Ann Arbor Voters: Vote Yes Tuesday May 2, 2017

Did you know there was an election coming up this Tuesday, May 2nd? Well, there is. Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Both Ann Arbor schools and Ypsilanti schools have proposals on the ballot. [So if you live in the school district, you need to vote. It's not about whether you live in the city.]

Find your polling place here.

For Ann Arbor, the question is whether to support a Sinking Fund Millage. This could be considered a renewal PLUS. It is an increase over what we have had recently, but it replaces a millage that we currently have. The millage would go from 1.0 to 2.5 mills. Under state law, sinking fund proceeds may not be used to pay teacher or administrator salaries. They are used to meet facility/physical building needs, and if we don't have the millage, that money gets taken from the general fund. 

I'm supporting this millage. 

I was leaning that way anyway, but I came to this as a definitive conclusion while I was sitting at a Recreation Advisory Commission meeting. I've been on the RAC for about two years, and we meet where Rec & Ed's offices are, on the "back" (S. Seventh) side of Pioneer High School. And here it is, February or March, and it is raining outside, I walk into a room where the tables have been moved from their usual spots, because in the usual spots there are buckets catching the rain from a leaking roof. Not one bucket. Many buckets.

[The whole bucket theme now has me singing to myself, "There's a hole in the bucket, dear Liza, dear Liza/There's a hole in the bucket, dear Liza, my love/Then fix it dear Henry, dear Henry, dear Henry/Then fix it dear Henry, dear Henry my love." And actually, maybe that's a good metaphor for the sinking fund, because the song continues, "With what shall I fix it...?"]

When Allen School flooded, the district exhausted its insurance and had to dip into the general fund. They have since "upped" their insurance coverage, but anytime you have to dip into the general fund, that is taking away from teachers and other staff and from stuff for kids.

A few weeks ago, at another Recreation Advisory Commission, sitting in the same room, this time there are no buckets. However, it is hot! I wish I could say that being hot (or cold) is an unusual experience for teachers and kids in the district, but the fact is--it's not! Go into many classrooms in September or June, and you will find the rooms well over 80 degrees. I don't think this is the easiest way for kids to learn!

Let's face it, buildings need to be renewed or they fall apart. I'd rather that money came from the sinking fund than the general fund, because the general fund supports teachers, and is constantly under threat from the state legislature.

So--I'm supporting the sinking fund millage. Do I agree with all of the proposed ideas for how to spend the money? Probably about 90% of them. That's good enough for me--I probably only agree with myself about 90% of the time!

If you live in the Ann Arbor school district, please vote Tuesday May 2, 2017.

You can read more!

1. Ann Arbor Public Schools Information Page

2. Ann Arbor Citizens Millage Committee Web Page

What Does The Ballot Proposal Say?

This proposal would replace and extend the authority last approved by voters in 2013 and which expires with the 2019 levy for the Public Schools of the City of Ann Arbor to levy a sinking fund millage.  This proposal would allow the use of proceeds of the millage for all purposes previously permitted by law as well as newly authorized security improvements. 

As a replacement of existing authority, shall the Public Schools of the City of Ann Arbor, County of Washtenaw, Michigan, be authorized to levy 2.50 mills ($2.50 per $1,000 of taxable valuation) to create a sinking fund for the purpose of the construction or repair of school buildings, including school security improvements, and the improvement and development of sites and, to the extent permitted by law, for other purposes, including, but not limited to, the acquisition and installation of furnishings and equipment, by increasing the limitation on the amount of taxes which may be imposed on taxable property in the School District for a period of ten (10) years, being the years 2017 to 2026, inclusive?  It is estimated that 2.50 mills ($2.50 per $1,000 of taxable valuation) would raise approximately $20,193,874 in the first year that it is levied. 

(Under state law, sinking fund proceeds may not be used to pay teacher or administrator salaries.)

