And The Beat Goes On!

This letter was sent to me by one of our readers.
I think it pertains not only to Social Security but also to the New Jersey State Pension Fund. 
Essentially, all governors and their cohorts in the Assembly and Senate from Whittman on, have raided the Fund so as to give the illusion of lower taxes and thereby effectively bought votes with our money.
Like it or not, your money was inessence contributed to the political campaigns of all these politicians so as to help ensure their reelection.
And the sadist part, the beat go on with Christie and his minions in New Jersey government.
P.S.
Thanks Marguerite for the letter!

This Montana woman stated it quite clearly.
Alan Simpson, Senator from Wyoming , Co-Chair of Obama's
deficit commission, calls senior citizens the Greediest Generation, as he compared "Social Security" to a Milk Cow with 310 million teats.

Here's a response in a letter from PATTY MYERS in Montana ...
 I think she is a little ticked off! She also tells it like it is!

 "Hey Alan, let's get a few things straight!

1. As a career politician, you have been on the public dole  for FIFTY YEARS.

2. I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63).

3. My Social Security payments, and those of millions of  other Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing  account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account and give OUR money to a bunch of zero ambition losers in  return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and turning Social  Security into a Ponzi scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud.

4. Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown, you and your ilk pulled the proverbial football away from millions of American  seniors nearing retirement and moved the goalposts for full  retirement from age 65 to age 67. NOW, you and your shill commission is proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN.''

5. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying into Medicare from Day One, and now you morons propose to change the rules of the game. Why? Because you idiots mismanaged other parts of  the economy to such an extent that you need to steal money from  Medicare to pay the bills. And you've spent more than any administration in history.

6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why? Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you  ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt. To add insult to injury, you label us "greedy" for calling "bullshit" on your incompetence. Well, Captain Bullshit, I have a  few questions for YOU.

 1. How much money have you earned from the American  taxpayers during your pathetic 50-year political career?

2. At what age did you retire from your pathetic political  career, and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from the American taxpayers?

3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health  insurance?

4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are  you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or, as  usual, have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?  It is you, Captain Bullshit, and your political  co-conspirators called Congress who are the "greedy" ones. It is you and your fellow nutcases who have bankrupted America and stolen the  American dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers. And for what? Votes!  That's right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted America for the sole purpose of advancing your pathetic political careers. You know it, we know it, and you know that we know it.  And you can take that to the bank, you miserable son of a bitch.

 If you like the way things are in America delete this.
If you agree with what a fellow Montana citizen Patty Myers says, PASS  IT ON!!!

Have a wonderful day!

Working Hard or Hardly Working?

Trippin' With The Gov!

Was he docked or did he use his "Personal Days"?

- - Private Education is Just Grand - - Many Grand for Some!

Aint Private Education
Just Grand!
But Certainly Not for the
Students
The tuition at Stevens
is $41,942 !

Witnessing the Extinction of an Endangered Species

"Walker's victory could bring more efforts to weaken public unions" 


Read it at:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/06/politics/wisconsin-recall-unions/index.html?hpt=hp_t2



"First they came for the  Communists  and no one complained,  then they came for the  Jews  and no one complained,  then they came for the  Gypsies  and no one complained then they came for me and there was no one left to complain."

Dear Friends (I think)

I have had a major catastrophe!  Both of the hard drives in my computer failed simultaneously and I have lost all data. I have bought a new computer but I don't have the email addresses for the people to whom I send my blog notifications.
If you would send to me your email address and that of any other people who you think might be interested in this blog I will appreciate it.


My email is   wsautter@optonline.net


Thanks

Walt


 PS
I just saw in the paper that Judge Hurd refused to reinstate the pension COLA! Maybe I should have spelled his name with a "T".
PSS
I have also noted that judges in NJ did not have their pensions effected by the new pension laws? Very curious isn't it??

Iris Hits The Nail on The Head

If This Doesn't Piss You Off - Check Your Pulse - You Must Be Dead!

"Hey - This pension reform thing is working great -
For my buds!"

Gov. Christie's pension issue: N.J. probe looks at running mate, double-dipping

N.J. Gov. Chris Christie with Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno in November 2011. Despite Guadagno's involvement in a criminal investigation of pension abuse, Christie has not appointed a special prosecutor.

By Mark Lagerkvist
New Jersey Watchdog

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — a rising star in the national Republican Party — called an overhaul of the state pension system his "biggest governmental victory." He now faces embarrassment from flaws his reforms failed to fix.
But his reform did little to stop the age-old New Jersey practice of double-dipping, in which employees "retire," start collecting a pension, and then are rehired, often the next day. Christie's own deputy chief of staff collects $219,000 a year from the state — a $130,000 salary as a top aide to the governor plus $89,000 in state pension.

Worse for Christie, a criminal investigation is under way involving his running mate, New Jersey Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno.

As a county sheriff in 2008, Guadagno made false statements to enable her chief officer to pocket nearly $85,000 a year in retirement pay while drawing an $87,500 annual salary. The double-dipping scheme first was reported by New Jersey Watchdog in 2010.

The state's investigation is assigned to the Attorney's General's Division of Criminal Justice, a unit where Guadagno once served as deputy director. Despite the apparent conflict, Christie has not appointed a special prosecutor.

A spokesman for Christie and Guadagno declined to comment. The Attorney General's Office did not respond to questions.

Pension abuses are so rampant in New Jersey that even the agency investigating Guadagno has its own controversy.

