While the majority of NJEA local affiliates gave only conditional approval to the MOU in participating districts, the state presentation clarified the two areas of concern: seniority provisions relating to Reductions in Force (RIF) and merit pay, both based on teacher effectiveness measures. The presentation also clarified that pending legislative action will make these provisions requirements, potentially rendering the local union resistance irrelevant.
This is a statement by Paula White, Executive Director of JerseyCAN, on the New Jersey…
This is a press release. Earlier today, Gov. Phil Murphy signed a bill to eliminate…
Today Gov. Phil Murphy signed Senate Bill 896, which prohibits the New Jersey Department of…
The 74 conducted a study of the relative learning loss in Democratic (Blue) and Republican (Red) states and…
In October 2020 Newark Superintendent Roger Leon announced with great fanfare the opening of district’s…
This is a press release from the Governor's Office. In related news, one in five…
View Comments
Intriguing indeed. Seems like the team may have promised template legislation based on the deeply flawed legislation adopted in stellar education states like Louisiana, Kentucky and Colorado. Who wouldn't want to have a school system more like theirs? see: http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2010/08/25/why-im-not-crying-for-louisiana-and-colorado/
Setting aside the god-awful state of education in states that have jumped on the bandwagon, here's a series of posts that provide substantive critique of the various problems with blunt instrument teacher evaluation bills adopted in these states and with using value-added assessments as a basis for rating teachers and potentially firing/dismissing and/or "de-tenuring" them.
http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/category/race-to-the-top/value-added-teacher-evaluation/