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Ypsilanti Voters: Vote Yes Tuesday May 2nd, 2017

Did you know there was an election coming up this Tuesday, May 2nd? Well, there is. Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.

Both Ann Arbor schools and Ypsilanti schools have proposals on the ballot. [So if you live in the school district, you need to vote. It's not about whether you live in the city.]

Find your polling place here.

If you are a voter living within the light purple boundaries, you need to vote!

Key Facts About the Ypsilanti Community Schools Proposal

1. Ypsilanti's proposal is really pretty simple. It is a renewal of a millage. It is basic maintenance of the status quo.

2. IF THE MILLAGE DOES NOT PASS, YCS will lose $2,370 per pupil each year.

3. 100% principal residential dwellings are not affected. This is a millage on what are called non-homestead uses. Non-homestead=industrial, business, second homes.

So please--vote yes.

This proposal will allow the school district to continue to levy the statutory rate of not to exceed 18 mills on all property, except principal residence and other property exempted by law, required for the school district to receive its revenue per pupil foundation allowance.  The remaining .5 mill is only available to be levied to restore millage lost as a result of a reduction required by the “Headlee” amendment to the Michigan Constitution of 1963, and will only be levied to the extent necessary to restore that reduction. 

Shall the currently authorized millage rate limitation on the amount of taxes which may be assessed against all property, except principal residence and other property exempted by law, in Ypsilanti Community Schools, Washtenaw County, Michigan, be renewed by 18 mills ($18.00 on each $1,000 of taxable valuation) and also be increased by .5 mill ($0.50 on each $1,000 of taxable valuation), for a period of 5 years, 2018 to 2022, inclusive, to provide funds for operating purposes; the estimate of the revenue the school district will collect if the millage is approved and 18 mills are levied in 2018 is approximately $25,816,000 (18 mills of the above is a renewal of millage that will expire with the 2017 levy and .5 mill is an increase in millage which will only be levied to the extent necessary to restore millage lost as a result of a reduction required by the Michigan Constitution of 1963)?

VOTE YES! PLEASE! 

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Understanding the Impact of the Governor's Budget Proposal on Michigan Schools

Michigan Parents for Schools has a detailed summary of the Governor's budget proposal and its impact on Michigan schools.

I'm including a few excerpts here, and then you should really read the whole thing. With these state proposals, the devil is n the details.

Per-pupil funding underlines the distribution of school funds. 

The governor's executive budget recommendation is headlined by a modest increase in per-pupil funding. Districts at the current minimum level of $7,391 - which includes some 60% of all students - would receive $120 more per pupil for their general operating needs. Districts at or above the state maximum (currently $778 higher or $8,169) would get an increase of $60 per pupil.

Districts at the current minimum level of funding: think Manchester and Whitmore Lake.
Districts at or above the state maximum: think Ann Arbor.

Compare this to the year my daughter was born (which is also the year Proposal A started): 

Put another way, the small number of districts which were at the bare minimum spending level when Proposal A took effect in 1994 are still doing better than when they started, adjusted for inflation, but they have not recovered the levels they saw in 2010-11. Districts which started out at the "basic" level of funding ($5,000 in 1994) have lost some ground and are below where they started in 1994, adjusting for inflation, wiping out the gains from the first decade of this century. Districts at the higher end have done even worse: if they received what was the state maximum in 1994 ($6,500), they have lost ground against inflation nearly every year since then and the draft budget would let them buy about 17% less now than they were able to 22 years ago. (Emphasis added. Yes, that describes Ann Arbor.)

Retirement funding significantly affects school district resources.

Costs of the state-run school employee retirement system (MPSERS) continue to have a major impact on the budget. Unfortunately, unlike some other states, Michigan does not cover these costs from other funding sources, but instead uses money from the school aid budget. The cost of funding the retirement system has risen astronomically in recent years, and not because benefits are getting richer. As districts shed teachers and other staff in downsizing, and as more services are privatized, there are fewer employees paying into the system while the number of retirees is growing. . . As a result, contributions equal to about 36% of payroll have to be made by the state and school district employers (employees also make their own contributions). Ten years ago, this rate stood at a little over 16%.  (Emphasis added.)

