Latest in NJEA Issues and Political Action

Frequently asked questions on the November School Elections Bill

Thu, 26 Jan 2012 16:11:05 -0500

On Jan. 17, Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill, P.L.2011, c.202, allowing districts, municipalities, or voters to opt to move the annual school election to the general election in November. This action eliminates the vote on school budgets for such districts, except for separate proposals to spend above the cap—i.e., if the proposed budget is at or below cap, then there will be no public vote on the budget.

Frequently asked questions

When can we expect to see school elections move to November?

As a result of this legislation, we may immediately start seeing boards of education or municipalities pass resolutions to move this year’s April elections to November.

Who can decide to move a school election date and how long does it take to initiate the move?

School boards, municipalities, or voters can initiate the change in date. A school election can be moved immediately following a school board or municipal resolution. There is a two-step process to move the election via voter petition. Moving the election via voter petition can only be done in November during the general election.

How do you move a school election via school board resolution?

The school board must adopt a resolution moving school elections to November.
If the resolution is adopted, the election of board members and second above cap budget questions shall be moved to November.
The school board must approve a resolution no later than February 17, 2012, and must immediately notify the county clerk in order to move school elections for 2012.
Procedures are the same for a municipal resolution.

How do you move a school election via municipal resolution?

The municipality must adopt a resolution moving school elections to November.
If the resolution is adopted, the election of board members and second above cap budget questions shall be moved to November.
The municipality must approve a resolution no later than February 17, 2012, and must immediately notify the county clerk in order to move school elections for 2012.
Procedures are the same for a school board resolution.

How can a school election be moved by voter petition?

Any citizen can initiate a petition to request a vote to move school elections from April to November.
To be valid, the number of signatures on the petition must be equal to or greater than 15 percent of the total number of votes cast in the previous presidential election.
The petition must be filed with the district’s board of education at least 60 days prior to the November general election.
A successful petition will result in a ballot question at the next general election asking voters to approve moving school elections from April to November.

What happens if the ballot question to move the election fails?

A subsequent petition to move the election cannot be filed until at least one year after the defeat. This is to prevent the question from going on the ballot every November.

Who pays for the costs associated with moving the school election?

If a school election is moved to November, the school board will be required to pay for any additional costs associated with this move, regardless of the mechanism (municipal resolution, voter petition, school board resolution) used to move the vote.

If a district budget is at or under cap and the school election is moved to November, then will there be a vote on the budget?

No, any district that budgets at or under cap and moves the election, does not vote on the budget. There will be a vote for school board candidates and any second questions.

If a district moves its school elections to November and budgets above cap, then is there a vote on the budget?

Yes, voters will vote on the portion of the budget that is above the cap. In addition, voters also will vote for school board candidates.

If a district budgets at or below cap and does NOT move the election, then is there a vote on the budget?

Yes, any district that does not move its school elections to November will continue to hold school elections as they do now in April.

If a district moves its school election to November, can it be moved back?

The election may not be moved back to April until the completion of four election cycles, regardless of the procedure that was originally used to move the election to November.

What are the procedures to move a school election back to April?

The procedures to move a school election back to April, including a vote on the entire budget, can be accomplished using any of the procedures that are used to move the elections to November. However, school elections cannot be moved back until the completion of four election cycles.

If the school election moves to November, will the school board candidate elections continue to be non-partisan?

Yes, the school board candidate election remains non-partisan even if moved to the November general election ballot.

What happens to board members whose terms expire in April if school elections are moved to November?

School board members whose terms end in April will maintain their seats until the re-organization in January.
School board members who are elected in November will take their seats at the re-organization in January.

What is the procedure for moving school elections in regional school districts?

If the board of education of a regional school district passes a resolution to move the election from April to November, the election shall be moved. The constituent districts’ school elections are unaffected by this decision.
If one of the municipalities in a regional school district passes a resolution to move the election from April to November, then the other municipality(ies) must also do so in order for the regional school election to be moved.
To move the school election through petition and subsequent voter approval, the petition must have at least 15 percent of the total number of voters in the last presidential election in all districts to place the question on the ballot. A simple majority of voters in that regional district then must approve the ballot question to move the election from April to November.
If all the constituent districts move each of their school elections to November, the regional district must move its school election to November.

