NJ Tenure Reform Bill

On August 6, 2012, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed the Teacher Effectiveness and Accountability for the Children of New Jersey (TEACHNJ) Act into affect after being passed by Senate and assembly three months prior. TEACHNJ, S-1455, was a bipartisan decision and created with input from all relevant stakeholders – legislation, principals and supervisors, school boards, the New Jersey Department of Education, and the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA). This marked the first change to NJ education tenure laws in over 100 years. It is the combination of proposals by Senator Teresa Ruiz (D-Newark), assemblyman Patrick J. Diegnan, other stakeholders, and the provisions suggested by the NJEA. The aim of TEACHNJ is to make sure that each teacher is effective. This marks the first time that tenure is measured by effectiveness rather than the time spent in a position or within a district. The goal is to have every student in New Jersey graduate high school ready for college or a career, regardless of where they grew up and which school they attended. (Office of the Governor, 2012)

            The new tenure law was put into effect for all new-hires starting in the 2012-2013 school year. Teachers hired prior to that school year will operate under the previous tenure laws. TEACHNJ extended the time period to achieve tenure from three years to four. In order to receive tenure, teachers are required to complete a mentorship during their first year of teaching and be rated “effective” or “highly effective” in two of the three summative yearly evaluations. Teachers who have already acquired tenure are not required to earn it again, unless they move to another school district. Educational services staff members do not need to complete the first-year mentorship and are not held subject to the evaluation rating categories of TEACHNJ. However, many districts are creating new evaluations for these positions. Secretaries and clerks still receive tenure after three years. Their tenure cases will no be settled by arbitrators, not in the courts as they were previously. If a tenured teacher moves to a new position within the district that requires a different type of certificate, tenure can be obtained after two years in that position. An example of which is a teacher who becomes a school counselor would receive tenure after two years in his/her new position. Principals are required to receive “effective” or “highly effective” ratings in two annual evaluations in first three years to receive tenure. In these cases, the person still has tenure in the previous position. (The New Tenure Law: How It Will Affect you, 2012)

In the 2012-2013 school year, 30 school districts were part of the pilot teacher evaluation system (Office of the Governor, 2012). The 2013-2014 school year was the beginning of the statewide implementation (Office of the Governor, 2012). The new evaluation system comprises of four ratings: highly effective, effective, partially effective, and ineffective. The law specifies that the evaluations should be compiled from several objective measures of student growth. These evaluations are to completed by in-district administrators and supervisors (The Evolution of Tenure Reform in New Jersey, 2012). Evaluations will now be linked to professional development. The idea is to tailor professional development to the needs of teachers to help them become more effective. TEACHNJ also provides support for teachers to improve their effectiveness. First-year parents are required to be a part of a mentorship program. The goal of the mentorship program is to work with administrators and colleagues to help them succeed with the proper skills and supports. If ineffective evaluations are given to tenured teachers, some circumstances allow for an additional year to receive effective evaluation if modest improvements were made. (The New Tenure Law: How It Will Affect you, 2012)

Tenure charges must be brought about if a rating of “ineffective” or “partially effective” is followed by a rating of “ineffective.” However, if the teacher receives an evaluation of “partially effective” after a rating of “ineffective” or “partially effective,” the teacher may be allowed to have a third year to earn a rating of “effective” or “highly effective.” The tenure law works to decrease the amount of time and money spent to remove a teacher that is evaluated repeatedly as ineffective. (The New Tenure Law: How It Will Affect you, 2012) Under the old tenure law, a removal of a tenured teacher could take several years and cost more than $100,000.  The new teacher dismissal proceedings were proposed by the NJEA and modeled after the successful Massachusetts law regarding teacher dismissal appeals. This includes the change from appeals occurring with arbitrators as opposed to the courts. Under this law, there is a 105 day limit from when the tenure charges are received by the commission and a cap of $7,500 which would be paid by the state. All teachers are still entitled to due process. (Office of the Governor, 2012)

Districts will have School Improvement Panels to help the implementation of TEACHNJ. Their role is to oversee the mentoring program, conduct certain evaluations, and identify professional development opportunities. The panel consists of a principal (or a person that he/she designates), the assistant or vice principal, and a teacher. (The New Tenure Law: How It Will Affect you, 2012).