Twenty-three supervisors and investigators for the Attorney General’s Office and DCJ are using legal loopholes to draw salaries and pension pay, New Jersey Watchdog found. On average, each pockets $164,000 a year — $96,000 in salary and $68,000 in pension.

Most "retired" for just one night. Those officers left their positions with the Attorney General’s Office only to return to the same employer the next morning with new job titles — and two paychecks instead of one.

In a continuing series of investigative reports, New Jersey Watchdog exposed similar double-dipping practices involving 125 officers employed by prosecutors, 18 officials from a state Homeland Security Unit and 44 county sheriffs and undersheriffs — in addition to the Guadagno story.

Democratic State Sen. Fred Madden is a "triple-dipper" who collects more than $241,000 a year from public coffers — $49,000 as a legislator, $106,983 as a police academy dean and an $85,272 pension as a State Police retiree.

"I don't have a problem with it at all," said Madden.

The Guadagno controversy -
While Madden and others profit from loopholes in pension rules, the circumstances surrounding Christie's second-in-command raise questions of fraud and deception.

Guadagno was elected sheriff of Monmouth County in 2007. She previously worked as an assistant U.S. attorney and as an assistant New Jersey attorney general. From 1998 to 2001, Guadagno served as deputy director of the DCJ — the unit now assigned to investigate the case in which she's a major figure.

In 2008, Guadagno hired Michael Donovan Jr., a retired investigator for the county prosecutor, as the sheriff’s “chief of law enforcement division.” She announced the appointment in a memo to her staff.

The focus of a criminal investigation of pension abuse, Chief Michael Donovan takes an oath of office in the Monmouth County, N.J., Sheriff's Office on Sept. 22, 2008. Donovan's job title was fudged to allow him to collect his pension and his pay at the same time. The swearing in was witnessed by his mother, Emily, and then-Sheriff Kim Guadagno, now the state's lieutenant governor. Donovan was sworn in by Judge Lawrence M. Lawson.

But there was a problem. As a sheriff's chief officer — a position covered by the pension system — Donovan would be required to stop receiving pension checks and resume contributions to the state retirement fund.

Guadagno fudged the job title, so Donovan could double-dip. In county payroll records, the oath of office and a news release, Donovan was called the sheriff's "chief warrant officer" — a low-ranking position exempt from the pension system.

A chief warrant officer oversees the service of warrants and other legal documents. In contrast, the sheriff's official website identified Donovan as "sheriff's officer chief," supervising 115 subordinate officers and 30 civilian employees.

On Guadagno’s organizational chart, Donovan was listed as chief of law enforcement — and the position of chief warrant officer was conspicuously absent.

The ruse allowed Donovan to collect an $87,500 salary from Monmouth County in addition to an $85,000 pension as a retired county employee.

A Conflicted Investigation - When Guadagno was elected as Christie's running mate in the 2009 election, she resigned as sheriff.

In 2010, state Treasury pension officials began to ask Monmouth County about retiree Donovan's employment. "I would respectfully request that former Sheriff Guadagno be contacted..." replied her successor, Shaun Golden, in a letter forwarded to the Treasury.

The Treasury denied the existence of any correspondence or email contact with Guadagno or Christie regarding Donovan. Officials also rejected requests for records of the Treasury's inquiry.

In response, New Jersey Watchdog filed a formal complaint with the state Government Records Council, a body consisting of gubernatorial appointees and cabinet officials. One year later, the council has yet to render an advisory opinion.

Meanwhile, the state Police and Firemen's Retirement System's Board of Trustees took action of its own.

"It's a double-whammy," said PFRS chairman John Sierchio. "If you're going to retire under one job title and come back under another title, we have a problem with that. The chief of sheriff is a covered title under the pension system — and they should be contributing instead of drawing out."

The PFRS board voted in May 2011 to call for a criminal investigation of Donovan and parallel instances involving John Dough, of Essex County, and Harold Gibson, of Union County. The case was referred to DCJ.

However, the investigation is riddled with a maze of potential conflicts of interest:
•DCJ is probing allegations involving its own former deputy director, Guadagno.
•Nearly two dozen DCJ investigators and supervisors are "double-dippers" who collect state paychecks and pensions.
•Attorney General Jeffrey Chiesa, a Christie appointee, is ultimately in charge of the probe of fellow cabinet member Guadagno. Chiesa is also former chief counsel to Christie.
•Despite evidence of possible wrongdoing by his lieutenant governor, Christie has not appointed a special prosecutor or authorized an independent investigation.

One year later, the PFRS board remains in the dark. "I keep asking, but we haven't been told anything," said Sierchio.

Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno of New Jersey. When she was a county sheriff, her office fudged a job description and organizational charts to allow an aide to double-dip on his pension. Guadagno has declined to comment.

Sean Conner, a spokesman for Christie and Guadagno, refused to listen to questions about Guadagno's role or the need for a special prosecutor.

"Let me stop you right there," Conner told New Jersey Watchdog. "If it was referred to DCJ, you need to call DCJ."

The Attorney General's Office did not respond to questions about the investigation.

Back in Monmouth County, Donovan has another new job title — but he’s still a double-dipper. In February 2011, Golden named him undersheriff in charge of law enforcement — a strikingly similar position, but one apparently exempt in the labyrinth of pension rules. Donovan currently gets an $86,000 annual pension on top of his $92,000 salary.