How will the budget timeline be affected if a district moves its school election?

If the election remains in April, there are no changes to the current procedures and timelines.
Budgeting guidelines and timelines will be unchanged regardless of when elections are to take place.
Districts that move their elections to November must submit temporary budgets by May 19. This is also the date when budgets defeated in the April elections must be certified and submitted to the Executive County Superintendent.

How does this law affect special elections dealing with bond referenda?

This law does not affect special elections dealing with bond referenda.

What happens if a school election remains in April?

If districts maintain their school elections in April, then there are no changes to the procedures they currently follow and voters will continue to vote on the school budget.

How will second questions be affected if a school election is changed to November?

Second questions are submitted for voter approval consistent with current regulations except that the vote will take place in November.

Be a part of the education reform discussion

Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:56:03 -0500

Set aside Saturday, Feb. 25 for the NJEA Walter J. O’Brien Legislative Conference at the Westin Princeton at Forrestal Village. The annual conference is your opportunity to get educated, organized, and involved in the legislative issues that affect every public school employee.

In addition to a general session, members have an opportunity to meet with legislators in breakout sessions to discuss the issues.

Be part of the education reform discussion, combat attacks on collective bargaining, lead the fight for K-14 state aid, and lobby for your economic security.

To register, print and send in this flier with your payment. The registration deadline is Feb. 10.

NJEA continues to monitor pilot teacher evaluation program

Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:38:28 -0500

Ten school districts and 19 schools that are receiving School Improvement Grants (SIG) continue to implement the state’s proposed teacher evaluation program, and NJEA continues to monitor the pilot.

To date, the emphasis in these schools and districts has been on training administrators and teachers in the new observation protocols that measure teacher practice. Districts were required to choose one of four teacher evaluation models to pilot in their districts (see the October and November 2011 NJEA Reviews for more information). Administrators were to receive three days of training, with teachers receiving two days of training in the various models. Initially all training was to be completed by Nov. 30; now the N.J. Department of Education (NJDOE) is reporting that all training should be completed by the end of January 2012.

The Evaluation Pilot Advisory Committee (EPAC) is monitoring the impact of the pilot program and is to provide feedback to the NJDOE. NJEA Secretary-Treasurer Marie Blistan is a member of EPAC.

“We are less concerned about the date the training is completed than the quality and thoroughness of the training,” notes Blistan. “We want to make sure evaluators are properly trained to evaluate using the new models and that teachers understand how their performance will be measured before anyone is observed or evaluated using the new domains proposed by the models.”

In addition, NJEA is meeting regularly with representatives of the Department of Education to resolve concerns about the pilot that emerge from conversations with local association representatives and members.

“We anticipate that we will have differences of opinion as we move forward with the pilot, but believe that wherever possible, we should work together to resolve problems in the best interest of students and teachers in New Jersey,” states Blistan.

The results of the pilot evaluation system will ultimately be used by the NJDOE to propose new teacher evaluation regulations for all teachers in New Jersey. A $1.1 million grant was offered to encourage school districts to participate in the program, which advances the recommendations released by Gov. Chris Christie’s Task Force on Educator Effectiveness in March 2011. The stated goals of the new evaluation system are to make teacher evaluation criteria more uniform and to accurately assess teacher effectiveness so educators can get meaningful feedback in an open and collaborative setting.

The centerpiece of the program is to increase student achievement as measured by standardized test scores. The base evaluation formula proposed by the Educator Effectiveness Task Force directed that at least 50 percent of the evaluation framework be based on “identified measures of student achievement,” with the remainder based on “demonstrated practices of effective teachers and leaders.”

The state’s original plan was for the new evaluation system to be implemented statewide next school year. But many, including NJEA, are questioning this ambitious timeline.

“This is too important to rush,” believes Blistan. “Our members’ careers, the culture of our schools, and the learning environment we provide for our students will be significantly impacted by these new regulations. We need to take the time to design new evaluation procedures that are not only fair and transparent, but a system that promotes best practices, teacher collaboration, and optimum student outcomes.”

