Pension Abuse: Work a Day, Collect a Few Million

Pension systems of all types and sizes seem to be in some form of financial trouble. And yes, there are various stories of people taking advantage of loopholes to improperly, if not illegally, benefit.

But this is a bad one about teacher union lobbyists who became substitute teachers for a day in order to be in line (based on their lobbyist salaries) for big paydays down the road.

The Education Action Group reported the following:

The Illinois Teachers Retirement System, by the way, is millions of dollars in debt. That means it currently lacks the funds to meet its obligations to real teachers who will retire in the future and genuinely deserve their pensions.

One of the lobbyists, Steven Preckwinkle, will receive about $2.8 million by the time he turns 78 and $3.8 million by the time he turns 84, according to media reports. David Piccioli will collect $1.1 million by the time he’s 78 and $1.7 million by the time he’s 84.

The two lobbyists and the Illinois Federation of Teachers have paid approximately $230,000 into the pension system. Sounds like these two will make out pretty good.

But the story gets even worse. Now we hear about Reg Weaver, the former president of the NEA, who is drawing $242,657 per year from the Illinois state teachers pension system, based on his top salary working for the union. Most teachers pensions are based on their top salary earned in the classroom. Weaver topped out at $60,000 before he went to work for the union.

All of these situations were created by loopholes in a state law that allow union officials to tap into the teachers pension program. As Kent Redfield, a political science professor at the University of Illinois Springfield told Education News, "The people that are on the inside and understand the process are going to be able to make the system work to their advantage."

Sadly, it’s the taxpayers and average teachers on the "outside" who get the raw end of the deal.

Growing the Science Branch of STEM

If the subject is education or workforce development, one of the more popular acronyms is STEM. But the areas of science, technology, engineering and mathematics are not treated equally, according to a new report.

Maybe it shouldn’t be a surprise that the report was sponsored by the National Science Foundation (although other nonprofit research entities were also involved). And although elevating science is one of the lead concepts, there are a number of suggestions for policymakers in the effort to improve all STEM disciplines.

A few of the highlights:

“A growing number of jobs — not just those in professional science — require knowledge of STEM fields,” said Adam Gamoran, chair of the committee that wrote the report and professor of sociology and educational policy studies at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.  “The goal isn’t only to have a capable and competitive work force.  We need to help all students become scientifically literate because citizens are increasingly facing decisions related to science and technology — whether it’s understanding a medical diagnosis or weighing competing claims about the environment.” 

The report identifies key elements of high-quality STEM education to which policymakers could target improvements:

  • A coherent set of standards and curriculum. States and districts should have rigorous K-12 STEM standards and curricula that are focused on the most important topics in each discipline and presented as a sequence of content and practices that build knowledge over time.

  • Teachers with high capacity to teach in their discipline. Good teachers need to know both STEM content and how to teach it; many teachers are currently underprepared to teach STEM-related courses.

  • A supportive system of assessment and accountability. Current assessments limit educators’ ability to teach in ways that promote learning the content and understanding the practices of science and mathematics.

  • Adequate instructional time. The average amount of time spent on science instruction in elementary classrooms has decreased in recent years even as the time on mathematics instruction has increased. This is likely due to the focus on math and English language arts in the No Child Left Behind Act. 

The report suggests that one way to elevate science to the same level of importance as mathematics and reading is to assess science subjects as frequently as is done for reading and math, using an assessment system that supports learning and understanding.  However, such a system is not yet available for science subjects, the report notes. States and national organizations need to develop assessments that are aligned with the next generation of science standards — which will be based on a framework to be released soon by the Research Council — and that emphasize science practices rather than mere factual recall.  

National and state policymakers also should invest in helping educators in STEM fields teach more effectively, said the committee. For example, teachers should be able to pursue professional development through peer collaboration and professional learning communities, among other approaches. Schools and school districts should devote adequate instructional time and resources to science in grades K-5 to lay a foundation for further study, the report notes, as research suggests that interest in science careers may develop in the elementary school years.  