Who was RIchard Headlee and why should you care?
Image used under a Creative Commons license
and taken from here.

Read the rest here. There is much more.

A lot of people think this stuff is a bit boring. And complicated.

Even if you are one of those people, you should know that it's essential for us to wrap our heads around 20j, the Headlee Amendment, plans for Detroit and Flint schools (among others), funding for charter schools, and how funding for higher education interacts with the School Aid Fund.

They are our schools--but only if we claim them.



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

State Legislation: Thank You, Local School Boards, Superintendents, Representatives

I think I would be remiss if I didn't thank the school board and superintendent (and, in fact, not just of Ann Arbor, but of Lincoln schools and maybe some other local ones as well), for taking policy issues to the legislators.

1. Ann Arbor Superintendent Jeanice Swift testified at a Senate Committee hearing against the idea of having guns, whether open carry or concealed carry, in schools. 

Here is an excerpt of her statement:

My remarks today are directed specifically toward the question of allowing concealed carry in pre K-12 schools.  

We recognize the proposed legislation is considered by some as a ‘fix,’ a compromise, an effective way to close the ‘open carry loophole’ that currently exists in Michigan law. Clearly, some consider ‘concealed carry’ as an improvement over ‘open carry.’ 

We understand that the stated intent of the legislation may in part be designed to remove the concerns with weapons that are visibly displayed in school and so prove a disruption to ensuring a safe, secure, learning environment. However, it is overwhelmingly clear that guns, visible or concealed, pose a significant risk to the safety and wellbeing of students, staff, and families at school.

You should read the rest, because Dr. Swift gives some shocking examples that happened in real life, that explain why guns in schools are a bad idea.

2. On the "third grade retention bill," which would provide interventions for struggling readers but also would require kids to be retained, the bill has passed out of the House more or less on party lines. My representative, Adam Zemke, originally was a co-sponsor but withdrew his support. According to this article,

The proposal was approved in a 57-48 vote, mostly along party lines, and now heads to the Senate. Democratic Rep. Adam Zemke of Ann Arbor, an original co-sponsor of the bill and key player in negotiations, withdrew support on the floor and removed his name from the measure.
Zemke had proposed an amendment to allow struggling readers to advance to fourth grade if they were working to improve under an individualized reading plan and had support from school administrators and parents. The amendment was rejected.
"This bill, without that amendment, then tells Johnny none of that (work) matters," Zemke said. "We're going to hold you back regardless. I am not going to remove the hope of a 9-year-old, period."

Thank you Lincoln Consolidated Schools Board for opposing this bill!
Thank you, Representative Zemke! The bill now goes to the Senate.

The bills go to the Senate next. The Capitol is

pretty. What's going on inside? Not so much.

3. The Teacher Evaluation bill passed the House. It's better than it was, but it's still (in  my opinion) bad, and I appreciate Rep. Jeff Irwin's opposition to this bill. He wrote on facebook:

I also have concerns about SB 103, the educator evaluation policy. My opposition stems in part from my opposition to the changes made to the tenure act in 2011. But, my opposition is deeper than my desire to stunt the effect of those changes. Mainly, I'm opposed to the bill because it accepts the toxic notion that education will be improved by more testing and more motivation for the teachers. This bill accelerates the problem we have with teaching to the test. If we want educators to teach to the test, the best way is to approve legislation like this that bases their employment and promotion on testing.
Also, I don't think the tests we're mandating produce consistent and reliable results. In other states that have adopted similar policies relying on testing growth (or value added), teachers are rated highly effective one year and then ineffective the next. The assessments bounce all over and this legislation will provide unreliable information to parents and school leaders. Our students and educators deserve better. (Emphasis added.)