While sheriff's chief, Donovan pocketed $227,000 in retirement checks. Since he did not re-enroll in the pension system, he avoided $18,000 in contributions to the retirement fund. If state authorities ultimately determine Donovan violated pension rules, he could be forced to repay $245,000.

Reform...except for double-dipping - Pension fraud and widespread abuse are nothing new in New Jersey.

The federal Securities and Exchange Commission accused New Jersey of pension fraud in 2010. It was the first time the SEC had taken action against a state government over public pension funds.

According to the SEC, New Jersey misled its bond investors from 2001 to 2007 by failing to disclose it had not met its obligation to fund public workers' pension funds. The lawsuit was settled with a cease-and-desist order, which the state accepted without admitting or denying the charges. The alleged fraud occurred on the watch of four previous governors.

Christie vowed to overhaul the pension system. With the state facing a $45 billion pension shortfall when he took office, the new governor spearheaded legislation that he signed into law last year.

"We are putting the people first and daring to touch the third rail of politics to bring reform to unsustainable system," stated Christie in a news release. “We are once again showing the people of New Jersey that our state is leading the way on the biggest challenges before us and remains unafraid to do what is hard, but necessary."

But the reforms did little to halt widespread double-dipping by numerous public employees, including Christie's deputy chief of staff.

Louis Goetting gets $219,000 a year from the state — $130,000 in salary as a top aide to the governor plus $89,000 in state pension payments from an early retirement deal. Christie hired Goetting in 2010 as a budget guru to help trim the cost of government.

In addition, Goetting (pronounced “getting”) received two golden parachutes from public coffers before joining Christie — severance packages of $190,000 from Brookdale Community College in 2009 and $180,000 from University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey in 2002.


Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey has touted his pension reforms, which have done little to halt the practice of double-dipping by public employees, including his deputy chief of staff.

The bottom line: Goetting has gotten more than $1.1 million in pension and severance pay — and he still draws a six-figure salary from the state.

In answer to questions about Goetting's double-dips, the governor's press office has reiterated a statement Christie issued last year: "There is no one in my administration, myself included, who understands about the operation of this government better than Lou Goetting does. And so the people of New Jersey have gotten an incredible bargain.”

Pension reforms will not be complete without an investigative staff to monitor potential abuses, according to PFRS chairman Sierchio. He noted there are 275,000 retirees — but no investigators assigned to review complaints.

"We don't have anybody watching the store," said Sierchio. "We've got an $80 billion pension system, and nobody to investigate anything. Once you get your pension, you never have to look over your shoulder.

Why Not Whys Instead of Hows?

All the recent clamor about student loan rates got me to thinking about my own college days.

I graduated from a rural, north western, New Jersey high school in 1960.

My family lived on the edge. My father was in his seventies and disabled. We lived solely on his monthly Social Security check (I know – “socialism, entitlements, feeding at the public trough, etc.”) but without it we wouldn’t have survived.

Upon graduation I sought a college with the lowest possible tuition. The one I found was East Carolina College in Greenville, North Carolina however even that was more than I could afford when I considered the costs of transportation.

As a result, I joined the work force delivering coal for the local lumberyard.

After a year of hard labor I accumulated two years of tuition money and was admitted to Montclair State College.

Enough about me.

What does this have to do will the current banter regarding student loan rates?

Well, I clearly recall the tuition rate that I paid in 1961was -  are you ready?

      One hundred and fifty dollars per year!

If it weren’t for that minimal tuition rate, I and many like me, could have never moved from the poverty class to the middle class. I’d still be shoveling coal for a living!

As you can see below, the rate for the same college today is approaching ten thousand dollars per year!

Now I know what many of  you will say.

“Yes, but everything was cheaper then and a dollar was worth much more than today.”

All this is true but let’s use some simple arithmetic to give these numbers current day prospective so they can be fully appreciated.

First, consider that tuition rates have increased 6400% over the past forty-five years ($150 to $9674).

My first teaching job in 1965 paid a starting salary of $5200. Today a starting salary hovers around $50,000 a less than 690% increase.

In 1966 I bought my first new car, a fully loaded Pontiac Lemans (one of the most popular and stylish cars of the day). The cost - $2750!

A similar car today (a Honda Accord) goes for approximately $23,000, an 840% increase.

Gasoline prices (another topic of popular controversy) were at $.33 per gallon. Today - $4.00 per gallon – a 1200% increase.

Even housing has risen at a significantly lesser rate than college tuition. In 1965 a new single family, split level sold for about $25,000. Today that same house bears a price tag of about $450,000 – an increase of  a mere 1800%.

The education “reform” movement in New Jersey and elsewhere throughout the nation proclaims that vouchers and privatization will lower costs.

All colleges, both public and private participate in the “free market” in that they are obliged to compete for students (customers).

Based on the aforementioned  statistics it certainly appears that the “free market” when applied to education does not reduce costs. When compared to the price rises of other “commodities” it may be actually increasing costs to the consumer?

It appears that college tuition rates have “gone wild”.

How does this relate to public education?

Here’s how!

Why have no questions been asked as  to why college costs have skyrocketed  beyond all other costs? Only questions about interest rates on the loans that are required in order to pay them have been raised!

The same vein of discussion occurs pertaining to health care costs. Again, little asked as to why costs are so high but instead how and who is going to pay them!

The whys of  the costs of both of these vital services are never called into question?