Along with the Evaluation Pilot Advisory Committee, the program will be evaluated by an independent evaluator. The state is in the final stages of completing the contract negotiations with the researcher chosen to evaluate the pilot.

NJEA is working with the local associations in pilot districts to provide the necessary support to assure that the local association and educators in these districts have input into the pilot study. The Association is also monitoring the impact of the program on proposals to change teacher evaluation regulations.

Governor appoints NJEA members to special task force

Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:04:07 -0500

Gov. Chris Christie has appointed two NJEA members to the N.J. Special Education and Traumatic Brain Injury Awareness Task Force. Vernon Township High School teacher and Athletic Trainers’ Society of New Jersey member Joanne Ploch and Howell Township special education teacher Linda Levine will serve on the 17-member body.

The task force was created in 2009 and was made permanent by a law signed by Gov. Jon Corzine in January 2010.The primary charge of the task force is to both develop best practices and processes for education professionals working with students with a traumatic brain injury and address the needs of students with a traumatic brain injury.

The body is tasked with additional responsibilities:

Studying and evaluating practices for recognizing and educating children with traumatic brain injuries of all types ranging from mild to severe.
Preparing students with traumatic brain injury for entry into college or the work force.
Examining how current statutes and regulations affect students.

Joanne Ploch has been an athletic trainer and health and physical education teacher at Vernon Township School District since 2004. She is also a former executive council member of the Athletic Trainers’ Society of N.J., and brings over 20 years of experience in the fields of athletic training, sports medicine, and education.

Linda Levine is a middle school special education teacher and a learning consultant. She has served on the Education Committee of the Brain Injury Association of N.J. for over 15 years. She became involved in this issue after her son suffered a brain injury and continues to advocate for brain injury awareness as a parent and teacher.

State Board to address achievement gap

Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:01:58 -0500

The N.J. State Board of Education's Closing the Achievement Gap Task Force has held its initial meetings and plans to hold regional public hearings to gather input on how to best address the State's academic achievement gap.

The 10-member task force, which stems from the State Board's annual retreat in June, was created “to examine why many poor and minority students in New Jersey do not score as well on state standardized tests as their more-affluent and white counterparts.”

"It is the State Board of Education's mission to help provide every child in New Jersey with an excellent education regardless of their race, ethnicity, socioeconomic group or sex," President Aponte said. "I am confident that the State Board's Closing the Achievement Gap Task Force will produce proven and practical methods that school districts across the state can use to help all students achieve at high levels."

The task force's charge is to provide the State Board and policymakers with recommendations for a statewide strategy to close the academic achievement gap by addressing proven correlatives of poor academic achievement. It will examine the themes of access; culture/climate; expectations; and strategies.

The task force members include:

James Boatwright, former director of academic support, The College of New Jersey.
Dr. Gloria Bonilla-Santiago, director of the Center for Strategic Urban Community Leadership and board chair of the LEAP Academy University Charter School.
Richard E. Constable III, Esq., deputy commissioner, N.J. Department of Labor and Workforce Development.
Robert L. Copeland, superintendent, Piscataway School District.
Silvia Correa-Abbato, assistant superintendent, Union City School District.
Dr. Stephen Jose Hanson, professor, Psychology Department, Rutgers.
Dr. Arnold G. Hyndman, professor of Cell Biology and Neuroscience and director of the Organizational Leadership Program of the School of Arts and Sciences at Rutgers. `
Carlos R. Moreno, director of School Reform and Innovation—New Jersey.
Dr. Michael Nettles, senior vice president and Edmund W. Gordon chair of Policy Evaluation and Research Center, Educational Testing Service.
Dr. Dorothy Strickland, member, N.J. State Board of Education and professor emerita, Rutgers.

Support for the task force is being provided by ETS, the Department of Education, and the Office of the Acting Secretary of Higher Education/Commission on Higher Education.

