There's a New Group in Arbor Town; Parents and Teachers are Riled Up!

There is SO much going on these days. And while I was busy with my life, the school world spun madly on...In the last few weeks, the school board has pushed through two very controversial policies at an hour when most of us were sleeping, and without sufficient notice.

I'm talking about the Prohibited Subjects Policy, which I wrote about here, and Draft Policy 5060, which has gone through first briefing. The Prohibited Subjects Policy was first posted in board docs on the day it was voted on, and Draft Policy 5060--which tries to punish families in "application-based programs" who opt their children out of testing--wasn't even posted in board docs until an astute parent asked what that policy on the agenda was.

June 3, 2015 Update: Point of clarification--board policies do not jump unformed to first briefing. This policy, for instance, was discussed at the May 20 Governance Committee, which was a public meeting held at Skyline at 3:30 p.m. FYI, the Governance Committee is where all potential board policies are discussed. [I don't know that the public was there, but the public IS welcome.]

So, long story short, a new policy is not introduced for the first time at a regular BOE meeting; it goes to Governance first. The public is welcome at these meetings. 

And we, parents and teachers and citizens, have been asleep. I know. I--like so many of you--get up early to go to work; and the school board meetings start with almost two hours of presentations, awards, and public commentary. When people do show up at the meetings, they tend to leave after public commentary. Very few people stay around to the bitter end.

How quiet is it? At the last board meeting, Ann Arbor News reporter Lindsay Knake had this tweet:

The next morning, when I woke up, I laughed at this tweet.

This tweet would, of course, be funny--if it weren't so tragic. That means that aside from the school board members and staff required to be there, Lindsay Knake--who has been the education reporter for the Ann Arbor News for less than a year--was probably the only other (awake) observer in the room.

And that, itself, is a failure!

That is not the only failure.

I reject the fact that the board is not following its own, established, policies and procedures. (I'm not entirely sure if the policies were violated in actuality, because I wasn't at the meetings to see what time they discussed certain items, but I'm quite sure they were violated in spirit. Policies 1200 and Policy 1220 were put in place to ensure that items were discussed while people were still awake, and with proper timelines for giving notice to topics.) I wrote about these issues earlier in an Ann Arbor Chronicle article, Good Ideas, Flawed Process. So if I was calling out the board and superintendent on ideas that I thought were good, but the process was bad, you can be sure that I am upset about ideas that I think are bad, where the process is bad.

And I do think that both the Prohibited Subjects Policy and the Draft Policy 5060 are bad. (Look for a post tomorrow on Draft Policy 5060.)

I reject the idea that either policy had to be created or implemented now.

I reject the idea that either policy had to be brought forward without public discussion, sneaked onto the agenda.

I believe that by acting in this way, the school board and superintendent have unnecessarily inflamed passions with both teachers and parents.

It's puzzling to me--and so, so disappointing--that the board and superintendent have turned to poor process on these issues, when they had such a good model of process, and policy development, for the discussions around weapon-free schools. Why not build on that successful process instead?


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

SO--What Next?

Well, there's a new group in town:

Ann Arbor Community for Trust and Transparency in Schools 

(AACTTS! We hope to have lots of AACTTSion).

Ann Arbor Community for Trust and Transparency in Schools is a new community group focused on how we as citizens and constituents can have a voice in shaping local and state educational policies and decision-making processes. We are coming together to understand and address issues that challenge the values that our community holds as partners in educating our kids.

I don't mind saying that the decisions on these two policies have done a lot to galvanize people. I personally feel that trust in the district is at an all-time low. But it doesn't have to be that way.

If you look at the top of this page, you will see that I have added a "page" to the blog for the AACTTS information. You can click on that tab, or you can follow this link.

Right now we are encouraging people to write to/talk to board members, and there are some sample letters on the page. One-on-one contact is good! Let board members know how you feel--about the policies, about the labor negotiations, about the process the board is using...

You can also sign a petition that is focused on Draft Policy 5060.

Sign the petition here.



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Coda: Process Errors in My "Honeymoon is Over" Post

In writing my post about how the "honeymoon" is over (read it here), I got a lot of positive feedback--especially from teachers, who said, "Right on!" The teachers who contacted me felt that it mirrored very closely their lived experience.

But I also think I might have missed the mark in a three ways.

First, I think that some people might have read the post as violating one of my core blog rules, posted on the right hand side of my blog: "All are welcome to comment, but please be respectful, and assume that everyone wants the best for the schools." And for me, that approach is supposed to extend beyond the comments section, and into my blogging itself. If it came across to you that I don't believe that the superintendent or school board wants the best for the schools, then I am truly sorry--because I believe that Dr. Jeanice Swift, and every school board member, DOES want the best for the schools.