Assemblyman Patrick J. Diegnan Jr. summarizes the law by saying it “is meaningful tenure reform that does what’s best for our children while balancing the protection of due process for our principals and teachers” (Office of the Governor, 2012). NJEA president Barbara Keshishian states that they new tenure reform law is “a win-win for our students, their teachers, and the public” (A ‘win-win’ for students, teachers, and the public, 2012). Just over a year after being signed, Senator Teresa Ruiz, the law’s prime sponsor, remarks that it is still an “unfinished job” (Mooney, 2013). She says that New Jersey should be proud of what the law has accomplished thus far and that it is one step in process in ensuring the best education for New Jersey’s students (Mooney, 2013). Christie acknowledges that it is a continuous process as well (Mooney, 2013).

References

A ‘win-win’ for students, teachers, and the public. (2013, August 06). NJEA. Retrieved from https://www.njea.org/news/2012-08-06/a-win-win-for-students-teachers-and-the-public

Mooney, J. (2013, August 12). Tenure law still a work in progress. Philly.com. Retrieved from http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20130812_Tenure_law_still_work_in_progress.html

Talking points on the new tenure law. (2012, August). Retrieved from http://www.njea.org/njea-media/pdf/TenureLawTalkingPoints2012.pdf?1380895938844 

The evolution of tenure reform in new jersey. (2012, June 20). NJEA. Retrieved from https://www.njea.org/news/2012-06-20/the-evolution-of-tenure-reform-in-new-jersey

The new tenure law: how it will affect you. (2012, September 28). Retrieved from http://www.njea.org/njea-media/pdf/TenureLawQ-A_2012.pdf?1380895938844 

Office of the Governor. (2012, August 06). Governor chris christie signs revolutionary bipartisan tenure reform legislation into law. Office of the Governor Newsroom. Retrieved from http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20120806c.html

The Common Core State Standards

Nicole Haldeman

Common Core State Standards

Much is at stake for American education. The United States education system is slipping in the ranks when compared to other developed nations. American students ranked 24th out of the 29/30 OECD countries for both Mathematics and Problem-Solving. In science we ranked 21st. America fell at or below average in all three categories (www.oecd.org/statistics/). America ranks 17th out of the twenty best countries for education and has made little advancement in changing those rankings over the last few years (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/best-education-in-the-wor_n_2199795.html). Obviously, America is not doing something that the other 16 countries are doing.

            One step in the right direction towards bringing our education system up to par with other countries was to unify the standards used to create curriculums. Prior to the introduction of the Common Core Standards in 2009, states held the responsibility of creating and implementing their own set of academic standards. However, with the adoption of the core curriculum standards, each state will follow a clear set of internationally based educational standards in the subjects of mathematics and English language arts which will be utilized in kindergarten through the 12th grade. The core standards hope to put students in a position to excel in a technological and global workplace or in an advanced educational setting, such as a 2 or 4-year college or vocational school. The initiative, being designed and led by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) with input from teachers, administration, experts, and parents, has already been voluntarily adopted and in some cases implemented in 45 of the states.

            Through thorough research a set of evidence based standards were developed in mathematics and English language arts. Importantly, these standards are internationally benchmarked and will hopefully allow our students to compete globally. The common core standards outlines what skills need to be taught to students and when. It tells the teacher what the student should be able to accomplish per grade level. For example, in the 3rd grade a student should be able to write opinion pieces on topics or texts, supporting a point of view with reasons. Additionally, the student must be able to use linking words and phrases (e.g., because, therefore) to connect opinions and reasons (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.3.1 and CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.3.1c). The core standards do not however tell teachers or schools how to teach the information outlined in the standards, rather, they can devise their own curriculums and lesson plans and implement it in ways that fit their own classroom and students.

Unfortunately, it is hard to tell the impact that the common core standards will have on the educational system for many years. Already, there have been some discussions on the positive and negative aspects of the core standards before they have even reached their fruition. On a positive note, the core standards initiative aims to lessen and close the gaps in achievement between higher and lower economic areas. All schools, regardless of where they are located or their student population’s economic status, will be held to the same high academic standards. This should appease colleges as well because a large complaint by many colleges and universities is that a large portion, around 73% of students in reading and 63% in mathematics, need remedial courses because they are not ready for the rigorous coursework of college (The Condition of Education, 2004). Additionally, states will benefit positively from the initiative because they will no longer need to develop unique tests for their state, rather, one test can be formulated with the cost split between participating states, saving money for every state involved. A benefit for teachers is that they are able to share information with the other participating states to widen their scope of the best practices in education, which allows for greater collaboration between teachers across the country. Student’s benefit because their progress is measured more easily with the standards in place due to progress and pre-test monitoring tools that are made available to educators. Now, if a student is lagging behind, it is easier to pinpoint earlier on because they will be frequently monitored individually throughout their school year (Meador, Pros and Cons of the Common Core Standards).