Public Employees’ Sick Leave Bills

Fri, 16 Dec 2011 10:07:55 -0500

Currently, there are at least two bills that seek to curb the compensation public employees receive for their accumulated sick leave. S-2220 (Sarlo) was conditionally vetoed by Gov. Christie in December 2010. The governor wanted language that would:

Prohibit supplemental compensation for sick days that accumulate after the effective date of the act.
Require that any sick leave and vacation leave accrued prior to the effective date of the act be used before sick leave or vacation leave accrued after the effective date.
Establish a third level of discipline for violating the sick leave provision that would permit termination of the employee.
Prohibit all employees, not just those hired after the effective date of the bill, from using six or more consecutive days of accumulated sick leave without a written medical note. It also would extend this provision to any time during employment, not just the 12 months before retirement.
Require the suspension of payment for accumulated sick or vacation leave for an employee under indictment for a crime that involves or affects their office and the forfeiture of any supplemental compensation if the employee is convicted.

The most recent bill was introduced in November 2011 by Assemblywoman Pamela Lampitt as a response to the governor. A-4345 would:

Cap current employees’ accumulated sick leave compensation to the current level.
Restrict future accumulated sick days above 60 to an aggregate of $7,500 which would then be paid out in monthly installments for the remainder of the employees’ life expectancy and apply those payments to the retiree’s share of the premium for post-retirement medical benefits.
Limit the carrying forward of vacation leave for one year only.
Impose limits on the use of sick leave on all employees in the 12 months prior to retirement.
Require the suspension of payment for accumulated sick or vacation leave for an employee under indictment for a crime that involves or affects their office and the forfeiture of any supplemental compensation if the employee is convicted.

NJEA is working to improve this legislation and to protect the collective bargaining rights of our members.

Congress may take months to reauthorize ESEA

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 16:52:26 -0400

Although Indiana Sen. Tom Harkin (D), chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, has released a draft of a comprehensive bill to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), insiders believe that an actual vote by Congress could be months away.

Meanwhile, NEA and NJEA are analyzing Harkin’s 860-page bill and will provide feedback to Congress on its specific provisions.

ESEA was originally passed by Congress and signed into law by Pres. Lyndon Johnson in 1965. It is revised every five to seven years. The 2001 iteration of the law, signed by Pres. George W. Bush, was known as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB).

Because of Congressional inaction, and the harmful effects of NCLB, President Barack Obama announced this fall that his administration would give states the opportunity to apply for regulatory flexibility in meeting the mandates of NCLB. To date, 39 states, including New Jersey, have notified the U.S. Department of Education of their plans to apply for waivers from the unreasonable mandates of No Child Left Behind.

Evaluation pilot advisory committee announced

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 16:47:36 -0400

Five teachers are among the 21 members of the Evaluation Pilot Advisory Committee (EPAC) who will advise the N.J. Department of Education (NJDOE) on its teacher evaluation pilot program. Ten districts have been selected to participate in the program, dubbed Excellent Educators for New Jersey (EE4NJ), over the course of this school year. They will split $1.1 million in grant funds. Newark will also participate in the pilot with funding provided by an unidentified grant. In addition, eight schools receiving federal School Improvement Grants (SIG) are required to participate in the program.

School administrators, higher education, and parents are also represented on the advisory group. The committee also has one representative from each of the following groups: the N.J. School Boards Association, the State Board of Education, vocational schools, non-public schools, and charter schools.

EPAC will be responsible for providing guidance throughout the pilot. The group will also produce a recommendation for statewide rollout of a new teacher evaluation system. Additional EPAC members representing all participating pilot districts will be added to the committee in the coming weeks.

The NJDOE solicited nominations for EPAC members from major stakeholder groups. NJEA Secretary-Treasurer Marie Blistan was recently added to the committee. The committee held its first meeting in October and will gather monthly at the NJDOE in Trenton.

The original EPAC members are:

Marie Bilik, executive director, N.J. School Boards Association
Carl Blanchard, national board certified teacher, Franklin High School
Jeanne Delcolle, N.J. Teacher of the Year, 2011-12, Burlington County Institute of Technology
Patricia Donaghue, parent, Toms River
Carol Everett, executive director, N. J. Association of Independent Schools
Dr. Dorothy Feola, president, N.J. Association of Colleges for Teacher Education; associate dean, College of Education, William Paterson University
Darleen Gearhart, director, School Improvement Grants, Newark Public Schools
Timothy Matheny, principal, South Brunswick High School
Eileen Matus, retired principal, Toms River Regional School District
Elizabeth Morgan, national board certified teacher, Ann A. Mullen Middle School
Dr. Brian Osbourne, superintendent, South Orange-Maplewood Schools
Richard Panicucci, assistant superintendent of curriculum, Bergen County Technical Schools
Meredith Pennotti, principal, Red Bank Charter School
Judith Rattner, superintendent, Berkeley Heights Public Schools
Vivian Rodriguez, assistant superintendent, Perth Amboy School District
Dr. Sharon Sherman, dean, School of Education, Rider University
Peggy Stewart, chair, N.J. Professional Teaching Standards Board
Belinda Stokes, principal, Henry Snyder High School
Dr. Dorothy Strickland, N.J. State Board of Education
Bruce Taterka, U.S. Teaching Ambassador Fellow, West Morris Mendham High School
Patricia Wright, retired superintendent, Spring Lake.

Since September, the NJEA Review has run a series of articles on the pilot program. See this month’s installment, which describes three of the models chosen by some of the pilot districts. Read more information on the teacher evaluation pilot program.

New state BOE member sworn in

Fri, 04 Nov 2011 16:42:15 -0400

Joseph Fisicaro of Burlington County is the newest member of the State Board of Education (SBOE). Nominated by Gov. Chris Christie in June, he was sworn in at the board’s October meeting.

Fisicaro, a board member of the Lenape Regional High School district from 1993 until his appointment to the State Board, worked in the Philadelphia schools for 33 years as a teacher of social studies, Spanish, and Italian. An NJEA member since 2006, Fisicaro currently works at the Burlington County Institute of Technology in its Office of Special Education.

After years of open slots, that SBOE now finds all 13 of its seats filled. Fisicaro is the fourth Christie appointee to join the board.

The SBOE has three primary roles in public education: a regulatory role, a policymaking role, and a public role.

When laws are passed, they often lack the details needed to implement them. The board makes, enforces, modifies, and repeals regulations as needed. These codes cover things from the rules concerning certification and evaluation to square footage of classrooms. Administrative code affects every public school employee and student in New Jersey.

The board serves as the policymaking body of the Department of Education. The board acts on recommendations from the commissioner regarding department goals, proposed education standards, policies, and initiatives.

Finally, the board fulfills its role as a liaison to the public by hearing public testimony on proposed regulations and other issues of general concern.

The SBOE meets monthly in Trenton, currently, the first Wednesday of every month. The agenda, available on the Department of Education’s website, is usually published the Friday before the meeting. Public testimony topics are also published on the department’s website, www.nj.gov/education.

DOE announces 11 districts to participate in a teacher evaluation pilot program

Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:36:47 -0400

Ten districts have been selected to participate in the Excellent Educators for one-year New Jersey (EE4NJ) teacher evaluation pilot program over the course of the 2011-12 school year. The districts were selected from among 31 applicants, and, pending final review procedures, will split $1.1 million in grant funds made available by the state. An eleventh district, Newark, will also participate in the pilot through a separate grant.

These districts will implement a new framework for evaluating teachers based on multiple measures of teacher practice and student performance. According to the N.J. Department of Education (NJDOE), the pilot districts are expected to provide “critical input and feedback prior to statewide roll-out in 2012.”

Last year, Gov. Chris Christie convened the N.J. Educator Effectiveness Task Force, which released a report in March 2011 outlining several steps for implementing an improved evaluation system. Over the past five months, the Department developed a competitive grant process to award $1.1 million in federal and state money to districts that will begin to implement a new evaluation system based on the Task Force’s findings. The Department outlined a framework for the new evaluation system, but encouraged districts to innovate within that framework.

The selected districts are:

Alexandria Township (Hunterdon County)
Bergenfield (Bergen)
Elizabeth (Union)
Monroe Township (Middlesex)
Ocean City (Cape May)
Pemberton Township (Burlington)
Red Bank (Monmouth)
Secaucus (Hudson)
West Deptford Township (Gloucester)
Woodstown-Pilesgrove Regional (Salem)
Newark, which will to be funded through a separate undisclosed grant (Essex)

The NJEA Review outlined the fundamentals of the State’s proposed teacher evaluation system in last month’s issue. The Review will publish a series of articles on this developing story this year. Here is this month’s installment.