Now is the Time for School Choice

The School Scholarship Program is designed to provide real school choice opportunities for thousands of low-and middle-income families. Shouldn’t Indiana parents have more choices to access the quality schools they want for their children?

Please contact your state legislators today to urge them to "support the School Scholarship Program to provide more school choices for Indiana families." 

Today, tens of thousands of Indiana families have few or no choices in finding schools that meet their children’s needs. They feel trapped in assigned schools that all to often are failing to provide a quality education. In fact, nearly 25,000 children in this state are trapped in chronically failing schools.

The School Scholarship Program would allow thousands of low-and middle-income families to access a portion of the per-pupil funding spent on their children in their assigned public schools and use those funds to pay tuition at the public or private schools of their choice.

For the first time, families could choose their own schools and have per-pupil funding follow them.  The program would introduce real competition and empower parents to choose the best school settings, public or private, for their children.

The School Scholarship Program is strongly supported by Gov. Daniels, Supt. of Public Instruction Dr. Tony Bennett and legislative leaders. However, the plan is currently on hold due to the Democrat walkout in the House.

If It’s for the Kids, Why Not Ask Their Opinions?

When discussing education reform, it’s common to hear proclamations like, “We’ve got to do it for the students!”

To that end, many of the proposed education reforms center on the teacher, as a consensus is (finally) beginning to take hold that teacher effectiveness is paramount to student success. Ideas for reform include better training and education of teachers and rewarding teachers for the quality of their teaching, as opposed to the amount of time they spend at the front of the classroom.

All of the offered solutions and ideas go back to the sentiment that the whole point of education reform is to give students a better education and better chance in life. But if that’s truly the case, shouldn’t we be asking for their opinions?

An article in the New York Times reported that students actually have a pretty good handle on when they’re in the presence of an effective teacher. Results released from a report funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation show that students who learn the most during the year (as measured by standardized test results) described their teachers as ones who were able to focus their instruction, keep their classrooms under control and help students understand their mistakes.

The report is part of a much larger research project, which also ranks teachers using a method called value-added modeling. The method uses standardized test scores to calculate how much each teacher helped the students learn. Researchers are now using other methods – like student surveys – to corroborate those value-added scores. It seems the results show a correlation between what the students report and what the scores show.

The Times went on to report that out of thousands of students who filled out confidential questionnaires, classrooms where the majority of students said they agreed with the statements, “our class stays busy and doesn’t waste time,” and “in this class, we learn to correct our mistakes,” more often were taught by teachers with high value-added scores.

While college students all across America are asked to evaluate their courses and professors on an annual or semi-annual basis, it’s rare that schools do the same with their K-12 students – leaving teacher evaluations up to pre-arranged classroom observations by the principal or other school administrator.

Students – the ones that are meant to get the greatest benefit from education reform – therefore aren’t given the opportunity to confidentially share their experiences and opinions about the teachers they rely on for their future success.

Maybe it’s time that the adults stop proclaiming and start listening to what the students actually have to say.

Administration Announces New Plan for Indiana Education

Gov. Daniels and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett have released a new plan for Indiana schools — and that plan was endorsed yesterday by the Indiana Education Roundtable. The Indy Star has the story:

The Indiana Education Roundtable, made up of education, business and civic leaders, unanimously recommended an education reform agenda being championed by State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett and supported by Gov. Mitch Daniels.

The next step is for the reform to be packaged into a series of bills that will be put before state legislators when they convene Jan. 5…

Garnering the most attention and what Bennett emphasized the most was improving the teacher evaluation process and awarding teachers based on performance rather than seniority.

The influence of teacher’s unions also was addressed in the reform agenda, including focusing collective bargaining agreements "on salaries and wage-related benefits, including innovative ways to recognize performance through compensation."

Gov. Mitch Daniels said various drafts of the bills are being pondered and that a first draft could be laid out in a couple of weeks.

"Every word we’ve said about how complicated this is true," Daniels said after the meeting. "But the day has come that we have to act."

You can find an outline of the plan here.