Despite the positives, there are some negative aspects that have been brought to light concerning the common core standards. In my opinion, the largest negative associated with the standards is the lack of an equivalent test for special needs students. Instead, they are expected to complete the same test as their general education peers. The common core state standards website states that there will be shared best practices and experiences to help students with disabilities and English language learners as well as information on the implementation of the standards for those children. I feel that the answer was vague and not well defined, there was no further information regarding this group of children. Another negative regarding the standards is the difficult adjustment for both teachers and students. However, I feel in time students and teachers will adjust, so although negative at first, I do not believe it will remain a negative of the initiative in the future. Additionally, some argue that the new program will be too rigorous and fast paced for school children, especially those in elementary school. I feel that after looking at statistics of where we fall globally that our students may need a more rigorous education. One negative I cannot deny is that schools will have to purchase newer textbooks and supplies to align with the standards which can prove costly for school districts (Meador, Pros and Cons of the Common Core Standards).

I feel, after reviewing the literature regarding the common core state standards, that this anticipated change in educational standards will help to lead America in the right direction. Looking towards the future, one can optimistically predict that with a more even playing field for students from diverse economic backgrounds and with more attention paid to elementary education that a larger number of students will graduate. With more students graduating, prepared to work and attend college, the economy should raise and our colleges will spend less money and tax dollars on remedial courses. A larger number of students will graduate from colleges because they will not be taking these non-credit remedial courses. The hope for American education is that, with the implementation of these standards, we will again rise in the world education ranks and be considered an OECD country with a top-notch education.  

References

Best Education In The World: Finland, South Korea Top Country Rankings, U.S. Rated Average. (2012, November 27). Breaking News and Opinion on The Huffington Post. Retrieved September 27, 2013, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/best-education-in-the-wor_n_2199795.html

Common Core State Standards Initiative | Home. (n.d.). Common Core State Standards Initiative | Home. Retrieved September 27, 2013, from http://www.corestandards.org/

Meador, D. (n.d.). Pros and Cons of the Common Core Standards - Pros and Cons of the Core Standards. Teaching - About Teaching and Educational Best Practices - Educational Professional - School Principal - School Administrator . Retrieved September 27, 2013, from http://teaching.about.com/od/assess/f/What-Are-Some-Pros-And-Cons-Of-The-Common-Core-Standards.htm

Statistics - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (n.d.). Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved September 27, 2013, from http://www.oecd.org/statistics/

The Condition of Education. (2004, June 1). National Center for Education. Retrieved

September 27, 2013, from nces.ed.gov/

Common Core State Standards

                                                Common Core Standards
                                                               By: Angela Gwathney

As the 2013-2014 school year has recently commenced there has been great debate in the recent curriculum changes across the country as a result of participating states adjusting their curriculum to meet the Common Core Standards. The National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) led the development and continue the initiative of the Common Core State Standards. So far forty-five states have adopted the Common Core Standards. Such standards emplace uniform measures for grade levels k-12 in English language arts and mathematics. These standards that have recently come into effect do not tell teachers how to teach and or what specific lessons they should be teaching. Rather these standards guide schools to develop their curriculums in a unified manner. Common Core Standards also give teachers, students, and parents an idea of the state’s educational expectation at each grade level.

One of the incentives behind the Common Core Standards is due to American falling behind academically on an international scale. For example, in 2008 on the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), American students placed 25^th in math and 24^th in problem solving out of thirty industrialized counties (www.nlmusd.k12.ca.us). The intent behind these standards being emplaced is so that graduates from high school poses the tools to successfully enter any two-four year college as well as the workforce. The Common Core Standards ensure that not only our students be prepared for their future but also that our communities be put in the best position to compete successfully in the global economy.

You may be wondering how such drastic changes will be assessed. Fear not, in the coming 2014-2015 school year assessments will be administered within educational systems of participating states. Next year all districts will have to partake in the one of the common assessments. The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium are the two state-led consortia developed to assess the Common Core Standards. Although such drastic changes lay a game plan for school districts, teachers, and administrative personnel, these modifications have generated large concerns.