State database to link student test performance to individual teachers

Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:29:02 -0400

By this time next year, the N.J. Department of Education expects to have assigned every New Jersey teacher an individual identification number so it can link teachers to their students. Since spring 2007, the NJDOE has assigned a unique statewide identification number to each student.

This is just one part of the N.J. Department of Education’s plans to expand its N.J. Smart electronic database of student, school, and district data by September 2012.

The state’s move to enlarge the web-based portal’s database is driven by N.J. Department of Education efforts to create a teacher evaluation system that relies heavily on tying individual student standardized test scores results to specific educators. It is also an effort to comply with federal rules that accompanied acceptance of federal dollars under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund.

The U.S. Department of Education (ED) wants each state to be able to access and report on data electronically for preK through postsecondary education in such areas as student transfers and dropouts and college readiness. For that reason, NJDOE is purchasing data from the National College Student Clearinghouse and expects to update the database of New Jersey’s 2,011 recent high school graduates in October, once colleges complete their enrollments.

The Federal Government is urging each state Department or Education to include additional data in their statewide data base systems, including but not limited to:

Data on teacher evaluation systems
Evaluation results of individual teachers
Student test performance growth data tied to individual teachers
Accommodations for students with disabilities and limited English proficient students
School-level reports on student test score data
Status of persistently underperforming schools.

Change in graduation rate calculation has NCLB implications

In 2004, the State of New Jersey signed a National Governors Association compact to generate a cohort graduation rate by 2010 using a national formula for all states. The federal government adopted major components of the formula in 2008, mandating states to move to the cohort rate by 2011. This gave states time to put in place electronic data systems that could track individual students.

Starting with the Class of 2011 graduates, the New Jersey graduation rate will be calculated using a federally-required formula based on a four-year cohort. The 2007 ninth grade class – with incoming transfers added and documented outgoing transfers subtracted -- will be divided into the number of 2011 graduates. Dropouts, including undocumented transfers, will remain within the cohort count for the calculation. The rate will be reported by school, district, and statewide, plus disaggregated by subgroup at each of those levels.

Until now, New Jersey school districts have been using a formula that uses dropouts to measure the graduation rate. The number of students in grades 9 through 12 who drop out each year during July through June is divided by the number of students enrolled in grades nine through 12 by the October enrollment report. Based on an analysis of 2001-02 data, the standard statewide single year dropout rate was 2.6 percent. Districts needed to reduce their dropout rate by 0.5 percent per year until they met that rate as one of the indicators of Adequate Yearly Progress under the current provisions of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, also known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

NJEA PAC endorses 69 candidates for Legislature

Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:42:44 -0400

The 125-member political action committee of the 200,000 member New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) voted to endorse 69 candidates for election to the New Jersey Legislature this November.

The NJEA PAC Operating Committee (NJEA PAC) endorsed 48 Assembly candidates and 21 Senate candidates in 29 of the state’s 40 Legislative Districts. They include 2 Republicans and 67 Democrats.

We are excited to support these candidates,” NJEA President Barbara Keshishian said. “The incumbents we endorsed are proven supporters of public education and working families. The challengers show a real determination to return this state to its progressive, pro-education roots.”

Keshishian acknowledged that NJEA is endorsing fewer candidates this year, and that some previously-endorsed legislators are not on this year’s list.

While the screening committees took many issues into account in making their decisions, as a result of the recent pension and benefit legislation, our members will be facing significant financial consequences,” said Keshishian. “NJEA members make these endorsement decisions and they have made it clear that they will not endorse legislators who have impaired their right to collectively bargain and who have imposed thousands of dollars of additional costs on public employees.

Our members refuse to give precious resources and their own time to campaign for legislators who hurt them and their families,” Keshishian said. “But make no mistake, fewer endorsements do not mean NJEA will be less involved in the upcoming elections. If anything, we will be more committed and will work harder to support pro-public education candidates who have shown they care about public school employees, our families, and the students we educate.”