You can also listen to Indiana Chamber VP of Education & Workforce Development Derek Redelman offer his take on the proposed reforms.

School Leaders Offer Promising Reform Message

This will likely be the longest blog post you will find on these pages. But that’s OK, because it probably is the most important.

It’s a message about fixing schools, something you’ve seen and heard plenty of times in the past. But on this occasion the authors are 16 superintendents or other leaders of major school districts across the country. One of the 16 is Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Eugene White.

These are some of the reforms needed to save our schools and, more importantly, the young people who are our future. Read this, pass it along to others and do what you can to help make a difference.

As educators, superintendents, chief executives and chancellors responsible for educating nearly 2 1/2 million students in America, we know that the task of reforming the country’s public schools begins with us. It is our obligation to improve the personal growth and academic achievement of our students, and we must be accountable for how our schools perform.

All of us have taken steps to move our students forward, and the Obama administration’s Race to the Top program has been the catalyst for more reforms than we have seen in decades. But those reforms are still outpaced and outsized by the crisis in public education.

Fortunately, the public, and our leaders in government, are finally paying attention. The "Waiting for ‘Superman’ " documentary, the defeat of D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg’s $100 million gift to Newark’s public schools, and a tidal wave of media attention have helped spark a national debate and presented us with an extraordinary opportunity.

But the transformative changes needed to truly prepare our kids for the 21st-century global economy simply will not happen unless we first shed some of the entrenched practices that have held back our education system, practices that have long favored adults, not children. These practices are wrong, and they have to end now.

It’s time for all of the adults — the superintendents, educators, elected officials, labor unions and parents — to start acting like we are responsible for the future of children. Because right now, across the country, kids are stuck in failing schools, just waiting for us to do something.

So, where do we start? With the basics. As President Obama has emphasized, the single most important factor determining whether students succeed in school is not the color of their skin or their ZIP code or even their parents’ income — it is the quality of their teacher.

Yet, for too long, we have let teacher hiring and retention be determined by archaic rules involving seniority and academic credentials. The widespread policy of "last in, first out" (the teacher with the least seniority is the first to go when cuts have to be made) makes it harder to hold on to new, enthusiastic educators and ignores the one thing that should matter most: performance.

A 7-year-old girl won’t make it to college someday because her teacher has two decades of experience or a master’s degree — she will make it to college if her teacher is effective and engaging and compels her to reach for success. By contrast, a poorly performing teacher can hold back hundreds, maybe thousands, of students over the course of a career. Each day that we ignore this reality is precious time lost for children preparing for the challenges of adulthood.

The glacial process for removing an incompetent teacher — and our discomfort as a society with criticizing anyone who chooses this noble and difficult profession — has left our school districts impotent and, worse, has robbed millions of children of a real future.

There isn’t a business in America that would survive if it couldn’t make personnel decisions based on performance. That is why everything we use in assessing teachers must be linked to their effectiveness in the classroom and focused on increasing student achievement.

District leaders also need the authority to use financial incentives to attract and retain the best teachers. When teachers are highly effective — measured in significant part by how well students are doing academically — or are willing to take a job in a tough school or in a hard-to-staff subject area such as advanced math or science, we should be able to pay them more. Important initiatives, such as the federal Teacher Incentive Fund, are helping bring great educators to struggling communities, but we have to change the rules to professionalize teaching.

Let’s stop ignoring basic economic principles of supply and demand and focus on how we can establish a performance-driven culture in every American school — a culture that rewards excellence, elevates the status of teachers and is positioned to help as many students as possible beat the odds. We need the best teacher for every child, and the best principal for every school. Of course, we must also do a better job of providing meaningful training for teachers who seek to improve, but let’s stop pretending that everyone who goes into the classroom has the ability and temperament to lift our children to excellence.

Even the best teachers — those who possess such skills — face stiff challenges in meeting the diverse needs of their students. A single elementary- or middle-school classroom can contain, for instance, students who read on two or three different grade levels, and that range grows even wider as students move into high school. Is it reasonable to expect a teacher to address all the needs of 25 or 30 students when some are reading on a fourth-grade level and others are ready for Tolstoy? We must equip educators with the best technology available to make instruction more effective and efficient. By better using technology to collect data on student learning and shape individualized instruction, we can help transform our classrooms and lessen the burden on teachers’ time.