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Grounds Crew Now; Teachers' Aides Next? School Board Meeting Wednesday

You might have noticed this MLive article from June 19, 2015:

Ann Arbor Schools May Privatize Grounds Crew

As noted in the article,

Ann Arbor Public Schools may privatize its grounds crew to save up to $300,000.
The district will have to lay off 13 employees if it hires four local companies to provide grass cutting, snow removal and athletic field care.
The Board of Education on Wednesday, June 17, reviewed a proposal to hire AM Service of Ann Arbor, Great Lakes Environmental Services of Whitmore Lake, JCC Design of Whitmore Lake and Superior Lawn Care & Snow Removal of Ypsilanti to do the work.
"We believe this model of using a number of contractors to deliver services to parts of the district will help meet real time needs and increase agility in keeping grounds in really good shape," said Superintendent Jeanice Swift. (Emphasis added.)

This item will be voted on at Wednesday's (June 24th) board meeting.

Side Note:

Another item on the June 24th agenda will be the "revised" Draft Policy 5060, which addresses parents who refuse to have their children take state tests.

Here is the amended policy--do you think it is better? It does not call out any particular students. But it still maintains that the tests are mandatory, and it says the board may take "any additional actions," which I think is pretty broad.

But back to my other point.

The rumor that I have heard floating around--I have not seen any written documentation (but also I haven't looked for any)--is that the district is looking into outsourcing all of the teachers' aides in the district. Presumably that would mean making it so that another company (possibly PESG, which does the substitute teachers) would hire all of the teachers' aides and supply them to the district.

UPDATED 6/24/2015--response to this rumor from David Comsa, Deputy Superintendent of Human Resources and Legal Services: "There is no chance of AAPS outsourcing teaching assistants. First, the district is actively bargaining with the Paraeducator unit, which includes teaching assistants. Second, state case law considers most teaching assistants to be protected from outsourcing."

Notice the trend? The goal is to make it so that the number of employees the district is directly responsible for is as small as possible. There is a strong financial incentive for this--for all school district employees, the district is responsible for retirement costs (I believe the costs are above 25% of payroll, and the district is unable to control the amount they are required to pay--that is set by the state). It also gives the district a lot more flexibility.

However, there is certainly also a very troubling aspect to this as well. People lose their jobs, and there is no guarantee that they will be re-hired, or that their pay rates will be similar...even if they are, they will lose the opportunity for a state pension. It also distances the district from tough personnel decisions (after the initial layoff)--the district just tells the other company to do X with Y amount of money--if that leads to difficult working conditions or less pay for certain people--it is separated from the decisions of the district itself.

I recognize that the district, per pupil, gets about the same amount of money as we got thirteen years ago--and there-in lies the conundrum. On the other hand--although theoretically the services should not change, in reality I hear people complain all the time about the decline in custodial services, the decline in food service...I don't really know if the decline is real or imagined.

Can you imagine a time where the district outsourced the teachers? (Just. Asking. I have not heard of any plans to do so--and I do not mean to start any panic about that--but that is what some charter schools do.)

If you have feelings about any of this, you should share them with the Board of Education: boe@a2schools.org (note new, shorter, email address!), ideally before the school board meeting on June 24th.



Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

It's A Zero-Sum Situation ($$$$$)

People seem to appreciate knowing more about the context for the discussions about union-administration relations for the Ann Arbor Public Schools.

You'll find the AAPS budget page here, and it's worth a look.

And the number one context piece is this: when it comes to school funding, it's (at best) a zero-sum situation.

The Ann Arbor Public Schools per-pupil funding for the 2014-2015 budget was $9,133 per pupil. In 2002-2003, it was $9,181. That's right, the current funding is less than the funding from twelve years ago. [In my parents' district in New  York, per pupil funding is more than double this number, and they are not at the top of the districts in their county!]

Per-pupil funding for AAPS, taken from the 2014-2015 budget.

Looking at the coming year(s), 
this financial situation does not seem to improve. 

