Representing Teachers and School Employees in Northwest Louisiana
This business was founded by a former teacher and RRU member.
$100 off tours to Ireland for all Caddo and Bossier school employees.
Contact 318-658-3738 or brianonounain@hotmail.com for more information.
AFT’s Weingarten: “Policy must address what is actually happening on the ground, in classrooms.” WASHINGTON—Statement by American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten on the National Council on Teacher Quality’s report, “State of the States 2013—Connect the Dots: Using Evaluations of Teacher Effectiveness to Inform Policy and Practice.”
“Like the AFT, the National Council on Teacher Quality believes that for the Common Core State Standards to succeed, they need to be implemented properly, with alignment throughout the system, including teacher evaluations. But the AFT also believes that high-stakes consequences of student assessments should wait until the rollout of the standards is complete and successful. We agree with NCTQ that special education teachers need special attention in their evaluations to ensure that all relevant measures are considered.
“There’s a real disconnect between what the ‘powers that be’ want to dictate or proclaim as success, and what classroom teachers and students actually need to be successful. This dissonance is surreal, and it’s why teachers and parents don’t trust policymakers. To really connect the dots between teaching quality and student performance, we must provide teachers with the support and resources they need to improve their instruction and meet the needs of all kids. Policy must address what is actually happening on the ground, in classrooms.
“This report shows that teacher evaluation systems in 35 states and the District of Columbia are driven by tests, requiring that student achievement results be a significant, or even the most significant, factor in teacher evaluations. Yet only 20 states and the District of Columbia require that teacher evaluation results be used to inform and shape professional development for all teachers. We have to stop test-centric evaluations and build systems that will actually improve teaching and learning.”
Follow AFT President Randi Weingarten: http://twitter.com/rweingarten
On the other hand, as to the value and validity of this political gimmick initiated by Jeb Bush, the report card evokes a quote from Shakespeare. The report card itself is “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” That is the verdict issued by the Louisiana Federation of Teachers.
“These school letter grades won’t and will never tell us what we need to know about our schools,” said LFT President Steve Monaghan. “When Superintendent White said in his press release that changes in the formula used to compute the grades ‘have led to real increases in student achievement,’ he spoke the simple truth. He who controls the formula controls the fate of our public schools.”
In the past, Monaghan said, low-graded school report cards were used to justify seizure of schools by the Recovery School District and to make more children eligible for vouchers at private and religious schools.
“This adjustment to the formula to grade our schools is just the latest in a series of tweaks to the so-called education reforms of the last several years. It’s a cliché, but it’s true; this airplane is being built while fully loaded and in flight.”
Monaghan said that the imposition of a single letter grade on schools ignores the vast differences in school missions, populations and priorities.
“We use the same measuring stick for all schools, whether they are selective admission magnet schools rated among the best in the nation, or alternative schools for our most challenged students,” he said. “Note that these letter grades don’t distinguish among schools that are technology-oriented, language immersion, college prep or career-readiness.”
Just as student report cards reflect achievement in a variety of subjects, school report cards should tell the whole story of an institution’s standing by multiple measures, Monaghan said.
“A child comes home from school with grades in English, math, science, social studies and other subjects,” he said. “That gives parents an idea of where the student is doing well and where improvements are needed. This single grade stamped on a school tells the public very little.”
The Louisiana Federation of Teachers has pushed for the creation of a learning environment index for each school. The index would not simply reflect test scores, but would assess and inform the public of the condition of school facilities, whether the school is safe and orderly, the health and economic vitality of the surrounding community, the availability of instructional materials in the school, teacher and staff retention, and the physical and emotional health of the student population.
“Stamping a label on a school does nothing to improve education,” Monaghan said. “Schools with a high letter grade learn nothing about their achievement. In those labeled F, children are stigmatized, teachers are frustrated and communities are defamed.”