Due to the curriculums being made more rigorous, much feedback to these reforms has been made. Those who are in favor for the reforms feel that this only adds to their curriculums and is beneficial in giving their teachers specific direction with their lessons (www.sheboyganpress.com). Schools who already hold their students to relatively high standards seem to be unaffected by the recent curriculum changes. Some parents of children experiencing the teaching reforms feel that it is a positive attribute to the current curriculums emplace and want their children to be able to compete in a global market.

Questions also have been raised in regards to special needs students. In reading about the Common Core Standards and how it will affect those with special needs and ESL students, it remains unclear. The Core Standards cite states that, “the standards include information on application of the standards to these groups of students (National Governor’s Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State, 2010).” One grandparent went as far to say they felt there grandchild was potentially being tortured and traumatized to be taught to meet a test that may fail (www.courant.com).

In reading the Huffington Post, critics of the new reforms have reciprocated some harsh responses. One comment made stated that, “allowing the federal government at the throats of our young people is to disallow children the opportunity to know the unique American experience of liberty in a freewill republic (huffingtonpost.com).” Some people that have posted on the cite have gone as far to equate Obama administration to Hitler and dictatorship! Are these comments exceedingly harsh or spoken truths?

Personally I feel as though the Common Core Standards is a step in some sort of direction but as many people are, I am skeptical. The reality of it is that we need to take action in creating change. Remaining stagnant is doing nothing in making intellectual progression as a county. In these reforms coming about, I fear that the purpose of teaching and ensuring that student’s best interest be taken into account will be overshadowed by districts working to meet Common Standards. These reforms accompanied with recent tenure changes (in New Jersey particularly) have created strenuous school year for teachers. Will students continue to acquire knowledge or learn specific material that enables them to pass a standardized test? In solving one problem have we created another? I’m not sure. I think that we won’t no if any of the steps taken actually prove to be beneficial to our educational system. I hope that in that time, these Common Core Standards prove to be everything they say they are. If they fail, the younger generation may suffer. We as a nation may actually be making counter productive strides as opposed to constructing a globally competitive generation.

N.A., Norwalk-La Mirada Unified School District, The Common Core State Standards Initiative [The Rationale]. Retrieved from http://www.nlmusd.k12.ca.us/cms/lib3/CA01001758/Centricity/Domain/2892/112712_Rationale%20for%20the%20Common%20Core%20State%20Standards.pdf

Hertel, N., (2013, September 10).  Common Core standards becoming more common [News Article]. Retrieved from http://www.sheboyganpress.com.

National Governor’s Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State, (2010). Frequently Asked Questions [Informative Article]. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions

Megan, K., (2013, September 21). Common Core Standards To Change State’s Educational Landscape [News Article]. Retrieved from http://www.courant.com/news/education/hc-common-core-0922-20130921,0,7892931.story?page=1.

Klein,R., (2013, September 11). 13 Extreme Statements Made About The Common Core Standards [News Article]. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/11/common-core-extreme-statements_n_3908402.html

Data Analysis

In today’s current state of education, directives are implementing new expectations of learning and a commitment to closing the achievement gaps. The theory now is that schools should allow and provide for every student to achieve a high level of learning and achievement, in order to make students become independent learners. Accountability and assessment are at the heart of today’s educational reform efforts. As is indicated in numerous scholarly articles, strong accountability mandates, with heavy stakes attached, are sweeping the country at every level (Herman & Gribbons, 2001). As Ornstein & Hunkins (2013) state, learning is ongoing, never ceasing to enrich understanding. With this idea in mind, and the pressure put on schools to constantly improve, effective measures are needed to ensure schools are adhering to such standards. Recently, “high-stake” statewide tests have been at the forefront as an evaluation method of student performance. These tests, such as the NJASK, are aligned with state common core standards and measure the degree to which standards are being implemented at each level. However, as Bernhardt (2004), indicates Analyzing state assessment results is only the beginning of effective data-driven decision-making. The issue is that statewide assessments are one-dimensional; they only measure the scores of a group of students over a period of time. There are many factors that are not considered in these scores.  