And obviously--expenses continue to rise. Most particularly, retirement expenses (which are centralized through the state and charged to districts, and the districts do not control) continue to take a bigger and bigger bite out of the district's budget.

Even though the reason AAPS has higher per-pupil funding is because we have always supported our schools financially; even though we are a "donor district" and give much of the money that we collect to the rest of the state...
the state legislature continues to give token, if any, increases to districts like Ann Arbor (because we already get "so much" and it's "inequitable"), and disproportionate increases to charter and online schools.

Projections for next year are that any increases we see will not keep up with the cost of inflation, even without restoring teacher pay.

From the point of view of the administration and the school board, it's not a fiscally sound decision to raise teachers' salaries (even if they are not paid enough now), and several districts that are currently in deficit have gone down the road of spending that doesn't match income. The AAPS school board and administration are trying to avoid that.

And some people (me, among others, though I link here to Chris Savage's blog), fear that the defeat of Proposal 1 will be seen as by the legislature as an opportunity to grab more money from the school aid fund.

SO...

When we talk about the school budget, and the value of teachers and other school staff (teacher's aides, secretaries, principals...)...yes, and yes.

They are both important.

But financially, we're in a zero-sum game. If individual teachers get paid more, it is likely that we will have larger class sizes. But reducing class sizes is a proven way to improve achievement, and I think our class sizes now are plenty large enough.

That is the reality. Money, money, money.

Feel a bit stuck? I do.

And by the way--a good way to keep on top of what is happening at the state level is to visit, and subscribe to, the updates from Michigan Parents for Schools, mipfs.org. And a good thing to do is to work with Michigan Parents for Schools to advocate at the state level.




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!

Yes, I Am Supporting Proposal 1--Join Me!

Three reasons that I am supporting Proposal 1:

1. Roads--I'd rather pay to fix the roads, than I would to fix my car. I figure bent axles, busted tires--it will end up costing about the same.

2. Restoration of the 
Earned Income Tax Credit--this provides some relief from taxes to low income families struggling to get by.

3. School Aid Fund--the restrictions on the School Aid Fund mean it is less likely to get raided. People who know seem to think that if this passes, there will likely be some relief to schools via the school retirement funds (which currently suck a huge amount of money out of the per-pupil school funding).

Oh, and here is a fourth reason:

Although this is a very imperfect proposal, I am pretty convinced that whatever the legislature cooks up next may address the roads, but will be much, much worse for poor families and schools.

Read more on Ballotpedia (neutral information)

Follow more links and articles at the Michigan Association of School Administrators information page (they are supporting the proposal)

What else is on the ballot? In Ann Arbor, there is a schools bond renewal.

And yes, I am also supporting Ann Arbor's proposed bond renewal.

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Yes, I Am Supporting the May 5th Bond Proposal--Join Me!

The Ann Arbor Public Schools have a bond proposal on the ballot on May 5th. It's a renewal. I am supporting it.

Here's why:

1. The bond monies will be used to do things like buy new school buses, upgrade and add safety features to schools and school playgrounds, and replace school furniture. It can't be used for things like teacher salaries.

2. If we don't support the bond, necessary projects (like school buses) will have to be taken from the per-pupil operating funds, which would mean less money for students.

3. We cannot (thanks to Proposal A) ask for a levy for more monies for operating costs (unless we do a countywide millage)--so the best we can do is to keep those non-operating costs coming out of other revenue streams.

Read the AAPS information about the bond proposal here.

I hope you will 

join me in supporting this 

bond renewal 

on May 5th!

[And yes, I will also be supporting Proposal 1 on the ballot. I'll write about that later this week.]

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Guest Post: Guns First, and That's Great! What's Next for Activists?

This is a guest post from A3Teacher, an Ann Arbor teacher who posts here from time to time.