Second, perhaps I should have asked for a reaction from Dr. Swift before posting my piece, so I could have given her the chance to respond. I don't say that because I think my blog needs to be "balanced" or "neutral" in the classic newspaper way--I don't think it does. In fact I think my best blogging happens when I write from a point of view. However, I end the post by saying that "process matters," and if I believe that, then maybe I should myself be modeling better process and opportunities for airing disagreements. [And--if we're contrasting past and present here, I can say that former Superintendent Dr. Pat Green never answered my emails, and Dr. Swift always answers them.]

Third, from a comment that somebody made about how parents "can send her packing," I think some people might have inferred that I want to start a campaign to get rid of Dr. Swift.

So to set the record straight: That is not true.

I think that Dr. Swift has done a really good job on a lot of things for the Ann Arbor Public Schools. As I say in the first post,

Some notable successes--she got the principals of Roberto Clemente and Ann Arbor Tech to work together; turned Northside into Ann Arbor STEAM; got the school board to open seats to schools of choice, and also attracted a lot of Ann Arbor residents back into the schools. The number of students in the district grew significantly, and that allowed the budget to grow as well.

In her first year, I think we saw a marked shift from a culture of "No we can't" to a culture of "Yes we can." I appreciate her energy, her hard work, and her interest in all facets of the district, Many (not all) of the current issues can be attributed to the fact that there are fiscal constraints, which we ignore at our peril. 

Do I see Jeanice Swift as a strong booster of the Ann Arbor Public Schools? Absolutely yes.

Do I agree with her (or the school board) on everything? Clearly not. 

At the same time, that does not mean I think it's time to "send her packing."

No, I want to convince her (and the school board) that I am right and she is (they are) wrong. :)

We cannot be like the queen in Alice in Wonderland, who--whenever she didn't like someone (Alice)--cried, 

No, I want to convince her (and the school board) that I am right and she is (they are) wrong. :)

I want us to be a community where we can disagree and model conversations about these disagreements. 

That's why I want a transparent process. I realize that union negotiations can make that difficult, but ultimately I think we help ourselves if we make discussions about disagreements public, open, and honest.

Look for a post next week where I try to make that happen.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Major Changes in Ann Arbor Schools Policies Again Put on Agenda at the Last Minute

Someone just alerted me to three new proposed policies, named the "prohibited subjects policies," that have been placed on tonight's board agenda, but were only placed there this afternoon...

I find the substance of the policies a bit shocking (although I assume they are influenced in some way by Michigan's right-to-work law, but I don't know much about the ins and outs of the law). But what is really shocking is that they are being added to the agenda at the last minute, especially given their content.

You can always look at the agenda and policies of the Ann Arbor schools board on BoardDocs, but if you were to look at them yesterday, you wouldn't (it seems) know what would be on the agenda tonight.

Here is the link to the proposed policies, but I'm just going to paste them in below as well, on the theory that most people will not click on the link. They're not that long....

BY THE WAY--
First Briefing means there is still time to let the Board of Education know what you are thinking: boe@aaps.k12.mi.us.

Policy #1:
Book AAPS Policies & Regulations Section 4000: Human Resources Title Placement of Teachers Number 4800 Status DRAFT Legal MCL §423.215(3)G).
The Superintendent or designee shall determine teacher placement based on qualifications (as defined by the District, which shall include but not be limited to state and federal requirements such as certification, highly qualified requirements, endorsements, etc.), the academic needs and best interest of District students, and the District's educational program. At all times, the District shall strive to place the most effective and qualified teachers in assignments aligned with student and District needs. Decisions about teacher placement, and the impact of such decisions on the individual teacher or the bargaining unit, shall not be the subject of any terms or conditions within a collective bargaining agreement between the District and a collective bargaining representative of such teachers. The Superintendent or designee may develop and adopt administrative regulations related to teacher placement. This policy supersedes all other policies on this issue.