NJEA PAC voted on the recommendations of local interview teams from each legislative district. Those endorsements are:

LD 1 Assembly: Nelson Albano (D)
LD 2 Assembly: Alisa Cooper* (D) and Damon Tyner (D)
LD 3 No endorsements
LD 4 Assembly: Shelley Lovett (R)
LD 5 No endorsements
LD 6 No endorsements
LD 7 No endorsements
LD 8 No endorsements
LD 9 No endorsements
LD 10 Assembly: Gregory McGuckin (R) and Bette Wary (D)
LD 11 Senate: Raymond Santiago (D); Assembly: Vin Gopal (D)
LD 12 Senate: Robert Brown (D); Assembly: William Spedding (D) and Catherine Tinney Rome (D)
LD 13 Senate: Christopher Cullen (D); Assembly: Kevin Lavan (D)
LD 14 Senate: Linda Greenstein (D); Assembly: Daniel Benson (D) and Wayne DeAngelo (D)
LD 15 Senate: Shirley Turner (D); Assembly: Bonnie Watson Coleman (D) and Reed Gusciora (D)
LD 16 Senate: Maureen Vella (D); Assembly: Marie Corfield* (D) and Joe Camarota (D)
LD 17 Senate: Bob Smith (D); Assembly: Joe Egan (D) and Upendra Chivukula (D)
LD 18 Senate: Barbara Buono (D); Assembly: Pat Diegnan (D) and Peter Barnes (D)
LD 19 Senate: Joe Vitale (D); Assembly: John Wisniewski (D) and Craig Coughlin (D)
LD 20 No endorsements
LD 21 No endorsements
LD 22 Assembly: Linda Stender (D) and Jerry Green (D)
LD 23 Senate: John Graf, Jr. (D); Assembly: Karen Carroll (D)
LD 24 Senate: Ed Selby* (D); Assembly: Leslie Huhn (D) and Jim Nye (D)
LD 25 Senate: Rick Thoeni (D); Assembly: Gale Heiss-Colucci (D) and George Stafford (D)
LD 26 No endorsements
LD 27 Senate: Richard Codey (D); Assembly: Mila Jasey (D) and John McKeon (D)
LD 28 Senate: Ronald Rice (D); Assembly: Cleopatra Tucker (D) and Ralph Caputo (D)
LD 29 No endorsements
LD 30 Senate: Steven Morlino (D); Assembly: Howard Kleinhendler (D) and Shaun O’Rourke (D)
LD 31 Senate: Sandra Cunningham (D); Assembly: Charles Mainor (D) and Jason O’Donnell (D)
LD 32 Senate: Nicholas Sacco* (D); Assembly: Vincent Prieto (D) and Angelica Jimenez (D)
LD 33 Assembly: Sean Conners (D) and Ruben Ramos* (D)
LD 34 Assembly: Thomas Giblin (D)
LD 35 Senate: Nellie Pou (D); Assembly: Benjie Wimberly* (D)
LD 36 Senate: Paul Sarlo (D); Assembly: Gary Schaer (D)
LD 37 Senate: Loretta Weinberg (D); Assembly: Valerie Vainieri Huttle (D) and Gordon Johnson (D)
LD 38 Senate: Robert Gordon (D); Assembly: Connie Wagner* (D)
LD 39 No endorsements
LD 40 Assembly: Cassandra Lazzara* (D)

* NJEA Member

Cerf reorganizes Department of Education

Tue, 06 Sep 2011 16:51:43 -0400

With a new Commissioner comes a new vision of the Department of Education. In July, the State Board of Education approved Acting Commissioner Christopher Cerf’s plan for the department.

Cerf said the department, as previously organized, had been geared toward ensuring compliance with rules rather than its most important job, which he defined as "to graduate all of New Jersey's children regardless of their birth circumstances, their zip code, their level of need, to graduate them college- and career-ready."

Under the new structure, the department has four main divisions led by an “officer” who will be responsible for certain activities as follows:

Chief Academic Officer: Will be responsible for implementing the new Common Core State Standards; ensuring that State assessments meaningfully reflect college and career readiness; and collaborating with education leaders across the state to help them build curriculum and instructional tools that maximize the impact of the new standards.