For many Ann Arbor community members, an issue of whether guns should be allowed in schools is one that has a clear answer: NO.  Many, many families, parents, and students came to board meetings expressing their strong convictions against having guns in our public community schools. The board, on April 15th voted for a resolution banning guns from our schools.  In Ann Arbor, rallying against guns in schools is easy.  On an issue that has such clear and logical implications, it is easy for parents, teachers, community members, and students to get on board with and advocate against guns in our schools.  

I love that families made posters.  I love that there were community members who came week after week to speak to the board.  I love that community members were unafraid to speak for the safety and well-being of our students and staff.  And I would love if this enthusiasm and passion made its way into other areas of concern for Ann Arbor Public Schools and the State of Michigan.  Many decision makers stopped listening to teacher voices years ago (or perhaps teachers need to speak out more clearly, loudly, and with a unified voice), and the reality is that we need more parents, families, and students, to raise their voices about issues pertaining to their schools.

The issue of guns in schools was easy because there was a pretty clear outcome from the beginning; most people, I believe, knew that ultimately (whether now or later) guns would not be a permanent fixture in our schools.  This was an easy issue to get on board with and add to the cadre of voices echoing the same perspective.  There are many other issues that are complex, require a lot of time, discussion, and consideration that are not as clear cut.  Below are two that I think are important to AAPS’ success in the future as well as questions to ask of your leaders (principals, district administration, etc.), and actions parents, students, and community members could take.  I welcome thoughts in the comments section.  

1. New and new to district teacher compensation.  In 2013 the Economic Policy Institute listed Ann Arbor as Michigan’s most expensive city in which to live.  With freezes, cuts, increased contributions from employees to benefits, and partial freezes to those who increased their educational levels, Ann Arbor and the State of Michigan must consider how it will retain “the best and the brightest.”  Back in 2002 the State Board of Education laid out specifics in their document “Ensuring Excellent Educators”, yet there is much left to be desired in regard to the work outlined in this task force report.  If our state economy is recovering, as our Governor insists, shouldn’t we be investing some of that money back into schools instead of raiding the K-12 School Aid Fund to pay for the general budget deficit?  [Editor's Note: On May 5th you can vote for an Ann Arbor schools bond renewal, and for Proposal 1, which will keep some monies in the School Aid Fund.]

If it cares about attracting and retaining very high quality teachers (as opposed to allowing mediocre or poor teachers to latch onto the system and hide until it’s too late to dismiss them), it must wisely invest in its younger teachers. Otherwise, newer teachers and millennials will move and find other cities, states, and districts to work for.  Perhaps this means that teachers, families, AAPS, and community members need to lobby in Lansing and actively enter the realm of politics in an organized fashion.  The largest factor in student growth and learning is not computers or technology, it is not a specific curriculum or fancy buildings, it is the quality of its teachers (one of many sources confirms this concept).  Teachers are the most important and influential factor in student growth.  It is time to show its teachers that they are valued.  

Questions to ask:  

1. How is Ann Arbor actively retaining and rewarding its best teachers?  
2. How is Ann Arbor showing its teachers that it values the work that they do besides a salary and benefits?  
3. Why has Ann Arbor frozen “steps” (a type of pay increase teachers get with seniority)?
4. Why has Ann Arbor chosen not to fully recognize (with compensation) teachers who increase their education?

[Editor's Note: Similar questions could be asked in other districts. In Dexter they are having big issues with health insurance; in Ypsilanti, the pay rates for teachers are very low.]