To make this transformation work, we must also eliminate arcane rules such as "seat time," which requires a student to spend a specific amount of time in a classroom with a teacher rather than taking advantage of online lessons and other programs.

Just as we must give teachers and schools the capability and flexibility to meet the needs of students, we must give parents a better portfolio of school choices. That starts with having the courage to replace or substantially restructure persistently low-performing schools that continuously fail our students. Closing a neighborhood school — whether it’s in Southeast D.C., Harlem, Denver or Chicago — is a difficult decision that can be very emotional for a community. But no one ever said leadership is easy.

We also must make charter schools a truly viable option. If all of our neighborhood schools were great, we wouldn’t be facing this crisis. But our children need great schools now — whether district-run public schools or public charter schools serving all students — and we shouldn’t limit the numbers of one form at the expense of the other. Excellence must be our only criteria for evaluating our schools.

For the wealthiest among us, the crisis in public education may still seem like someone else’s problem, because those families can afford to choose something better for their kids. But it’s a problem for all of us — until we fix our schools, we will never fix the nation’s broader economic problems. Until we fix our schools, the gap between the haves and the have-nots will only grow wider and the United States will fall further behind the rest of the industrialized world in education, rendering the American dream a distant, elusive memory.

The authors: Joel Klein, chancellor, New York City Department of Education; Michelle Rhee, chancellor, District of Columbia Public Schools; Peter C. Gorman, superintendent, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (N.C.); Ron Huberman, chief executive, Chicago Public Schools; Carol R. Johnson, superintendent, Boston Public Schools; Andrés A. Alonso, chief executive, Baltimore City Public Schools; Tom Boasberg, superintendent, Denver Public Schools; Arlene C. Ackerman, superintendent of schools, the School District of Philadelphia; William R. Hite Jr., superintendent, Prince George’s County Public Schools; Jean-Claude Brizard, superintendent of schools, Rochester City School District (N.Y.); José M. Torres, superintendent, Illinois School District U-46; J. Wm. Covington, superintendent, Kansas City, Missouri School District; Terry B. Grier, superintendent of schools, Houston Independent School District; Paul Vallas, superintendent, New Orleans Recovery School District; Eugene White, superintendent, Indianapolis Public Schools; LaVonne Sheffield, superintendent of Rockford Public Schools (Illinois).

Paying to Get the Students to Play

The blame for lack of student achievement typically falls in a few different camps. Ineffective teachers, administrations hamstrung by union rules, society in the form of a poor learning environment, parents that don’t emphasize education and sometimes even the young people themselves are held accountable.

In the past few years, some school districts have tried bribery as a partial solution. That is payment in cash or prizes to students for good grades, high test scores or merely showing up for class. My opinion aligned with the majority in stating that this was a serious misuse of funds. I honestly don’t know whether there has been any substantive study of the results of those efforts.

Now, the Houston public school system is preparing to offer payments to struggling students in the lowest-performing schools if they show up for Saturday tutoring sessions. Another "throw money at the problem and let’s see what happens" scenario. Maybe not in this case.

In addition to the extra weekend help (the superintendent equates the payment to a job as many of these students must work to support their families), the school district is implementing other meaningful reforms that include:

  • Extending the school year and day
  • Giving students who are performing below grade level a "double dose" of math and English
  • Removing ineffective teachers and principals
  • Students and parents signing performance contracts (a strategy employed by some successful charter schools)

It might be categorized as a desperate measure to pay students $30 a tutoring session (with free breakfast and lunch). But it’s not taking place in isolation and if some of the other reforms are successful, maybe getting students in the door will lead to improved results. Hopefully.

The Houston Chronicle has more here.