Weingarten rights guarantee an employee the right to Union representation during an investigatory interview. These rights, established by the Supreme Court, in 1975 in the case of J’. Weingarten Inc,, must be claimed by the employee. The supervisor has no obligation to inform an employee that s/he is entitled to Union representation.
If called to a meeting with a supervisor, repeat the following to administration when the meeting begins: “If this discussion could in any way lead to my being disciplined or terminated, or affect my personal working conditions, I respectfully request that my union representative or worksite leader be present at this meeting.
Without representation, I choose not to answer any questions.”
What is an Investigatory Interview?
An investigatory interview is one in which a Supervisor questions an employee to obtain information which could be used as a basis for discipline or asks an employee to defend his/her conduct. If an employee has a reasonable belief that discipline or discharge may result from what s/he says, the employee has the right to request Union representation.
Examples of such an interview are:
- The interview is part of the employer’s disciplinary procedure or is a component of the employer’s procedure for determining whether discipline will be imposed.
- The purpose of the interview is to investigate an employee’s performance where discipline, demotion or other adverse consequences to the employee’s job status or working conditions are a possible result.
- The purpose of the interview is to elicit facts from the employee to support disciplinary action that is probable or that is being considered, or to obtain admissions of misconduct or other evidence to support a disciplinary decision already made.
- The employee is required to explain his/her conduct, or defend it during the interview, or is compelled to answer questions or give evidence.
An employee must state to the employer that he/she wants a Union representative present; the employer has no obligation to ask the employee if she/he wants a representative.
Weingarten Rules
When an investigatory interview occurs, the following rules apply:
Rule 1 – The employee must make a clear request for Union representation before or during the interview. The employee can’t be punished for making this request.
Rule 2 – After the employee makes the request, the supervisor has 3 options. S/he must either:
Rule 3 – If the supervisor denies the request and continues to ask questions, this is an unfair labor practice and the employee has a right to refuse to answer. The employee cannot be disciplined for such refusal but is required to sit there until the supervisor terminates the interview. Leaving before this happens may constitute punishable insubordination.
An employee has NO right to the presence of a Union representative where:
Even in the above four (4) circumstances, the employee can still ask for representation. Most employers will permit a representative to attend even when not required to.
The October meeting of the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education was an endurance trial. Ever since BESE reduced its monthly meetings from two days of committee hearings to one, the agenda has been very crowded. The board’s current practice is to hold committee meetings on a Tuesday, during which all testimony is heard on agenda items. A full board meeting is then held on a Wednesday, when the full board votes on recommendations made by committees. The full board meetings generally conclude within a couple of hours, while committee meetings have been stretching late into the night. The October committee meetings strained everyone’s patience. A meeting on the controversial Common Core State Standards that was supposed to begin at 2:30 P.M. was three hours late getting started. Citizens who came expecting to speak were not allowed to begin their testimony until about 6: 30 P.M., and were limited to two minutes apiece. Even so, the meeting did not end until nearly 11 P.M. Parents who had traveled from as far away as Shreveport and spent the night in Baton Rouge waiting to speak were disappointed to learn that they would only be allowed to make brief comments. BESE President Chas Roemer said that board members travel the state and hold public meetings on issues, and voiced no support for a meeting schedule that is more convenient for the public.