Interestingly enough however, when it comes to costs of public education and public services which have risen not near so dramatically, the conversation immediately changes from “How do we pay for it?” to “Let’s limit costs by reducing salaries and benefits and putting caps on budgets”.

Why is this approach to solving cost problems applied only to public services and public servants and never to purveyors the services that engage in the most egregious price rises of all?

Maybe I Was Too Extreme in My Cynicism - Probably Not!

As you well know, I have frequently doubted the motives of the organizers of “education reform” groups such as B4Kids and Students First.

At times, after writing these articles,  I  began to question my own cynicism.

“Maybe I was being too extreme in my suspicions?”

Several days ago, the flyer below was sent to me.

Any trace of self-doubt has since disappeared!

******************************************** As you open your pocketbooks for the next natural disaster, please keep these facts in mind: The American Red Cross President and CEO Marsha J. Evans' salary for the year was $951,957 plus expenses.      The United Way President Brian Gallagher receives a $675,000 base salary along with numerous expense benefits. UNICEF CEO Caryl M. Stern receives $1,900,000 per year (158K) per month, plus all expenses including a ROLLS ROYCE. Less than 5 cents (4.4 cents) per donated dollar goes to the cause. ****************************************************** PS There are some worthy organizations however: The Salvation Army's Commissioner Todd Bassett receives a salary of only $13,000 per year (plus housing) for managing this $2 billion dollar organization. 96 percent of donated dollars go to the cause. The American Legion National Commander receives a $0.00 zero salary. Your donations go to help Veterans and their families and youth! · The Veterans of Foreign Wars National Commander receives a $0.00 zero salary. Your donations go to help Veterans and their families and youth! · The Disabled American Veterans National Commander receives a $0.00 zero salary.  Your donations go to help Veterans and their families and youth! · The Military Order of Purple Hearts National Commander receives a $0.00 zero salary.  Your donations go to help Veterans and their families and youth! · The Vietnam Veterans Association National Commander receives a $0.00 zero salary.  Your donations go to help Veterans and their families and youth!   Please share this with everyone you can.

Tenure Reform -Cutting Higher-Paid Teachers

I found this article on the Internet.

Mr. Krausser is right "on the money"

Tenure reform is all about cutting higher-paid teachers
6:52 PM, Mar. 23, 2012 - Asbury Park Press

Gov. Chris Christie’s tenure reform is really all about money. Any type of tenure revision will allow administrators to remove seasoned teachers, who make the highest salaries*

This type of age discrimination will result in having millions of extra dollars in local and state budgets. This money will not be given back to the taxpayer. It will allow politicians to have even more money to use on pet projects.

This is the reason tenure reform is getting bipartisan support. Both Democrats and Republicans will have a field day spending taxpayer money.

Remember, for more than 15 years, both parties raided the teacher pension fund. Now that there is no money left, they have to find another way to take from the middle class.

In the interim, public schools will deteriorate because young, high-quality teachers will leave the profession, knowing that after working for 10 years they will be out the door. Tenure reform also will result in many age-discrimination lawsuits against boards of education, which is just what we don’t need in this state.

If Christie really wanted to improve education, he would introduce legislation that requires administrators to spend 10 years in the classroom as a teacher. Most administrators are teachers who couldn’t teach but had political connections.

The biggest problem in education is the lack of leadership in our public schools **.

Edward M. Krausser

Wall


*Let me add that taxpayer's money will not be saved by cutting high paid teachers. Those "savings" will go into the pockets of the CEOs and highly paid executives that will run the private schools which are soon to replace today's public schools.
** Many of today's "educational leaders" are self proclaimed, well connected  "experts" with a good line of educational jargon and theory but little or no actual teaching experience.

And The Beat (Down) Goes On!

The definition of Tenure - Merrian Webster

: the act, right, manner, or term of holding something (as a landed property, a position, or an office); especially : a status granted after a trial period to a teacher that gives protection from summary dismissal

********************

I read in the Ledger again today about the Governor's plan to “reform” tenure. I decided to lookup the exact meaning of the word. 

Based on that definition it appears to me that  the tenure “reform” plan is not to “reform” tenure but instead to eliminate it.

Awarding five year contracts is not at all tenure as it is defined.

“Reform” evidently means to allow the awarding of consecutive, short term contracts granted at the employer's whim. That certainly is not cited in the definition of “tenure”.

The Ledger went on to praise the Newark School Superintendent (Cami  Anderson) for her removing eighty “poorly performing” teachers from the classroom.

It described her anguish regarding tenure in that she was unable to readily dismiss “poorly performing” teachers.

And could  it be that some of her angst arises from the fact that she and all superintendents in New Jersey have lost tenure and therefore no one else should be tenured? I’m just asking!

Needless to say the Star-Ledger editor and she both fully support the elimination of  teacher tenure and seniority rights in New Jersey Public Schools.

I looked up some statistics pertaining to the Newark School System.

“Newark Public Schools, with 75 schools, 7,000 employees and a student population of 39,440, is the largest and one of the oldest school systems in New Jersey. Its origin dates back to 1676 and Barringer High School in Newark’s North Ward, is the third oldest public high school in the nation.”

A little fourth grade math tells me that eighty out of seven thousand is 1.1%.

So let me get this straight!

We should eliminate teachers rights for the 98.9% so as to enable the easy dismissal of the 1.1% of “poorly performing” teachers?

Let's pretend I was teaching a class and 1.1% of the children failed a test. Should I then justifiably punish the entire class for the poor performance of those few? 