Required Reading for All Interested in Our Future

We take seriously the job of providing fairly quick, but informative reads in this space. We’re going to fall short on the first count here, replicating an education opinion column that recently appeared in the Washington Post. The quality, however, makes up for longer-than-normal length. It should be a mandatory assignment for those who think they are doing their best as part of our education system.

The authors are Joel I. Klein, Michael Lomax and Janet Murguía. Klein, who recently appeared before Indiana’s Education Roundtable, is chancellor of New York City schools. Lomax is president and chief executive of the United Negro College Fund. Murguía is president and chief executive of the National Council of La Raza. 

Why great teachers matter to low-income students

In the debate over how to fix American public education, many believe that schools alone cannot overcome the impact that economic disadvantage has on a child, that life outcomes are fixed by poverty and family circumstances, and that education doesn’t work until other problems are solved.

This theory is, in some ways, comforting for educators. After all, if schools make only a marginal difference, we can stop faulting ourselves for failing to make them work well for millions of children. It follows that we can stop working to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (currently known as No Child Left Behind) and stop competing in the Obama administration’s Race to the Top initiative, which promises controversial changes.

Problem is, the theory is wrong. It’s hard to know how wrong — because we haven’t yet tried to make the changes that would tell us — but plenty of evidence demonstrates that schools can make an enormous difference despite the challenges presented by poverty and family background.

Consider the latest national math scores of fourth- and eighth-graders, which show startling differences among results for low-income African American students in different cities. In Boston, Charlotte, New York and Houston, these fourth-graders scored 20 to 30 points higher than students in the same socioeconomic group in Detroit, Milwaukee, Los Angeles and the District of Columbia. Boston fourth-graders outscored those in Detroit by 33 points. Ten points approximates one year’s worth of learning on these national tests, which means that by fourth grade, poor African American children in Detroit are already three grades behind their peers in Boston.

Not surprisingly, these differences persist (or grow) by the eighth grade, at which point low-income African American students in Detroit are scoring 36 points behind their peers in Austin.

The scores tell a similarly painful story for low-income Hispanic students in different cities. In fourth grade, there is a 29-point difference between test scores in Miami-Dade and Detroit. By eighth grade, the gap has closed slightly, with low-income Hispanic students in Houston outscoring their peers in Cleveland and Fresno, Calif., by 23 points.

These numbers represent vast differences in millions of lives. Low-income African American and Hispanic students in different cities are sufficiently similar in terms of their academic needs, but their outcomes are so dramatically different.

The main difference between these children is that they are enrolled in different school districts. And research indicates that if the data were broken out for the same students in different schools, the differences would be more dramatic — and more dramatic still if broken out for the same children in different classes.

What explains these differences? Schools and teachers. "Teacher quality is the single most important school factor in student success," the Aspen Institute’s Commission on No Child Left Behind recently noted. Given how much research supports this view, it is especially troubling, the commission found, that "teacher quality is inequitably distributed in schools, and the students with the greatest needs tend to have access to the least qualified and least effective teachers."

Different teachers get very different results with similar students. So as reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is considered, we should look closely at those whom we attract and retain to teach, with regard to their quality and to ensuring that they are distributed equally across our school districts. If we can do those things, we could at least make Detroit students perform like those in Boston, and make Boston students do a lot better.

A few things need to happen:

First, we must attract teachers who performed well in college. Countries that do best on international tests draw teachers from the top third of college graduates. In the United States, however, most teachers come from the bottom third. Moreover, the bottom of that group is vastly overrepresented in our highest-needs communities.

Second, we must create systems that reward excellence rather than seniority by creating sophisticated evaluation systems that include student performance and merit-based tenure and compensation. We must make it easier to remove teachers who are shown to be ineffective.

Third, we must do more to attract teachers to high-needs students, schools and subject areas, such as English language learners, special education and other areas to which it is difficult to draw talent because of opportunities in other fields.

These are common-sense and ambitious reforms. Such efforts are rewarded in the Race to the Top initiative and ought to be fully integrated into a new Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Yes, they call for a reevaluation of seniority — the staple of most collective bargaining agreements — in the context of what actually serves children. But right now, one bad teacher with seniority earns as much as two great young teachers. Who really thinks this is best for our kids?

