Archive for the ‘Political Action’ Category
“Reformed” Teacher Evaluation: Another Example of Weighing the Cow Doesn’t Make it Fatter
Posted on: January 29, 2012
Someone posted this link to the ABC news story about teacher evaluation and education reform. I reposted the link along with the comment, “I’d much rather my principals were able to spend time working with teachers on curriculum than filling out paperwork. #justsayin”
But a few more thoughts were racing through my head, and so this post.
In my district probationary teachers were formally evaluated every year, and tenured teachers every three years, unless they were on an IDP (Individual Development Plan) because their performance was less than satisfactory. The IDP sets out what must improve, and the steps expected to be taken to achieve the goals. Part of the reason we are in the pickle we are today is that too many administrators did not do their jobs, or were not willing to conduct the due diligence to remove an ineffective teacher. It was never “tenure” that protected “bad” teachers. And the union, as an organization, does not want ineffective members among its ranks. The role of the union is to protect the due process of members, not jobs for those who cannot do them!
It used to be if a teacher was not observed/evaluated, the teacher was considered “satisfactory,” and now it’s just the opposite. So if an administrator does not do his/her job in carrying out the observation(s), even an excellent teacher’s job could potentially be at stake.
What is really sad about all of this, is that any person or group who sets out to adjust the insanities of this arrangement would be seen as not caring about having excellent teachers in front of kids, or worse, only concerned about “protecting” bad teachers.
No easy answers.
NOTE: The text of this post is from an action email sent out by AFT Michigan.
On Tuesday, November 8th there is an election. You may not have heard much about it, and there may be no candidates on the ballot depending on where you live, but in every Macomb county community there is a proposal on the ballot for a Special Education Enhancement millage. We encourage you to go out and vote for this millage.
Some groups in the county are spreading hateful messages in emails, newspaper statements and handouts about the millage. In their published messages, they suggest we could pay for the needs of students by a $34 million annual cut in school employee wages. They warn readers the “tax hike on you allows big union/administrator paydays to continue.” They refer to education budgets as “jackpot spending.” They characterized public school employee salaries and benefits as “stealing from families with special needs children.” We want to make sure that accurate information gets out.
Here is important information to remember and pass along:
• The proposal is not a 40% increase in taxes. The ballot issue seeks only a 2-3% change in total property taxes, as verified by the Macomb County Equalization Department. It will amount to around 20 cents a day, $6.00 a month for the average Macomb County homeowner.
• The new funding will go directly to special education, which will free up funds for all of the county’s 131,000 students.
• The proposal restores only about ¼ of lost education programs and services funds in the county compared to 2008. Our school districts have and will continue to address economic realities through cost containment, programs adjustments and employee concessions.
• One in 7 county students—a 10 percent increase since 2001–now receives special education services, and autism cases have increased by over 400 percent in the past decade.
• All of the proposal’s funding will go to local schools and students. Not a dime will go to Lansing or Washington.
How you vote is a personal decision, but we encourage you to vote YES on the Macomb County Special Education Enhancement issue on the November 8th ballot in your community. If Lansing will not fully fund education then we must take care of our own needs.
Many people don’t know about this election or how critical is to all kids in Macomb county, please pass this message along to 10 other people, and ask them to do the same.
(More detailed information is available on the Our Kids Our Future website.)
Changing the Rules, Changing the Game: What’s Happening to Michigan Teacher Retirement?
Posted on: April 9, 2010
[NOTE: This is cross-posted at Literacy, Learning & Sharing.]
April 15, 2010 marks the 25th anniversary of my hire date in East Detroit Public Schools. In June 2010 I will have 26.1 years of service credit in the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System (MPSERS), due to the year I spent as a substitute teacher prior to signing a contract in East Detroit.
When I decided to become a teacher, I knew I wasn’t going to make “the big bucks,” but thanks to the hard work of those who came before me in the labor movement, I knew I would be able to have a typical middle-class lifestyle and, once my working days were over, a pension with health care benefits.
In late 1986, public school employees had an option to become part of the Member Investment Plan (MIP), or remain in the Basic Plan.[1] Those who signed on for MIP have a percentage of their wages taken out for retirement (I believe it is around 3%). An important fact to note is that the percentage could be changed—which is the main reason some chose to remain in the Basic plan during the enrollment period. The fundamental differences in the plans are:
MIP members:
- are eligible for full retirement at age 46 with 30 years of service
- get a 3% cost of living increase in the annual pension
- have their final average compensation (FAC) calculated using highest 3 consecutive years of earnings.
Basic members:
- are eligible for full retirement at age 55 with 30 years of service
- receive NO cost of living increase in the annual pension; if the plan’s investments exceed predictions over a period of years members may receive a distribution of the excess earnings (“13th check”).
- have their final average compensation (FAC) calculated using highest 5 consecutive years of earnings.[2]
In February, the Office of the State Budget issued a proposal to reform the retirement system to include (among other proposals):
- an increase in the pension factor from 1.5% to 1.6% for anyone eligible who retires between July 1 and September 1.
- an increase in employee contributions up to 3% for all employees, effective July 1, 2010.
- elimination of dental and vision coverage for retirees.
- a service credit cap of 30 years, after which employees will be transferred into a separate defined contribution plan.
(Governor Granholm’s press release regarding the proposal.)
Since then, there has been wide speculation. I’ve heard everything from, “It’s not gonna happen.” to “The 1.6 won’t fly, but everything else will.” and variations on those themes. Most recently, both the Michigan House (HB 5953) and Senate (SB1227) have introduced bills. You can find detailed explanations in the AFT Michigan Capitol Report for March 2010.
Because I chose to keep my 3% and stay Basic, I chose:
- working for 9 additional years (minimum age 55 vs 46)
- potentially decreasing my FAC by having to average 60 vs 36 months’ earnings
- no cost of living increase
It was my choice, and I’m totally OK with it. Here’s what I’m not OK with: if (when) “reform” passes, I will have to pay 3% of my wages into MPSERS, and still be Basic. Not only that, because I will not be 55 when I have 30 years of service, I must continue working without having those additional years accruing toward the calculation of my pension.
Hardly seems fair, changing the rules 23 years later. (I won’t go into the loss of the dental and vision.) It might even be a breech of contract. My choice was irrevocable—why can the state change?[3] Some are trying to spin the change as an “early retirement incentive” when in actuality it is a benefit reduction plan which reneges on promises made to current employees with regard to their retirement.
Michigan educators and public school employees, I urge you to contact your legislators and voice your opposition to these bills. Join the conversation here. Comment or write a blog post about your situation and link back. I’m also going to send a link to this post to my legislators as well as @govgranholm.
As of Wednesday, the House and Senate each passed their versions of the reform bill. Now we wait…no! Don’t wait! Contact your state legislators!
[1] All public school employees hired after January 1, 1990 are in MIP.
[2] Your Retirement Plan: A Member Handbook for Michigan’s Public School Employees (October, 2009)
[3] In 1991, a window of opportunity was provided for Basic members to “buy-in” to MIP; again, one-time only, irrevocable decision.
E-flections of an Educator 