Do you think I might be called to the principal’s office if I did?

Suppose I were to tell him that I punished everyone because just punishing the 1.1% was far too difficult for me to do? How do you think that excuse would work?

I'm sure you get my point.

The straw man issue of the expense and difficult of removing “poor performing” tenured staff which is constantly cited as justification for “tenure reform”.  Please take a moment to read my article of Sunday, February 19, 2012  - “$100,000 Questions About Tenure” (which I have added below) and you will see what I mean.

Teachers have spent fifty years, legitimately building the profession into one with a modicum of respect, decent wages and benefits. Now within just a few years those gains are being er
oded and destroyed, all without protest.

In spite of the Governor's claim of a powerful NJEA, it has done little in response to the current attack on teachers. The union has been docile and completely ineffectual at best.

Trust me, all this is a guise to lay the ground work for the complete privatization of public education in New Jersey and throughout the country.

The loss of tenure and seniority will further weaken and destroy what is left of the teaching profession.

 When privatization is finally accomplished the corporations which will run the schools will then not have to deal with teacher rights and tenure issues. They will be able to hire and fire at will, pay low wages and reap great rewards for themselves and their executives.

*************

$100,000 Questions About Tenure

The constant cry from those wishing to eliminate tenure is that the cost of firing a tenured teacher is extreme (the claim is up to $100,000).

Why does it cost so much to remove a poorly performing, tenured teacher?

Because lawyers charge school districts exorbitant  fees in order to carry out the process.

Instead of ending tenure for all teachers, the majority of whom are doing well, why not limit the cost of firing the poor ones?

We should look at capping the outrageous legal fees that are paid by school systems each year.

The State is certainly very good at capping all other aspects of school district spending why not cap these?

If this was done, some questions might arise.

Would lawyers take tenure cases filed by school districts at reduced fees?

Last year,  New Jersey admitted 3037 lawyers to the Bar. Estimated job openings were 844 leaving a surplus of  2193 . The median wage for New Jersey lawyers is $43.84 per hour. *

If the law of supply and demand works, it should be easy to hire lawyers to pursue these actions.

Another question might then be, would districts be able to obtain the “best” lawyers if legal costs were capped?

Well, if the charges brought against an individual are valid and well documented, I don't think districts need Johnny Cochran to win the case!

Another cost saving measure might be, having the State hiring a group of salaried lawyers to be leased to school districts at  nominal rates. These lawyers could then pursue tenure charge cases instead of having districts spend outlandish sums by hiring independent law firms.

If the real motivation behind ending tenure is only so that “poor” teachers can be fired without huge cost why not investigate these alternatives?

(My own opinion, this is not the real motivation for the elimination of tenure.)

PS

Does anyone really think that the Governor (who is a lawyer) and the legislature (which is in majority composed of lawyers) would ever even suggest much entertain these types of action?

It's much easier and more fun to beat up on teachers!

* http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/

Education Reform in New Jersey 2012

I just got a look at Governor Christie's Education Reform Plan guide lines for 2012.
Here they are:
(1) Teachers each day will fill lamps, clean chimneys.
(2) Each teacher will bring a bucket of water and a scuttle of coal for the day’s session.
(3) Make your pens carefully. You may whittle nibs to the individual taste of the pupils.
(4) Men teachers may take one evening each week for courting purposes, or two evenings a week if they go to church.
(5) After ten hours in school, the teachers may spend the remaining time reading the Bible or other good books. (6) Every good teacher should lay aside from each pay a goodly sum of his earnings for his benefit during his declining years so that he will not be a burden on society. (don't count on the pension)
(7) Any teacher who smokes, uses liquor in any form, frequents pool or public halls, or gets shaved in a barber shop will give good reason to suspect his worth, intention, integrity, and honesty.
(8) The teacher who performs his labor faithfully and without fault for five years will be given an increase of twenty-five cents per week in his pay, providing the Board of Education approves. (at least it's not a wage freeze like last year!)
(9) Prepare for school events such as the popular Christmas pageant. Decide what to include in the program each year, teach each student what his or her part is and decorate the building for it.
(10) Bulletin boards in every room must display a large, (very large), flattering picture of the Governor. (that is if one can be found !)**
(11) A copy of “My Pet Goat” must be kept handy at all time in case the school comes under “Lock Down” while the Governor is visiting so that he may read it to the children.**
(12) To keep the school room neat and clean, you must:
-Sweep the floor at least once daily
-Scrub the floor at least once a week with hot, soapy water
-Clean the blackboards at least once a day
-Start the fire at 7 a.m. so the room will be warm by 8 a.m

The following is a list of additional rules for female teachers
(1) You will not marry during the term of your contract. You are not to keep company with men.
(2) You must be home between the hours of 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. unless attending a school function.
(3) You may not loiter downtown in any ice cream stores.
(4) You may not travel beyond the city limits unless you have permission of the chairmen of the board (Frank Sinatra?)
(5) You may not smoke cigarettes.
(6) You may not under any circumstances dye your hair.
(7) You may not dress in bright colors.
(8) You may not ride in a carriage or automobile with any man unless he be your father or brother.
(9) You must wear at least two petticoats.
(10) Your dresses must not be any shorter than 2 inches above the ankles.
(11) Women teachers who marry or engage in unseemly conduct will be dismissed.
(12) Women teachers must carry an aspirin tablet with them at all times.**

*Raymond Bial’s One-Room School (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1999 - **with some of my embellishments)
The good old days of teaching!
If teachers don't stand up and fight back, they may return sooner than you think!