Policy #2:
Book AAPS Policies & Regulations Section 4000: Human Resources Title Performance Evaluation Systems Number 4810 Status DRAFT Legal MCL 423.215(3)(!) MCL 38.93, as amended by Public Acts 100, 101 and 102, effective July 19, 2011 MCL 38.83a MCL 380.1248 MCL 380.1249, as amended by Public Act 257, effective June 30, 2014
The Ann Arbor Public Schools is responsible for the employment and supervision of all personnel. The District shall comply with Section 1249 of the Revised School Code, as amended from time to time, which mandates the inclusion of certain components within the District's performance evaluation system for teachers and school administrators who are regularly involved in instructional matters. Pursuant to Section 1249, the District shall: Adopt and implement for all teachers and school administrators a rigorous, transparent, and fair performance evaluation system. Evaluate the job performance of teachers and administrators using multiple rating categories that take into account data on student growth as a significant factor. Provide timely and constructive feedback to teachers and administrators regarding their job performance. Establish clear approaches to measuring student growth and provide teachers and school administrators with relevant data on student growth. Use the evaluations to inform its decisions on: the effectiveness of teachers and school administrators; promotion, retention, and development of teachers and school administrators, including providing relevant coaching, instructional support, and professional development; whether or not to grant tenure or full certification to teachers and school administrators; removing ineffective tenured and untenured teachers and school administrators. The District shall also comply with the requirements of the Michigan Teachers' Tenure Act with respect to the evaluation of teachers, as applicable. Decisions regarding the development, content, standards, procedures, adoption, and implementation of performance evaluation systems, and decisions about the content of performance evaluation systems, and the impact of such decisions on the individual employee or the applicable bargaining unit, shall not be the subject of any terms and conditions within a collective bargaining agreement between the District and a collective bargaining representative of its employees. The Board of Education delegates to the Superintendent or designee, the responsibility for taking appropriate action, including developing administrative regulations as needed, to adopt and implement a rigorous, transparent, and fair performance evaluation system in compliance with Section 1249. This policy supersedes all other policies on this issue.

Policy #3:
Book AAPS Policies & Regulations Section 4000: Human Resources Title Teacher Discipline, Demotion, or Dismissal Number 4820 Status DRAFT Legal MCL §423.215(3)(m MCL §§38.71-191

Teachers whose employment is regulated by the provisions of MCL §§38.71 through 38.191, inclusive, shall be disciplined, demoted or dismissed only for a reason that is not arbitrary or capricious. The Superintendent or designee shall ensure that decisions regarding the discipline, demotion and dismissal of teachers whose employment is regulated by MCL §§38.71 through 38.191 are consistent with this policy and the legal authority cited above. Decisions about the development, content, standards, procedures, adoption and implementation of a policy regarding discharge or discipline of a teacher, or the impact of those decisions on an individual teacher or the bargaining unit, shall not be the subject of any terms and conditions within a collective bargaining agreement between the District and a collective bargaining representative of its employees. The Superintendent or designee may develop and adopt administrative regulations that detail the standards or procedures for the discipline, demotion, and/or dismissal of teachers subject to this policy. This policy is applicable to teachers and school administrators whose employment is subject to section 1 of article l of the Michigan Teachers' Tenure Act. This policy supersedes all other policies on this issue.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Dear Dr. Swift, The Honeymoon Is Over

For the first year and a half of Dr. Swift's employment as the Ann Arbor Public Schools Superintendent, I heard almost entirely positive reviews. She had her "Listen & Learn" tour, she learned a lot from that, and she proposed new programs and ideas. Some notable successes--she got the principals of Roberto Clemente and Ann Arbor Tech to work together; turned Northside into Ann Arbor STEAM; got the school board to open seats to schools of choice, and also attracted a lot of Ann Arbor residents back into the schools. The number of students in the district grew significantly, and that allowed the budget to grow as well. If the custodians' jobs were cut along the way, I think the thought went, that was just a casualty of the times.

All this was in stark contrast to her predecessor, Pat Green, whose honeymoon lasted about 3 months, and whose focus in budget cycles was to thumb her nose at parents, propose cuts that managed to tick off a lot of people without likely saving any money (remember the idea of cutting middle school Athletic Directors), and generally share a negative vibe.

Recently though, while going back through other things that I had written, I was startled to see the headline of a piece I wrote in February 2014 for the Ann Arbor Chronicle. Titled Good Ideas, Flawed Process, the subheading said: "New superintendent brings positive proposals, but Ann Arbor Public Schools board violates its own policies, undermines public process." 

At the time I thought that this had a lot to do with her newness on the job and to the community, and hey--good ideas make all the difference, right? Well, maybe not.

And now I think I can say, with full confidence: "Dear Dr. Swift, the honeymoon is over."

Let's look at three areas, all of which concern me--as well as a lot of other parents and teachers.

1. Testing: in particular, M-STEP Testing.
As you know, the M-STEP (or, as I prefer to call it, the MIS-Step) is the state-mandated test that robs teaching time, robs computer lab time, and does not replace any of the other tests that are already being given (NWEA MAP, SRI, ACT, WorkKeys, regular final exams, to name just a few...). It's quite a bit longer than the MEAP that it replaced. For those of us who already thought there was too much testing, well, this doesn't help matters.