Apologists for our educational failure say that we will never fix education in America until we eradicate poverty. They have it exactly backward: We will never eradicate poverty until we fix education. The question is whether we have the political courage to take on those who defend a status quo that serves many adults but fails many children. 

An Awakening of Education Attitudes

What makes a good survey? Sure, there’s the wording of the questions, the quality of the pool of respondents and a host of other factors. One I like is the longevity of the poll. In this case, it’s 41 years for the PDK (Phi Delta Kappa International)/Gallup Poll of the Public’s Attitudes Toward the Public Schools.

Here are some of the key results:

The findings indicate that Americans continue to support annual testing of students in grades three through eight by a two-to-one margin, and they favor using a single national test rather than letting each state use its own. This opinion is held by Democrats and Republicans equally.

Two out of three Americans support charter schools, although many Americans are confused about whether charter schools are public schools and whether they can charge tuition, teach religion, or select their own students. During the last five years, Americans’ approval of charter schools has increased by 15 percent.

The 2009 poll also reveals that almost three out of four Americans favor merit pay for teachers regardless of political affiliation. Student academic achievement, administrator evaluations, and advanced degrees are the three most favored criteria for awarding merit pay.  

NCLB Fatigue? Americans are also growing weary of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). In fact, support for NCLB, which was passed in 2002, continues to decline as almost half of Americans view it unfavorably and only one in four Americans believe that it has helped schools in their communities. 

Split Views on Teacher Tenure. American views are split on teacher tenure depending on how the question is phrased. They disapprove of teachers having a “lifetime contract” but agree that teachers should have a formal legal review before being terminated.

Dropout Rate of Top Importance. Almost nine out of 10 Americans believe that the U.S. high school dropout rate is either the most important or one of the most important problems facing high schools today. Offering more interesting classes was the suggestion offered most when asked what could help reduce the dropout rate. 

PDK says the results are an endorsement of President Obama’s education agenda. I say it’s about time and let’s hope state and federal officials can build on the momentum and create some meaningful change to benefit all students.

Bennett Stresses Reward for Quality Teaching Over Seniority

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett spoke to the Columbia City Rotary Club Tuesday and emphasized his hope to keep the best teachers in Indiana’s school corporations. The Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette has the story; here it is in full:

Indiana public schools need to be centers for student learning, not employment agencies for adults, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Bennett said Tuesday.

Teacher contracts need to be overhauled so that if layoffs occur, it’s the worst-performing teachers who lose their jobs, not the ones with the least seniority, Bennett told members of the Columbia City Rotary Club.

“We have to have the political courage to have any and every discussion that puts children first,” Bennett said. “We’ve built a system that really doesn’t do that. So I think we all have to have the courage to say what are the structures that will afford us the opportunity to make decisions that are best for Indiana children.”

Bennett echoed the sentiments of Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Eugene White, who told legislators this session he would be in favor of repealing the law that allows collective bargaining for teachers so he could overhaul his schools with the right people in the right spots.

Bennett offered a four-point system for how Indiana’s schools can become the best in the nation.

He compared these goals with President John F. Kennedy’s goal he outlined Sept. 12, 1962, that the United States win the race to the moon.

“I think we need to go back to Sept. 12, 1962, if we’re going to talk about education,” Bennett said. “The world our kids compete in today is very different than the world in 1962.”

Bennett is challenging Hoosiers to acknowledge that students are in a competition for jobs; change the discussion from how to get more money for education to how to get more education for the money; put student learning before assuring jobs for adults; and develop a system that recruits, trains, rewards and evaluates teachers as professionals.

“We have to take a hard look at how we expend our resources,” Bennett said.

Among the goals for the Indiana Department of Education during Bennett’s first term, he said, is for 90 percent of Hoosier students to pass the ISTEP+ and for 90 percent to graduate high school.

“If this is a fight we’re afraid of fighting, we’re in trouble,” Bennett said.

Hat tip to twitter.com/INEducation.