Several hours of sometimes heated discussion, the board decided to seek a new opinion on the validity of the Value Added Model formula and to increase training offered to educators about the model, but took no action on a request to investigate changes apparently made to some teachers’ value added scores. On the agenda was a request from BESE Member Lottie Beebe to create a panel of statisticians and mathematicians to determine if Louisiana’s Value Added formula is reliable and credible. LFT President Steve Monaghan asked, “Is the Value Added Model a valid instrument for measuring teacher effectiveness? Some respected mathematicians believe that Value Added formulae have margins of error better than 30 percent. If that is true, then it is simply wrong to judge our teachers, our schools and our students by such a shaky instrument.” The formula has been frequently criticized, and there have apparently been several behind the scenes adjustments made to the formula and to individual teacher’s scores. While Dr. Beebe recommended three qualified individuals to look into the formula, the board approved Roemer‘s substitute motion to instead seek a “third party” review of the formula. Dr. Beebe’s motion would have incurred no additional expense by BESE; it is unclear whether Roemer’s substitute will require a contract, or how much the review will cost. The board declined to act on Dr. Beebe’s request for a look into waivers of VAM scores that may have been granted to some teachers. Monaghan said that no written policies have been developed by the Department of Education to guide the issuance of waivers by anyone on either the state or local level. “Teachers evaluated under VAM have no way to legally challenge the scores imposed on them, and yet an unknown number of scores have apparently been either waived or otherwise adjusted,” Monaghan said. Even after LFT Legislative Director Mary-Patricia Wray pointed out that alterations to Teacher Effectiveness Ratings made by the state superintendent of education may violate the law, the board took no further action on the matter. On the agenda’s final Value Added item, Superintendent of Education John White conceded that more stakeholder training is needed. The board unanimously approved a motion to conduct more training in the future.
Turning a deaf ear to complaints that controversial Common Core State Standards are not being properly implemented in Louisiana, the state education board tried to deflect criticism by shifting responsibility for the standards to local school systems. The BESE action was contained in a hastily contrived agenda item that was not properly advertised, and will probably have to be reconsidered in order to be legally adopted. The board’s tweaks to Common Core rules were aimed at angry parents who fear that a national curriculum is being imposed. BESE members reaffirmed their commitment to Common Core, but did nothing to satisfy educators who said the state has been derelict in its duty to prepare teachers and students for more demanding curricula. “We believe that the ideas behind Common Core have merit,” LFT President Steve Monaghan said, “but like so many other education reforms that have been imposed recently, there has been a failure to prepare and provision our teachers, our children, and communities for the changes.” At a committee meeting Tuesday, BESE members listened to hours of testimony. Much of it came from parents who fear federal intrusion into schools. Comments favoring Common Core were given by corporate sponsors and some teachers who were asked leading questions by pro-CCSS board members. At Wednesday’s meeting of the full board, a new agenda item was introduced in response to the parental concerns. Part of that resolution says no curriculum can be forced on a local school system, “including any that may be recommended, endorsed or supported by any federal or state program or agency.” Instead, BESE intends to give local districts and teachers more autonomy in choosing textbooks and learning materials. That did not sit well with educators like Monaghan, who said from the start that BESE and the department of education have shirked their duty to prepare for more demanding course work. The LFT president pointed out that the state had promised to provide curriculum information as part of an agreement to waive some sections of the federal No Child Left Behind Act. BESE, he said, is “passing the burden on to teachers and schools.” The motion also guaranteed the public the right to review textbooks and other materials, and promised that student social security numbers won’t be used as test identification numbers. When audience members objected to a new agenda item being adopted without proper notification or a committee hearing, BESE President Chas Roemer said he believed the item was “germane” to the issues under discussion.
Two charter school organizations that currently operate in Louisiana were given permission to open schools in Lafayette, East Jefferson and East Baton Rouge Parishes, despite parental and school board opposition. Lafayette parents and concerned citizens voiced opposition to decision, after the parish school board voted 8-2 to reject the charter applications at the local level. Lafayette Superintendent of Schools Pat Cooper spoke against his board’s decision. Cooper said the need for new facilities in Lafayette convinced him to support the charter expansion. Some Lafayette parents, however, said that voters are ready to pass a tax to cover the cost of new construction. The charter schools, they argued, will exclude the most needy children because of their geographic location and their “first come, first serve” enrollment style.
A new rule approved by BESE will allow non-public tuition organizations to advertise in ways that promote particular private schools. If the change goes into effect, it will overturn a current regulation prohibiting the promotion of a particular school over other qualified schools. The tuition organizations allow Louisiana taxpayers to get a 95% rebate on donations, which are sent to non-public schools on behalf of parents and students. The rebate has been controversial because of its cost to the state, and because the governor vetoed a similar measure that would have allowed rebates for donations to public schools. The new rule must still be published in the Louisiana Register and opened for public comment before it can go into effect.