Parents have the right to refuse this test for their children, but administrators have been nervous about potential implications for the district (at least for this year and next, likely none).

An email from the Superintendent implying that parents don't have the right to refuse this test, when they do, got a lot of parents hot under the collar--even parents who were happy to have their kids take the tests.

For myself, I wasn't surprised that the Superintendent was supporting the test (that's her job), but I was disappointed that she wasn't following the lead of Rod Rock, the Clarkston Superintendent who (with the chair of the Clarkston PTA, Ariana Bokas) wrote a wonderful op-ed in Bridge magazine about better ways to approach testing. Read it here.

2. International Baccalaureate schools: Huron, Scarlett, Mitchell

In the coming years, the Scarlett, Mitchell, and Huron schools are supposed to become International Baccalaureate schools. This is one of the ideas that came out of the first round of the Listen and Learn tour. To teach in an IB school, you need a certain type of training--and the whole "teach in an IB school" thing is really not for every teacher.

Past magnets and school openings have developed teacher staffing in different ways. Skyline's staffing plan was developed through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the teachers' union; A2Steam's staffing was developed as a "pilot," which means that teachers there don't have certain union work rules or protections for a certain period of time.

And let's note that A2Steam is a much smaller program than the combined programming of Mitchell, Scarlett, and Huron (together well over 2000 students).

According to my sources, the teachers' union and the Superintendent's representatives were meeting monthly all of this year to develop an MOA around the IB staffing, and the union apparently thought that MOA was going to go to the board for approval. At the last minute, they found out that the Superintendent was ignoring the MOA, and bringing a proposal for a pilot program to the school board. The pilot proposal passed the school board unanimously, and I have no idea whether the school board knew in advance of the vote (I'm sure they know now) that the AAEA felt they had been dealt with duplicitously...that they had been bamboozled. And part of the teachers' question was, "Why act as if you were going to bring the MOA forward...why waste our time over the past year...if you never planned to do that."

3. Teachers as Professionals

All of that sets the tone for some additional conflict.
Last year, teachers agreed to take a "one-time" pay rollback. [Although why anybody thought things would be better financially this year, with our current legislature, is a bit beyond me.]
So now this year, the district would like to reopen the contract (so they can extend these pay savings) and the union has just said no, thank you.

And that's at least partly because of the issues with the IB pilot, above.
And a refusal to negotiate over pay will likely threaten the school budget solvency, and that's not good.

But there's another issue, and it's one that concerns me a bit more.
Several teachers that I have spoken with have told me that they--or other teachers they work with--have been implicitly threatened, in both subtle and not-so-subtle ways, for speaking out at school board meetings, for speaking to school board members, for writing on social media, and even for sharing their opinions about testing in meetings where there were only teachers and administrators.

This does not sit well with me at all.

If teachers are professionals, let's treat teachers like professionals.

In a recent letter to teachers, the Superintendent wrote:

Unlike what has been stated in the media, the teachers of this district are respected and affirmed both by the district leadership and the families of Ann Arbor.  Unfortunately, the state leadership continues to devalue public education and as a result, each of us must continue to call for changes in legislation and leadership to reflect the funding that is needed and deserved to adequately support our schools.  At the same time, we do not create good will for public education with hostile attacks on the district. Public attacks on the new programs that our community values and that our teachers have so competently developed ultimately harms everyone.  (Emphases added.)

While some people might read this as relatively innocuous, many teachers don't feel respected or affirmed by the district leadership right now. And in the context of the subtle and not-so-subtle threats that teachers have experienced or heard about, many of them are reading this as a warning not to criticize the IB program or any other new programs. And the irony is, for the most part the criticisms are not about the programs themselves, but about the way the program will be staffed, and about why and how teachers will have to reapply for jobs...for the teachers that I've talked to, this did not feel like much of a Teacher Appreciation Week.

4. Tonight's Board Meeting

Tonight's Board meeting (Wed. 5/13/2015) starts at 7 p.m. and has been moved to Forsythe Middle School because a crowd is expected. It should be interesting.


5. Process Matters

Dear Dr. Swift--

There is still time to turn this around. You are rightfully concerned about the district's finances. You are rightfully developing new and exciting programs.

But you have to see parents and teachers, and teachers' aides, and secretaries, and principals--all of them, all of us--as partners.

The end does not justify the means. We need transparency and we need good will.

Process matters. I mean that both ways--process does matter, and also--let's discuss matters of process.

And now, please read the coda to this post (think of it as part II), which I wrote on 5/16/2015.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!