jersey’s school board elections to November was expected to raise the stakes of these historically sleepy races, but at least in this first year, the money didn’t live up to expectations.

In fact, campaign spending in these elections seemed to step way back. State campaign finance reports and a survey of school board members show tepid sums expended on individual races.

And at least one huge player mostly stood above the fray. The New Jersey Education Association, the powerful statewide teachers union, spent virtually nothing on the elections -- after shelling out more than $4 million in the past decade and upward of $750,000 in 2011 alone.

According to the state’s Election Law Enforcement Commission, the NJEA election committee didn’t even file a campaign finance report for the November ballot. Its reports for the few remaining April elections showed only about $20,000 spent, mostly to support its locals.

The reason was pretty simple: the move by a vast majority of districts to November elections essentially took school budgets off the ballot for the first time, quieting the NJEA’s usual campaigns in support of school funding.

Under the law enacted last year, districts choosing November elections no longer were required to put their annual budgets up for vote as long as they stayed within state caps.

As a result, only a handful of districts ended up holding budget votes. For the NJEA, that took the issue off the table, the one that had prompted its annual statewide mailings and other media campaigns.

Those campaigns essentially peaked three years ago, with Gov. Chris Christie’s steep cuts in state aid and his public call for voters to reject local budgets if teachers didn’t take a wage freeze.

Before this year, “school budgets had become essentially statewide elections, and we simply don’t have the same dynamic anymore,” said Steve Baker, a NJEA spokesman. “We will certainly continue to push for support of our public schools, but for that specific project, we just didn’t do it this year.”

The individual races for school board seats remained pretty quiet affairs as well, according to a survey of its members conducted by the New Jersey School Boards Association and released yesterday.

Only 10 percent of respondents said they had spent more than in previous elections, and 34 percent said they spent less. A large number also indicated they spent nothing on their races, although the survey didn't make it clear if they were first-time candidates or did not run at all.

Campaign finance reports showed far less spent overall, with both the April and November elections totaling just under $600,000. That is less than half of the $1.3 million spent in 2009.

The state association’s survey contained some other interesting findings about the school elections.

Respondents were pretty evenly split over whether the school elections had become more partisan by moving to November, a fear of those who considered making the move.

School elections are nonpartisan, but now the candidates were on the same ballot as party candidates for higher office. Forty seven percent of respondents thought they had not become more partisan, but 40 percent said they had, according to the survey.

About half said they thought the ballots didn't do much of job in displaying the school races at all. Some indicated that voters did not even realize there was a school vote. Others said ballots appeared to list school candidates under specific party lines.

“It was clear the ballot was arranged to provide emphasis to state and federal election areas,” wrote one respondent. “The school board section was at the bottom and not noticeable unless you were looking for it.”

Another wrote, “It was a huge problem -- we had four candidates for three positions. Three were under the Democrat column, one under the Republican column. The one on the Republican column lost.”

Still, a vast majority overall said the move to the November election was worth it, with close to two-thirds supporting the move and less than a third saying their constituents were against it.

By John Mooney, December 5, 2012 in Education|Post a Comment

Date: Wednesday, Dec. 5, 2012

Time: 10 a.m.

Place: New Jersey Department of Education, 1st floor conference room, 100 River View Plaza, Trenton

What they are doing: The 2011-2012 state test scores and graduation rates will be released at the State Board of Education meeting, laying out how every school and district fared last year. The board will also get a presentation on a recent, somewhat-controversial Stanford University study on the state’s charter schools. The board is also expected to move ahead on several regulatory items, including final approval of new administrative code for charter schools. Public testimony on several items is also planned.

Test scores: The release of schools' annual test scores is always a source of discussion, with this year likely to be no exception since the Christie administration relies heavily on the numbers to determine its level of oversight for each school. The schools themselves have had the scores for more than a month, but this will be the public’s first view of them.

Graduation rates: The graduation rates for every high school are also expected to spur discussion, since this will be the first time they are using new methodology that seeks to improve the tracking of how many students entering high school ultimately get a diploma. A recent federal report using the same methods put New Jersey’s four-year rate ending in 2011 at about 83 percent, down from the 90-plus percent that is commonly cited and no longer the highest in the nation.

Charter schools, Part 1: The authors of a flattering study on New Jersey’s charter schools are expected to present their findings and take questions from the board. Overall, the report by Stanford’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) found that students attending charter schools in the state fared better than peers in district schools. But looking deeper into the report released last week, the positive numbers largely came form Newark, with charter school students in several other cities doing no better or even worse than their peers. And critics have raised a number of questions about the researchers’ methods. The president of the board, Arcelio Aponte, said yesterday that he’s sure there will be a number of questions from the board, too, both about the success stories and those not so successful.

Charter schools, Part 2: The board is expected to finalize new regulations for charter schools that have brought unprecedented public comment, most of it critical. The most contested is language in the regulations that some say would open up the state to virtual or online charter schools. Two have already been approved but are yet to open. The regulations would also allow for the easier expansion of existing charter school networks into other communities.

Other business: The board has a number of other items on its plate, including ongoing action on several regulatory proposals regarding teacher quality, bilingual education, and vocational education. In addition, Aponte said he expected the board would also want to discuss the recently ratified Newark teachers contract, a seminal pact for a district that remains under state – and the state board’s -- control.

Public comment: The board will entertain testimony from the public on a number of topics, including much of the administrative code still under review. “It should be quite a long meeting,” Aponte said.