The Power of Observation

  I was reading an article in the Ledger the other day entitled, “Rutgers to Grade Teacher Evaluations”. It described how a “team” headed by William Firestone, professor of education at Rutgers and the “principal investigator” will evaluate teachers based half on classroom observations and half on how much progress students show. Teachers will then be graded as “ineffective” to “highly effective”.
  It went on to say “A bill before the Legislature proposes that the new ratings be used as a major factor in determining which teachers receive or lose lifetime tenure and who would be the first to go in the case of layoffs”. (In other words – eliminate tenure and seniority rights.)
  Upon reading this piece I began to reminisce back to my teaching and even my college days. I even recalled some of the incidents that were reported to me by my own children during their college days.   Several things jumped into mind. Firstly, I remembered my son enrolled in classes RU “taught” by instructors you could not speak intelligible English. Were these teachers at RU ever observed and evaluated the Rutgers “team”? Maybe the Rutgers “team” should look into these situations right in their own backyard before they venture out to evaluate the teachers in NJ public schools.
  Additionally, as I recall (of course from many years ago), the education courses that I had to endure were some of the most poorly taught and uninformative of all. I wonder if they still hold that dubious distinction today.
  Lastly, I remember a fact about teacher observations that has always perplexed me. It is the overreaching authority of supervisors to observe any teacher in any subject area, carte blanche. Knowledge of the material is evidently unnecessary in order to make a decision as to the quality of the instruction!
  I really can’t figure out how they can do it!
  I could never imagine myself evaluating a teacher in - say - a French class? I can’t even read a French Restaurant Menu!

What Next?

I received this article last week from a friend just as I was about to attempt to compile a list of my own. Thanks Joe!

******************
Our overburdened Schools

By Jamie Robert Vollmer

America's public schools can be traced back to 1647.Massachusetts Puritans assumed that families and churches bore the major responsibility for raising children, but they established schools to teach basic reading, writing, and arithmetic and to cultivate values. Science and geography were added later, but the curriculum remained focused for 260 years. Then, at the beginning of the 20th century, society started assigning additional responsibilities to the schools—a trend that has accelerated ever since:
From 1900 to 1910, we added nutrition, immunization, and health to the list of school responsibilities.
Then, between 1910 and 1930, we added the practical arts; physical education, including organized athletics; vocational education, including home economics and agricultural education; and school transportation.

In the 1940s, we added:
* Business education
* Art and music
* Speech and drama Half-day kindergarten. School lunch programs also appeared. We take this for granted today, but it was a significant step for schools to take on the job of feeding America's children one-third of their daily meals.
In the 1950s, we added: an Expanded science and math education
* Safety education
* Driver's education
* Foreign language requirements were strengthened, and sex education was introduced.

In the 1960s, we added:
*Advanced Placement programs m Head Start
* Title I
* Adult education
*Consumer education
* Career education
* Peace, leisure, and recreation education.

In the 1970s, we added:
* Special education
* Title IX programs
* Drug and alcohol abuse education
* Par
ent education
*Behavior adjustment classes
*Character education
* Environmental education
*Women's studies
* African-American history.
* School breakfast programs also were instituted, which means that some schools now feed children two of their three daily meals. Sadly, these are the only decent meals some children receive.
* Prime Start
* Full-day kindergarten
* Preschool programs for at-risk children
* After-school programs * Alternative education
* Stranger/danger education
* Anti-smoking education
* Sexual abuse prevention education.
* Health and psychological services also were expanded, and child abuse monitoring became a legal requirement for all teachers.

In the 1980s, we added.
* Keyboarding and computer education
* Global education
* Ethnic education
* Multicultural/nonsexist education
* English as a Second Language/ bilingual education
* Teen pregnancy awareness * Hispanic heritage education
*Early childhood education

In the 1990s, we added:
* Conflict resolution and peer mediation HIV AIDS education
*CPR training *Death education * Expanded computer and Internet education
* Inclusion
* Tech prep and school-to-work programs
* Gang education
* Bus safety, bicycle safety, gun safety, and water safety education.

In the first years of the 21st century we have superimposed on our overburdened schools a new layer of high:-stakes, politically charged, standardized tests. And in most states we have not added a single, to the school calendar in five decades. All of these added responsibilities have merit, but the schools cannot take all of them on alone. School boards must facilitate conversations in their communities to answer two essential questions: What do we want our children to know and be able to do -when they graduate? And how can our schools and our entire community be organized to make sure all children reach those goals? The bottom line: Schools cannot raise America's children.

Jamie Robert Vollmer (jamie@jamjevollrner.com), a former business executive and attorney, is a motivational speaker and consultant on increasing community support for public schools.

  ******************

Let me add some of  the latest burdens to be placed upon the back of New Jersey Public Schools.
The first,of course, is the anti-bully legislation (an unfunded mandate, of course) which requires schools to make in many cases extremely subjective determinations and then act upon them. Failure to do so can result in severe consequences for administrators and/or teachers.


"Administrators who do not investigate reported incidents of bullying would be disciplined, while students who bully could be suspended or expelled. School employees would also be required to report all incidents they learn of, whether they took place in or outside of school."- www.nj.com.