The Recovery School District is looking to take over a number of schools in Caddo Parish. Join Red River United in telling the RSD, “thank you, but NO thank you.” The RSD does not have a successful track record in transforming academically unacceptable schools (Linwood and Linear). In fact, the RSD has been sued numerous times including twice by the Southern Poverty Law Center, once for handcuffing a first-grader and once for failing to provide services to children with special needs. Our children deserve better than this. We should not knowingly and willingly put our children into a failed system. Our children should not be experimented upon for political and economic gains.
We do not support the hostile state takeover of community schools. We do not support our schools being changed from a public school to a charter school operated by outside private-monied and political interests. We contend that the Caddo Parish School System is best equipped to raise academic standards and that the community deserves a say in the process.
We do not support changing our community schools to a RSD or Charter school. If the RSD decides to move forward with either plan, I choose not to participate.
Economic and social factors put pressure on our children making it difficult for them to achieve success within the classroom.
Public education is under assault by people that demand that we pursue austerity, polarization, privatization and de-‐professionalization.
We are at a crucial moment when we must reclaim the promise of public education.
Reclaiming the promise of public education is about:
This vision may look different community by community. But it has a few common elements.
This is our core and it must be the focus of our work going forward.
This is a vision that works.
We need everyone’s help: educators, parents, students, civic leaders and community members.
None of us can be bystanders. Only by working together can we reclaim the promise of public education.
This is the tale of two visions.
Join us in Reclaiming the Promise.
Proponents of one vision, disguised as reform, hold closed-door meetings to design a plan to shut the public out of public schools by fixating on testing, cutting investments in education, promoting austerity, and using the remaining funds to turn a profit—not to help kids.
Believers in the other vision want parents, educators, school staff, students and community partners to unite to ensure great neighborhood public schools that help each and every child succeed, no matter his or her ZIP code.
Support our vision to Reclaim the Promise of public education for all children.
Reclaiming the promise of public education is about:
* Fighting for neighborhood public schools that are safe, welcoming places for teaching and learning;
* Ensuring teachers and school staff are well-prepared, are supported, have manageable class sizes and have time to collaborate so they can meet the individual needs of every child;
* Making sure our children have an engaging curriculum that focuses on teaching, not testing, and includes art, music and the sciences; and
* Ensuring children, their families and the community have access to wraparound services to meet their social, emotional and health needs.
This is a vision that works. It’s a vision of what parents want for their kids and what communities want for their future. It’s a movement that can stop the privatizers, profiteers and austerity hawks in their tracks. It will help our public schools become centers of communities, give voice to those closest to the classroom, and fulfill public education’s purpose as an anchor of democracy; a gateway to racial, social and economic justice; and a propeller of our economy.
Reclaiming the Promise is not a top-down edict; it’s solution-driven unionism and community-driven reform. And speaking of that, today, we proudly announced the winners of the 2013 AFT Prize for Solution-Driven Unionism. This prize recognizes groups that collaborated to develop programs with concrete results. One winner developed a successful student-learning alternative to high-stakes testing assessments, while another reduced its state’s healthcare costs by $1.6 billion. They are proof that when the community joins forces with those who serve our children and the public every day, we can reclaim the promise.
This is why we are asking you to stand with us and push back on privatization, austerity, mass schools closures, and test fixation, which have not moved the needle in the right direction. It is time we reclaim the promise of public education—not as it is today or as it was in the past, but as it can be—to fulfill our collective obligation to help all children succeed. This will be central to our work in the coming years, and the AFT executive council passed a resolution this week formalizing this as AFT policy.
Stand with us to Reclaim the Promise of public education.
We are at a pivotal moment—a moment we must seize without further detours, distractions and delays.