            Bernhardt (2004), states NCLB (2001), has made the use of data to improve student achievement imperative. The use of data analysis provides an objective prospective as to what actually is happening to children in their school experience. It looks at the whole picture of a student. (Crew, 2013). I recently spoke with a special education monitor for the NJ Department of Education, who will remain anonymous. To summarize what she stated, the use of data analysis in schools is a multidimensional tool. It helps to enhance the curriculum, measure teacher effectiveness, and assess and improve overall school & district performance. The impression that was developed during this Q&A was that the use of data analysis in the school system is a never-ending cycle. To clarify this more, data analysis is a Multiple Measure System, meaning demographics, perceptions, student learning, and school processes are categories used to assess the productivity of the school. The question that needs to be answered is, how can we as educators serve our main cliental, the students? By analyzing a combination of areas such as ethnicity, socioeconomic status, dropout rate, observations, values/beliefs, standardized tests, teacher assessments, etc., data will then help indicate where the school needs to make adjustment to fit the needs of their population.

            Where the criticism or cons of data analysis lies is that educators have to know how to properly interpret the data. Often, teachers are analyzing and comprehending data. This means that schools need to put the resources in to educate their teachers on proper processes. Also, even though the teacher’s may understand what data is telling them, the process to reevaluate their lessons and change their lessons in a very short period of time is time consuming. Many teachers have expressed that it takes time to self-critique and make pedagogical adjustments (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013). On the other end of the spectrum, districts need to be careful to not put all their eggs in one basket. In other words, administration needs to make it understood amongst their educators not to get over-eager about the use of data. Finally, when the data is looking at the teacher’s performance, it can lead to a sense of threat for that teacher. It can lead one to feel like they are under a microscope.

Although the ceiling seems high for the use of data analysis, it’s important to understand that; there is no substitute for good leadership in the schools. Data analysis is simply the face of what many consider a cultural change in education. It is a way to learn to improve from our mistakes and create the most positive learning environment. Data analysis is merely a set of tools for educators. By giving this data information to educators, and helping them to understand how to use it [the data] to approve student achievement, you will get good results (Klein, 2013).

References:

Bernhardt, V. (2004). Continuous Improvement: It takes more than test scores. ACSA Leadership , 16-19

Herman, J. & Gribbons, B. (2001). Lessons learned in using data to support school inquiry and continuous improvement: Final report to the Stuart Foundation. CSE Technical Reprt 535 .

Ornsteing, A.C., & Hunkins. (2013). Curriculum: Foundations, Principals, and Issues Sixth Edition. Pearson Education Inc.

New Jersey Department of Education. www.state.nj.us/education/data

Data Analysis

“Schools and school districts are under intense pressure to improve. With both limited resources and limited time to develop processes that allow them to move steadily upward, schools must use data to ensure that their improvement is effective and continuous.”(Berhardt, V.L., 2004)

            Statistical evidence is a reliable form of reference for determining effectiveness in any organization. However, in education, data and empirical information have not always been the go to when determining the effectiveness in schools. Historical information, personal preference, and individual judgments are fading away as a basis for decision making in schools (Herman & Gribbons, 2001). With the increasing need for student achievement, a more technical and reliable avenue must be used to optimize and improve learning. In the past few years we have seen many changes in educational standards, not only for our state, but also for the nation. NCLB has made drastic alterations to how teachers and students need to conduct themselves when it comes to the information learned on every grade level. The emphasis put on standardized testing scores has also called for an alternative way of analyzing teaching practices. This is why the need and use for data analysis has become priority for most school districts.  Nation wide, there are different types of data now being used to assess learning, teacher effectiveness, and appropriate curriculums for each grade level. There is an important amount of information that can be attained from data analysis but many educational professionals are concerned with what information is being compiled along with how it is used.

            Some of the advantages to using data analysis are to show the level of student learning, level of retention between grade levels, impact of programs being implemented, effectiveness of teaching styles, and determining whether the level of education is up to par with students needs (Bernhardt, 2004).  The advantages of utilizing data do not come without criticism or concern.  The majority of concern about data analysis comes from the emphasis on statewide testing. Standardized testing results yield the bulk of the data used to critique teachers and the schools that they work in. Unfortunately, it seems that many of these concerns are validated. Formative assessments are taking place in schools and are also an indicator of learning, however, summative assessments are the primary reference for assessing student achievement. This poses many concerns for educational professionals. It seems as if something is being taken away from daily and individual teaching because everyone must show proficiency in subjects on standardized testing. Research has shown that standardized tests may not be the best indicator of learning, but students and teachers are still being finely critiqued on how well they perform. There are opposing views about changes made to education in recent years. However, the best thing to do for students is to clearly define the best ways to optimize their education.