I would guess, based on the preceding unlined phrase, that even idle, teenage gossip, overheard in a classroom or hallway must be reported? 
So it seems that teachers must be constantly vigilant to overhear any and all utterances that might suggest bullying or else be held liable.
Additionally, an article recently appeared in the daily paper, indicating that the schools may be required to discipline students for out-of-school inappropriate behaviors?
I wonder how the parents of these children will respond. Will it be like the response which occurred at Wayne Hills  when the disciplining of the misbehaving football team was attempted?
I really have no problem with the intent of all these programs and their dictates but I certainly do question the continual burdening of the schools and then the deafening cries that schools are not doing their job!

Learning By Example

I guess "Anti-bullying" Laws aren't for everyone!



“All pigs are equal but some pigs are more equal than others”
    Animal Farm – George Orwell

Enough is Enough - Really?

We can always make room for more!

I was reading an editorial in the Ledger last week about the blocking of Christopher Cerf’s appointment as New Jersey Commissioner of Education by State Senator Ronald Rice. It cited Rice’s reason for stopping Cerf’s appointment as believing “Cerf is at the center of a conspiracy by hedge fund managers, like David Tepper of Appaloosa Management in Short Hills, to take over public education and turn it to private gain”.

I was certainly glad to see that it is not only I who is suspicious of the “education reform” movement but also someone else like Senator Rice who could act to at least slow its insidious progression.
Then the editorial continues on to demean anyone who could possibly believe Rice’s suppositions to be correct. “No one who is firmly based on the planet Earth believes that nonsense. Tepper is worth about $6 billion and his engagement in education reform is charity work. Does Rice really believe Tepper would need to engage in the mess of Jersey politics to earn a few more bucks?” it says.
Well, I think Rice probably does believe that he would (and so do I) and it is and not necessarily for a “few more bucks”. The current expenditures for education in New Jersey is surely not just a “few bucks”.
If the logic of the editorial suggests that Mr. Tepper is disinterested in making more money just because he now has so much, the question becomes, at what point in his accumulation of wealth did he lose interest in accumulating more? One billion would certainly be enough to satisfy me but evidently not Mr. Tepper because he apparently continued on to amass two billion. Then, I must assume that two billion was insufficient to satisfy his greed (I use this word since our Governor feels it’s OK to use it in reference to teacher’s salaries) since he went on the obtain a third billion and on finally to six billion.
So now I guess the Ledger editor has read the mind of Mr. Tepper and has determined that six billion is the cut off point for his desire to make more money! It must be grand to be able to peer into other people’spsyches and read their thoughts, motivations and desire
                                                                                       as does our editor.

Interestingly enough, a follow up editorial a day or two later seems to emphasize my point. It was about the climate change debate. Here is the excerpt that I found most interesting. “the oil-rich Koch brothers (who have backed climate-denier Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign) donated $200,000 to the Heartland Institute in 2011 and had given before. Their involvement supports the belief that the Heartland Institute is a shill for oil companies that have a huge profit motive in dirty fossil fuels”.
If memory serves me correctly, the Kochs have even more than six billion in their coffers. Using the logic applied to Tepper’s involvement in NJ “education reform” why would the Ledger ever think that the Kochs would want to make even more money?
All I can figure from this is it must be fuzzy thinking or selective naiveté on the part of the Star-Ledger editor. Or could it be something else? 

Who’sFirst?

Here we go again! Another message from “Students First” and, of course, a “Donate” click box included. Once again I replied asking why my previous inquires about executive compensation at “Students First:” was ignored. Finally realizing that my requests were in vain, I did a little research about the head honcho, Michele Rhee. My findings are contained in an article which I have inserted below the attached flyer. It gives me the suspicion that maybe “Students First” should be renamed “Michele and Executives First”.

PS
My suspicions are not reserved for "Students First". There are now organizations that proclaim to be promoting quality education crawling out of the woodwork. Many are fostered by big money interests and education "experts".
Is altruism the real motivation? Maybe, but I'm not so sure!

******************************************************************************

****************************************************************************** Guess Michelle Rhee’s Severance Pay! (Hint: It’s Not Too Shabby) Posted by Alan Suderman on Oct. 13, 2010 at 6:31 pm Admit it, you're curious about how much Michelle Rhee's severance paycheck will be, aren't you? That's so rude. Fortunately for you, LL is also rude. Here's what her contract (provided by a wonderful tipster) says: You shall serve at the pleasure of the Mayor and may be removed in accordance with the Act. In the event that your employment is terminated for any reasons other than (i) criminal conduct, (ii) gross dereliction of duty or (iii) gross misconduct, you shall be entitled to a severance payment of up to 12 weeks of your base salary, plus any accrued leave, as well as an additional 12 weeks of administrative leave. Additionally, should you choose to terminate your appointment for good cause, you will receive a payment of up to 12 weeks of your base salary, plus any accrued leave, as well as an additional 12 weeks of administrative leave. LL's no lawyer, but that looks like Rhee can get 24 weeks, also known as six months, of severance pay for leaving "for good cause," whatever that means. (It's hard to imagine Rhee didn't ensure her departure falls under that clause when she discussed it with Almost Mayor Vince Gray and Still Mayor Adrian Fenty.) Her contract, which she signed in 2007, has a base pay of $275,000 plus yearly cost-of-living adjustments. So, for six months' pay, we're talking roughly $140,000 in severance, plus whatever leave she's built up. LL has tried unsuccessfully to reach various city officials who can provide an authoritative amount, but hasn't gotten much of an answer. (Fenty spokeswoman Mafara Hobson says this: "I don't know that she gets a severance.") LL will update as needed.