In unity,
Randi Weingarten
AFT President
P.S. Find out more about Reclaiming the Promise by visiting aft.org/promise. To read more about the AFT Prize for Solution-Driven Unionism, go to aft.org/about/sdu/
(Baton Rouge – October 14, 2013) The state’s highest education board should seriously consider delaying the full, consequential implementation of Common Core State Standards until problems threatening the success of our children and educators are addressed, according to the Louisiana Federation of Teachers.
The Board of Elementary and Secondary Education’s Academic Goals and Instructional Improvement Committee will discuss “the implementation of the Common Core State Standards and accompanying (high stakes tests) in Louisiana, including the technology requirements of school systems and the implications of halting the transition to Common Core State Standards” at its meeting on Tuesday afternoon.
“While the Louisiana Federation of Teachers supports the noble intent of higher standards to prepare children better for a constantly changing world, parents, teachers, and elected officials have all expressed serious concerns,” LFT President Steve Monaghan said. “Quite frankly, the noise is deafening.”
Last July, Monaghan said, the LFT unsuccessfully urged state officials to accept an offer from U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to waive the imposition of high-stakes Common Core tests for at least a year.
“We believe that the ideas behind Common Core have merit,” Monaghan said, “but like so many other education reforms that have been imposed recently, there has been a failure to prepare and provision our teachers, our children, and communities for the changes.
“It is absolutely morally wrong if we do not try with all of our energies to prepare children for an uncertain future,” Monaghan said. “But, it is equally offensive to damage students and their teachers through a horrible implementation process.”
The state’s pledge to implement Common Core standards went hand-in-hand with a request for a waiver of sections of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that some claimed were overly burdensome, Monaghan said.
“The state’s original waiver application included a promise to establish comprehensive resources for teachers. That included content crosswalk documents, correlation charts to the existing curriculum and a phase-in of the new curriculum. Apparently, that waiver application was amended and the promised support withdrawn. The Louisiana Department of Education scrapped the transition, and passed the burden on to teachers and schools.”
“As a result,” he said, “teachers and local school districts are struggling to beg, borrow or improvise curricula to meet the standards.
“It’s like asking doctors to investigate a new disease, invent a drug and bring it to the market while treating a full patient load,” Monaghan said. “It’s unfair to teachers, students and the schools that will be judged on the success of Common Core testing.
The Federation president outlined a list of concerns that he plans to share with BESE when the committee meets on Tuesday afternoon:
• LFT believes the Department of Education and BESE have done a very poor job of preparing our teachers for Common Core standards.
While states like Kentucky and Arkansas have spent the past few years preparing teachers, students and communities to understand and to meet Common Core standards, Louisiana chased a series of policy misadventures, which included Act 54 of 2010 and Acts 1 and 2 (2012). It was as if key decision makers had forgotten their commitment made to CCSS in 2010.
• LFT believes that the state has shirked its responsibility to prepare local school systems for Common Core standards.
Instead of providing curricula or assisting with the development of curricula aligned with Common Core standards, the LDOE made it clear that teachers and each local school system are on their own in finding and developing curricula that align with the new assessments. Many teachers were directed to Web sites to master a completely new and still incomplete curriculum just days before school opened in August.
At the same time, five years of frozen funds have left school districts hard-pressed to meet regular expenses, let alone find costly new educational programs aligned with Common Core standards.
School infrastructure is woefully inadequate to handle the technological requirements of PARRC tests, which must be taken online by students. Wide swaths of the state lack necessary broadband access. Many schools do not even have enough computers on which students can take the tests. Some, it has been reported don’t even have the necessary electrical capacity.
• LFT believes the state may be setting Louisiana children and Louisiana schools up for failure by imposing rigorous new standards too quickly.
Students are required to tackle many concepts in earlier grades than before Common Core went into effect. As a result, children will be expected to grow two to three grade levels in one school year, and pass tests based on the new standards.
Opponents have charged that the math being taught is confusing and overly complex. Child development experts have challenged the age appropriateness of some of the standards. As mentioned earlier, the noise is deafening.