            What must be made clear is that student achievement data is not the only form of data in which can greatly assist schools. Demographic, Perceptional and School process data are all important forms of information that can and should be used to improve the mechanics of a school. Demographic data can tell us more about the students, teachers, and how both groups may be properly matched. It can give the school leaders an idea of who the student body is and who may be the best fit for conveying their education. Demographics are also the root of telling how well the school is meeting the needs of students.  To examine a school in a different light, perceptional data can be used to receive more personal information from staff, students, and the community. Perceptual data can give everyone a voice, which is equally important in meeting the needs of the students. It not only tells us how the students feel, but how the staff and community feel about the education and educational environment. Lastly, School process data is a beneficial way of attaining more specific data about the precise workings of a school. School process data tells more about the specific curriculum, instruction, and assessment strategies used by teachers. This data can show administration what the teachers are doing and how they are using educational components to yield results (good or bad)

            The use of data for assessing aspects of education can be incredibly beneficial, however schools must be careful how they are using the information. The real question here is not why are we using data analysis but how we can use the information to optimize learning in schools. Is the information that is being attained being used properly, or is it being used to critique staff/ teachers on subjects and tests that are not part of their curriculum? There has obviously been both support and criticism from the increase in data based decision making in schools. Some criticism may come from the lack of a clear set of guidelines for how schools should use the information. The information gathered should be used to assess how well any given school is doing to meet the educational needs of the students. Much of the information obtained can display whether or not the curriculum and or teaching practices are working. If not, it will show what may need to be altered for improvement. If used properly, the information can be used to optimize learning as well as to increase the proficiency and skills of everyone involved, students, teachers and staff included.

Below I have included a link for more information on how NJ is using data analysis in schools:

http://www.state.nj.us/education/njsmart/background/

References

Bernhardt, V. (2004). Continuous Improvement: It takes more than test scores. ACSA Leadership , 16-19.

Herman, J. & Gribbons, B. (2001). Lessons learned in using data to support school inquiry and continuous improvement: Final report to the Stuart Foundation. CSE Technical Reprt 535 .