$100,000 Questions About Tenure

The constant cry from those wishing to eliminate tenure is that the cost of firing a tenured teacher is extreme (the claim is up to $100,000).
Why does it cost so much to remove a poorly performing, tenured teacher?
Because lawyers charge school districts exorbitant fees in order to carry out the process.
Instead of ending tenure for all teachers, the majority of whom are doing well, why not limit the cost of firing the poor ones?
We should look at capping the outrageous legal fees that are paid by school systems each year.
The State is certainly very good at capping all other aspects of school district spending why not cap these?
If this was done, some questions might arise. Would lawyers take tenure cases filed by school districts at reduced fees?
Last year, New Jersey admitted 3037 lawyers to the Bar. Estimated job openings were 844 leaving a surplus of 2193 . The median wage for New Jersey lawyers is $43.84 per hour. *
If the law of supply and demand works as claimed, it should be easy to hire lawyers to pursue these actions.
Another question might then be, would districts be able to obtain the “best” lawyers if legal costs were capped?
Well, if the charges brought against an individual are valid and well documented, I don’t think districts need Johnny Cochran to win the case!
Another cost saving measure might be, having the State hiring a group of salaried lawyers to be leased to school districts at nominal rates. These lawyers could then pursue tenure charge cases instead of having districts spend outlandish sums by hiring independent law firms.
If the real motivation behind ending tenure is only so that “poor” teachers can be fired without huge cost why not investigate these alternatives? (My own opinion, this is not the real motivation for the elimination of tenure.)

PS
Does anyone really think that the Governor (who is a lawyer) and the legislature (which is in majority composed of lawyers) would ever even suggest much entertain these types of actions?
I guess he thinks it's much easier and it's  more fun beating up on teachers! (and it probably is).

PSS
I see today in the Ledger, Tom Moran's column describes NJEA as "a union whose highest goal is to protect bad teachers". I guess he's referring to the union's resistance against eliminating tenure.
I'm not a big fan of NJEA but I certainly don't think that "protecting bad teachers" is their objective at all and I would doubt that "Tommy Boy" really believes that either!
And about Vince Giordano's salary, "it is a little over $300K! Yes, that's way too high for a union guy". Again, I'm not a fan of Giordano but who is Moran to decide that his salary is "way too high for a union guy"? The NJEA members should make that decision not Tom Moran.
I guess being involved with a union in any way, shape or form  means you deserve only poor salaries and poor benefits. The only people who deserve good salaries and benefits are in the "private sector"!
(By the way Tom, working for  NJEA is a private sector job!)

* http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/

Cooked Up Schemes and Catchy Titles

 I got to thinking about all the educational schemes that are constantly cooked up in Trenton, Washington and throughout the U.S. What really impresses me is not the results they yield but the grandiose sounding names that are dreamt up for these fruitless projects. The ability to continuously conjure up such pretentious titles (and of course, the catchy sounding acronyms) is astonishing especially in light of their constant failure to help improve the education of our children.
The Renaissance Act
The Urban Hope Act
No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
The Race to the Top
The Quality Education Act (QEA)
Thorough and Efficient (T&E)
High School Proficiency (HSPT)
(HSPT9)
(HSTP11)
Grade Eight Proficiency Assessment (GEPA)
Quality Single Accountability Continuum (QSAC) Comprehensive Education Improvement and Financing Act (CEIFA)
The School Funding Reform Act
The New Jersey Assessment of Skills and Knowledge (NJ ASK)
NJ ASK 3
NJ ASK4.
NJ ASK 3-8
Minimum Basic Skills testing program (MBS)
Early Warning Test (EWT)
Alternate Proficiency Assessment (APA)
Elementary School Proficiency Assessment (ESPA)
Core Curriculum Content Standards (CCCS)
Professional Improvement Plan (PIP)
None of these programs and tests occurred before the 1970s. Up to that time, education was left in the hands of local school boards and teachers.
The system must have worked quite well since during the that prior time a record number of people were graduated from high school and college, America remained and improved its position as a world economic power, we sent men to the moon, we instituted civil rights for all and we backed down the Soviet Union.
Not bad for a country with an inferior educational system that was seen to require all the remedies which have been proposed and imposed during the past forty years!
I can only think of a few reasons as to why such a plethora of dictates are constantly issued from the DOEs.
(1) it is an attempt to justify the positions of public officials and the executives in the DOE (public education has to be saved and they are the ones who will do it)
(2) the state no longer trusts local school boards and teachers to provide the best possible education for their children (even though they did so for decades prior)
(3) the state feels that local school boards and teachers are incapable of providing sound education (even though they did so for decades prior)
(4) teacher's salaries have become too high and we need justification to lower them
(5) politicians will be able to better promote the privatization of public schools thereby allowing select individuals and corporations to reap the rewards
(6) maybe they really do think that education can be improved by the myriad of programs and proposals. I would like to think that this is their motive so that I might view them as being misguided rather than sinister - but I’m not so sure this is the case?
What do you think?

PS
I have contacted the NJDOE and asked who constructs and publishes the aforementioned tests (and is well paid with taxpayer money I am sure). Of course, once again, no one was there to answer my questions. “They will call back” was the reply from the secretary.
I left my number and email address.
So far, I have received the same reply as that from “Students First” – NONE!