Actions you could take:

1. Send an email to your school’s teacher or administrator about teachers who do fantastic things for your students.  Conversely, also send messages about teachers who are not so great.  If we want to increase the number of great teachers in schools, administration needs to hear not only about the great teachers, but also about the not-so-great ones.  
2. Attend a board meeting and share a story about how a teacher has positively impacted your student (In the past, families have used board meetings to raise issues of problematic teachers, but I have yet to see a parent, family, or student tell a positive story about a teacher.  Perhaps this is because there is an assumption that all teachers should be doing their jobs with or without recognition).  
3. Write a letter to board members and Dr. Swift directly (the entire board and the superintendent can be reached at boe@aaps.k12.mi.us or individual board e-mails are available here, and Dr. Swift can be reached at swift@aaps.k12.mi.us) asking them some or all of the questions above.  
4. Contact your legislators and ask them what they are doing in order to support increased funding to schools and teacher retention (you can find your representatives here and your senators here).  If you dig deeper and look at bills up for proposal, ask your legislators to vote for or against specific aspects of those bills.  It is not as effective to simply ask legislators to provide more funding to schools - be specific in regard to current legislation.  

2. Standardized tests and common assessments have taken over a large portion of schools’ calendars.  These can be used to drive instruction, although I have yet to see it truly used successfully.  There is a growing movement that questions the benefits of these tests to students, their validity of the actual tests, and their use in regard to teacher evaluations and instruction.  There are many independent schools that (as a selling point) tout the fact that they do not overload their students with the types of standardized tests that many public schools do.  Besides teacher-created classroom assessments and school-wide exams (given two to three times per year dependant on the high school), a high school junior next year could potentially have:

• the SAT,
• the ACT WorkKeys,
• the M-STEP,
• any AP tests,
• district common assessment/s (dependant on the subject),
• building specific assessments in content areas (known as SMART Goals - this changes based on the subject and department’s decision),
• the SRI twice (which measures Lexile reading scores).  

Questions to ask:  

1. How is each of these these assessments and tests necessary for our students?  
2. How are these assessments and tests representative of growth and learning?  
3. Will my student(s) be able to use their test scores in order to learn and grow?  
4. How can we be smart, as a district, with the data that comes out of standardized testing so that it positively impacts learning and growth?  Which tests could we cut?
5. Why is the state using texts which have not been validated or used before?

Actions you could take:

1. Ask questions of your district and board of education.  Ask questions by speaking at a board meeting or through writing.  Become a part of the public record and seek answers.  In addition, this shows the board and district that parents, families, and students have a vested interest in their schools.  Remaining silent send the (perhaps unintentional) message that the public agrees with the decisions of the district and board.    

Ask questions of your State Board of Education - you can do this in person, via phone, or in writing (Ann Arbor also has two board members who live in town:  Eileen Weiser, a Republican and John Austin, a Democrat).   

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!

Upcoming Meetings About the AAPS Bond (May 5, 2015 Election)

There are two items on the May election that concern the schools. One is a local Ann Arbor school bond proposal (this is essentially a renewal). The other is Proposal 1, which is a statewide initiative that involves both schools and roads. I'm supporting both of them.

There are some upcoming meetings about the local school bond proposal. If you have questions, this is a good way to learn more.

Five Community Meetings On the May 5 Bond Proposal 

Ann Arbor Public Schools Superintendent Jeanice Swift will host five community meetings this month to share information about the bond proposal appearing on the May 5 ballot.  

Each community meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. at the following locations:

• Tuesday, April 14,  Slauson Middle School, Media Center

• Thursday, April 16, Tappan Middle School, Media Center

• Tuesday, April 21, Scarlett Middle School, Media Center

• Thursday, April 23,  Clague Middle School, Media Center

• Thursday, April 30, Forsythe Middle School, Media Center

Superintendent Swift encourages all citizens to attend and learn more about the proposal and have the opportunity to ask questions. 

The bond proposal would raise $33 million for capital improvements across the district’s 32 buildings, while keeping the millage rate at or below the current 2.45 mills for taxpayers.  Improvements in the plan include security upgrades at school entrances, new musical instruments, the replacement of more than 100 buses over five years, and new furniture and other upgrades in classrooms across the district.
More information on the bond proposal is available at: 

http://news.a2schools.org/community-bond-meetings-begin-next-week/And
http://news.a2schools.org/aaps-millage-request-may-5-2015/

Consider subscribing to Ann Arbor Schools Musings by Email!