NJ Tenure Reform

                          New Jersey Tenure Reform

      The federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 contained a mandate requiring that all classrooms be staffed with a “highly qualified teacher.” As a result of this act, a great deal of political and scholarly attention has been given to teacher quality. Over the past decade, focus has been on such issues as: teacher recruitment, preparation, professional development, compensation/merit pay, and teacher tenure! Wow! 
      All of these issues have been at the center of discussion for educational reform, but none as highly controversial and publicized as teacher tenure.  
      Teacher tenure was created during the early part of the 20th century to establish a set of guidelines to protect teachers from the random, unfair, and often discriminatory dismissal practices that were common in local schools at that time. As a result of tenure laws, teachers could no longer be disciplined or fired without just cause or due process and they were often provided with job security for life. (Center for American Progress, Ringing the Bell for K-12 Teacher Tenure Reform,2011)
      But times have changed! Today, concerns about the effect on student outcomes along with budgetary constraints, have forced the need to discuss and reevaluate the tenure system.
      As a result, leaders in a handful of states and districts have already begun making changes to their tenure systems with their goal of increasing student learning. Many changes are in the works as states are pushing to renovate their tenure protections and increase the rigors of their tenure-granting process.
      New Jersey, under the direction of Governor Chris Christie, was a key leader in this process. After nearly two years of consistent advocacy and demands for real education reforms, the governor along with the bipartisan support of members of the legislature, education reform advocates, and stakeholder groups created the first extensive reform of New Jersey’s tenure law in over 100 years. “It is a sweeping overhaul of the oldest tenure law in the nation.”(http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20120806c.html)
      On August 6, 2012 Governor Christie today signed the Teacher Effectiveness and Accountability for the Children of New Jersey (TEACHNJ) Act. The legislation transformed the existing tenure system. The new plan provides clear and powerful tools to identify effective and ineffective teachers.  It strengthens the support available to help all teachers improve and develop themselves professionally  and, for the first time, ties the achievement, preservation, and loss of tenure to a teacher’s effectiveness in the classroom.
     All new educators will be provided a year of mentoring. It will take new teachers four years instead of three to attain tenure and it will only be awarded after receiving two years of effective or highly-effective ratings. Similarly, the process of revoking teachers’ tenure will automatically occur after receiving two consecutive years without an effective or highly-effective rating. The exception to this rule is in cases where an educator has demonstrated modest improvement during that span. At that time they may be granted an additional year to achieve an effective rating. These provisions will help ensure that only those teachers, who are consistently demonstrating success in educating and providing for our students, remain in the classroom. Teachers will be evaluated using a student achievement rubric and an approved teacher practice instrument (Danielson, Marzano) These evaluations will be based on an individual’s job description, professional standards, the use of multiple measures of student progress and multiple data sources. (http://www.state.nj.us – Achieve NJ)
     Teacher tenure is not transferrable from one district to another. “Any employee beginning employment in a new district after the effective date of the new law must earn tenure under its requirements, even if that employee was previously tenured in another district under the requirements of the old law” (NJEA, 2012). Seniority rights, too, have been maintained in the new law.
     The law does dramatically reduce the time and cost it takes to remove educators who are repeatedly ineffective. Formerly, the process to remove a teacher could take several years and cost more than $100,000, providing a disincentive for districts to bring tenure charges against ineffective teachers. Over the past ten years, less than 20 teachers in New Jersey have lost tenure after charges of “inefficiency.” Under the new system, the time would be limited to 105 days from the time the written tenure charges are received by the Commissioner and is capped at $7,500 per case – which will be paid by the state. (http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news) The rights to maintain due process still remain in effect.
     Additionally, the law requires that support be provided to help all educators improve. This will occur through the use of more meaningful evaluation systems and tying the results of these evaluations directly to professional development. In addition to mandating mentoring in a teacher’s first year, the new evaluation systems will provide more meaningful feedback and measures of what matters most – how well students are actually performing. Professional development will be tied to teacher evaluations.  Corrective action plans will be mandatory when a teacher is rated ineffective or partially ineffective – providing the opportunity for improvement before tenure charges are brought about for ineffectiveness.
     Although, it seems as if the TEACH NJ Act will create far-reaching, positive changes for our students and our schools, this legislation, of course, has drawn strong criticism and concern from many. Besides those who say the new laws will stigmatize teachers, and push effective teachers out of the profession, there are concerns over: how principals and administrators will find the time to conduct, as required, so many formal evaluations; how districts will equally and fairly integrate student growth data into evaluations of staff members who don't have standardized tests in their subjects; how one can fairly put total responsibility of student progress onto the teacher when so many factors in a student’s life may attribute to their performance; how teachers can be the only one accountable for a student’s growth when the student’s themselves and/or their parents are equal partners in the learning process; how a district can incorporate standardized test scores into teacher evaluations when those test scores are not released by the DOE until the late summer but final summative annual evaluations are due in early summer; how can these measures be consistent state-wide when districts are using different measures /rubrics of evaluation (Marzano, Danielsen).
     Stay tuned as New Jersey schools fully implement this new tenure legislation this school year. Even though there is a great deal of optimism in regards to this new system, there is sure to be some snafus along the way. However, one thing is for certain, “The main purposes for which K–12 tenure was created are less compelling today, and the costs of tenure as we know it to children and our national economy are great.” (Center for American Progress –Ringing the Bell for K-12 Teacher Tenure Reform) Reform of some type was inevitable, and as former AFT president, Sandra Feldman stated, “Even one incompetent teacher is too much for the children she teaches, the parents she faces, the members who get her students in subsequent grades… and frankly, for the good of our union.” (Center for American Progress –Ringing the Bell for K-12 Teacher Tenure Reform)


Teacher Tenure Reform: Applying Lessons from the Civil Service and Higher Education
http://opportunityculture.org/images/stories/teacher_tenure_reform-public_impact.pdf

Achieve NJ - http://www.state.nj.us/education/genfo/faq/faq_eval.shtml

Governor Chris Christie Signs Revolutionary Bipartisan Tenure Reform Legislation Into Law
(2012,August 06). 

Retrieved from:http://www.state.nj.us/governor/news/news/552012/approved/20120806c.html

NJEA (2012, September) The New Tenure Law
Retrieved from: http://www.njea.org/news-and-publications/njea-review/september-2012/the-new-tenure-law

Center for American Progress- Ringing the Bell for K-12 Teacher Reform (February 2011)
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education/report/2011/02/09/7314/ringing-the-bell-for-k-12-teacher-tenure-reform/