All PARRC tests must be taken via computer, including computations, even though many students have not been adequately prepared with keyboarding skills.
Louisiana children and schools will be compared to children and schools in other states will a much difference implementation narrative.
• LFT is concerned about the role played by corporate interests in the development and implementation of Common Core standards and testing.
Concerns have been raised about how companies that run testing will store, use and share student data. Educators and parents have raised questions about the appropriateness of learning materials and methods associated with common core standards. They deserve answers. Again, the noise is deafening.
Therefore, the Louisiana Federation of Teachers stands with organizations such as the Louisiana School Board Association, which have urged more transition time, the minimizing of negative consequences associated with the implementation process, and the provision of real support from the Louisiana Department of Education.
The committee is slated to begin its meeting at 2:30 P.M. on Tuesday. However, rules allow it to begin up to one-half hour earlier than scheduled. It may also begin later than scheduled if earlier meetings run over their time limit.
– See more at: http://la.aft.org/press/look-again-common-core-lft-urges#sthash.I8xJ3hmz.dpuf
PSRPs: Leaders in our Unions, Foundation of our Schools
Reclaiming the Promise of Public Education One Brick at a Time
Saturday, 16 November 2013
9 a.m. – 2 p.m.
RSVP TODAY BY CALLING 318-424-4579 or e-mailing Summer Lollie at slollie@redriverunited.org
Reclaiming the promise of public education will take the helping hand of ALL school employees. PSRPs are our office employees, custodians, maintenance workers, bus drivers, paraprofessionals, food service workers, school nurses and health aides, technicians, groundskeepers, security coordinators, secretaries, bookkeepers, mechanics, special education assistants, and hundreds of other job titles.
PSRPs are “leaders in our unions, foundations of our schools.” This union cannot succeed without the support and leadership of the PSRPs. PSRPs are educators, working every day to ensure that our children are receiving a quality public education. Whether you are a paraprofessional assisting in a lesson, maintenance making sure our schools are running, food service providing a good and nutritious meal, or an office worker helping students, teachers, and parents, PSRPs are essential to the education of our children.
Please RSVP so we know how many people to expect. RSVP TODAY BY CALLING 318-424-4579 or e-mailing Summer Lollie at slollie@redriverunited.org
The Caddo Parish School Board holds its regular meeting at 4:30 p.m. on the third Tuesday of every month. The meeting is open to the public. The board meets in its offices at 1961 Midway Avenue, in the Board Room.
1.01 Invocation – Steve Riall, District 1
1.02 Pledge of Allegiance – Steve Riall, District 1
1.03 Roll Call
2.01 Consideration of Minutes of the September 17, 2013, September 26, 2013, and October 1, 2013 CPSB Meetings
3.01 Presentations and Recognitions (Mainiero 603-6339)
3.02 Visitors
4.01 Establish the agenda and the proposed consent agenda
5.01 Confirm the Consent Agenda
6.01 Personnel Recommendations
8.01 General Fund Budget Revisions (Lee 603-6355)
8.02 2014 Group Insurance Renewals (Priest)
8.03 Approval of Resolutions, re: (1) Appreciation for Legislative Action providing Additional Funding for Public Education, and (2) Amend Accountability Bonus Points for Non-Proficient Super Subgroup (Priest)
8.04 Shreveport Job Corps Cooperative Agreement 2013-14 (Flowers 603-6548)
8.05 Request for Termination Appeal in Accordance with CPSB Policy GDPD
8.07 Proposal for Lease/Purchase of School Buses (Trammel)
8.08 Purchasing – Digital Video Recording Systems for Buses – Graham (318) 603-6480
8.09 Distribution of Additional Revenue from State Supplement (Priest)
8.10 Teacher M and S (Priest)
8.11 Approval of Compensation Guideline Modifications, Rahmberg, Stover & Associates (C White 603-6463)
9.01 Update on Collaborations with RSD
12.01 Board Member Announcements and Requests
13.01 Student Readmission Appeal Hearings
14.01 Adjournment