Chief Performance Officer: Will develop the State’s next generation accountability system and complete development of the statewide longitudinal data system, which will inform progress against learning goals for every school and student group on an ongoing basis.

Chief Talent Officer: Will ensure that New Jersey has the highest-performing teachers and administrators by focusing on recruitment, retention, and development; be responsible for expanding educators’ tools and the ability to collaborate around timely use of data to diagnose learning progress and personalize instruction for every child; and oversee the design and implementation of educator effectiveness work including evaluation and tenure reforms.

Chief Innovation Officer: Will identify, incubate, launch, and support proven school models, programs, and technologies for parents and children, especially in persistently lowest-performing school communities. This individual will manage the school choice programs in the Department.

Only the position of Chief Performance Officer has been filled. Bari Erlichson, the Department’s former Director of the Office of Education Data, was named as Chief Performance Officer. The Department is conducting a search to fill the other officer positions. The State Board also approved two other positions: Andrew Smarick as deputy commissioner and David C. Hespe as Chief of Staff. Smarick will head the new Delivery Unit, which will be responsible for aligning county offices and school support functions and will be tasked with “making sure the work of the new divisions reaches district officials.”

Smarick has been at the Department since September of 2010, had difficulty in obtaining Board approval when former Commissioner Bret Schundler had sought his placement as Deputy Commissioner. The Delivery Unit will house a new Project Management Office, whose goal will be to assist the NJDOE in becoming a “more service oriented agency and improve NJDOE's own planning and execution skills.

Hespe, who was Education Commissioner from 1999 to 2001 and was recently named by Gov. Chris Christie to head a task force looking at education mandates and red-tape, will oversee all key administrative functions in the Department, including administration and finance, programs and operations, legislative affairs, communications and strategic partnerships.

Christie appoints two more State BOE members

Tue, 06 Sep 2011 16:49:20 -0400

Gov. Chris Christie has nominated Mark Biedron and Joseph Fisicaro to the N.J. State Board of Education (SBOE). Biedron was sworn in at the August meeting. Fisicaro has been approved by the State Senate but has not yet been officially sworn in. Christie has added six new members to the SBOE.

Biedron, a co-founder of the independent Willow School, is from Hunterdon County. Fisicaro, from Burlington County, is currently a Board of Education member from the Lenape Regional School District. He also sits on the N.J. School Board Association's Board of Directors. Once Fisicaro is sworn in, the board will have its full membership of 13 members. Members serve without compensation; three members must be women, and no two members can be from the same county.

The State Board of Education has three primary roles in public education: a regulatory role, a policymaking role, and a public role.

The regulatory role: When laws are passed, they often lack the details needed to implement them. These details are contained in regulations in New Jersey Administrative Code. Education code is in Title 6A, referred to as NJAC 6:A. The board makes, enforces, modifies, and repeals regulations as needed, unless a law specifically gives the Commissioner emergency power to make regulations.

Code covers things from the rules concerning certification to evaluation to square footage of classrooms. The creation of regulations, rule-making, can be initiated due to new laws, federal requirements, a change in policy, an executive order, a court decision, an emergent danger, or a rule-making petition. The State Board has a lengthy rule-making process that includes both discussions by the members of the board and public testimony.

The policymaking role: The board serves as the policymaking body of the Department of Education. The board acts on recommendations from the commissioner regarding department goals, proposed education standards, policies, and initiatives.

The public role: The board is the board of education for the entire state, and thus serves the public. All board meetings are conducted according to the open public meetings act. The board fulfills its role as a liaison to the public by hearing public testimony on proposed regulations and other issues of general concern.

The State Board meets monthly in Trenton, currently, the first Wednesday of every month. The agenda, available on the Department of Education’s website, is usually published the Friday before the meeting. Public testimony topics are also published on the Department’s website.

Administrative code affects each and every public school employee and student. It is important for school employees to keep the State Board of Education informed about issues in their schools. As the policymaking body for the state, State Board members need to understand the day-to-day impact of the regulations and policies they make.

If you think the State Board needs to know about something, write a letter to the board members and send it to State Board Office, Riverview Plaza, PO Box 500, Trenton, NJ, 08625. Visit the N.J. Department of Education website for more information.