Unions Serve Teachers, Fail the Students

The following piece appeared on the Real Clear Politics website. No commentary needed the piece speaks for itself.

July 23, 2006
Unions Serve Teachers, Fail the Students
By Ruben Navarrette
SAN DIEGO -- After five years of trying to undermine the No Child Left Behind Act, the nation's largest teachers union has decided that it can live with the education reform law after all -- as long as the legislation is gutted, its standards lowered and its accountability measures watered down.

Great. So we're making progress.

This month at its annual conference, the National Education Association voted to launch a nationwide campaign to lobby Congress to radically change NCLB when the law comes up for reauthorization next year. The goal behind the changes seems to be to wrest power away from government and put it back where the union thinks it belongs -- with educators and those who represent them.


Call me cynical, but I never thought for a minute that the NEA was really concerned about, well, education. I never believed the organization was eager to find new ways to empower students or to hold schools accountable for the educational products they turn out.

I always assumed that the NEA was focused primarily on what any union tends to focus on: the interests of its members. And since the education establishment has been trained to believe that it is not in the interests of teachers to demand more from them or tie them to the performance of their students, I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that groups such as the NEA have reacted with hostility to No Child Left Behind.

That's exactly what's been happening since 2001, when the law -- perhaps the most significant domestic policy achievements of the Bush administration -- took effect.

According to a recent report by Education Sector, a Washington-based think tank, the NEA has given more than $8 million to various education, civil rights and public policy groups that opposed or criticized No Child Left Behind. Lead researcher Joe Williams says that what the union did wasn't illegal, but it is clear that it "actively pursued partnerships'' with groups intent on fighting NCLB. And questions remain about whether the funding that was given to some of these groups influenced the research some of these groups produced -- research that was, to no one's surprise, critical of the education reform law.

Not that the law doesn't have its critics. When I hear from teachers, or even school board members -- some of whom have accepted campaign contributions from the NEA and other teachers unions -- I get an earful about how NCLB is single-handedly destroying the public education system due to its emphasis on testing, its punishing of underperforming schools and its one-size-fits-all approach.

And yet, knowing all that, it's still frightening to get a peek behind the curtain at the specifics of what the NEA, if it had its druthers, would do to make NCLB more palatable to its members -- or at least, some of them, as the more hard-line members won't be satisfied unless the law is repealed.

Convinced that there is too much emphasis on regular testing, and that low-performing schools are being unfairly punished when students come up short, the union would prefer a broader-based accountability system that relies on "multiple measures of success.'' Whatever that means.

The union is also queasy about the requirement in No Child Left Behind that schools test students in math and reading and then report scores according to race, disability, English proficiency and economic background. The NEA instead wants benchmarks that take into account students' differing abilities and demographics. It seems that many educators are less than confident in the job they've done when it comes to teaching minorities, those with limited English proficiency and the economically disadvantaged, and they're not eager to broadcast their failures.

It's outrageous. If these people get their way, the practical effect would be a lower bar for students of different racial, ethnic or economic backgrounds -- and by extension, those who teach them. And they would do all this not for the good of students but for the professional welfare of those who are supposed to be teaching them and who have, for too long, been coming up short.

And why does the nation's largest teachers union want to make all these changes in No Child Left Behind? It's so the truth does not come out about whom the public schools serve and whom they sacrifice.

ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com
(c) 2006, The San Diego Union-Tribune

Illinois is a high-tax state

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Daily Southtown Newspaper.
In McHenry County School Districts must adopt referendum questions on or before September 5th. The last day to file in this office is September 7th. Will you be voting to increase the tax budern of your fellow Illinois residents?

Illinois is a high-tax state

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Despite the claims of some government employees and pro-tax political activists that Illinois is a "low-tax" state, the latest statistics from the non-partisan Tax Foundation headquartered in Washington, D.C., show that Illinois is a high-tax state; Illinois, in fact, has some of the highest tax burdens in the nation (www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/336.html).

The Tax Foundation measures tax burden by taking taxes as a percentage of income. In 2000, Illinois' combined state and local tax burden was 10 percent, ranking 30th in the nation. By 2004, Illinois' state and local tax burden had climbed to 10.4 percent, the 16th in the nation. Two years later, in 2006, Illinois' tax burden for state and local taxes had increased to 10.9 percent, the 14th highest in the nation. Only 13 out of 50 states had higher state and local tax burdens than Illinois in 2006.

When the federal tax burden is added to Illinois' state and local figures, Illinois has the 10th highest total tax burden in the nation for 2006 — 32.7 percent (taxes as a percentage of income).

Illinois' economic growth and tax increases have resulted in a flood of taxpayer dollars pouring into state coffers. For Illinois' fiscal year 2006, ending June 30, tax revenues were nearly $4 billion higher than in FY 2005. Illinois' total state revenue growth was more than twice the 3.3 percent rate of price inflation for the same period (www.ntui.org/itef/ITEFComment12-3/index.html).

Unfortunately, in fiscal year 2006, the Illinois General Assembly and Gov. Rod Blagojevich were responsible for accelerating the growth of spending. Total state expenditures increased by a huge amount, $5 billion, nearly $1 billion more than revenues — a spending orgy that threatens the long-term financial health of the state.

Illinois is a high-tax state plagued by runaway spending. This is a deadly combination for individual taxpayers and businesses alike. The high state and local taxes, combined with the state's irresponsible spending, are hurting its economy, driving small businesses out of state and enriching government employees at the expense of productive workers in the private sector.

Dennis Constant
Research director
Illinois Taxpayer Education Foundation

Restitution?

The following story appeared in the Chicago Tribune.


Ex-school official must pay $40,000

Published August 24, 2006

SAUK VILLAGE -- A former Sauk Village school administrator was ordered to pay $40,000 in restitution this week after pleading guilty to one count of theft from the district. Former maintenance manager Edward Bernacki, who had been accused of stealing more than $100,000 from Elementary School District 168, also was sentenced to a year of probation.

Bernacki's plea comes on the heels of two other high-profile cases in the financially troubled district.

Former Supt. Thomas Ryan is serving 8 years after pleading guilty to theft in November. He paid $400,000 in restitution.

Former school board president Louise Morales pleaded guilty to official misconduct in February. She was sentenced to 18 months of probation and was forced to pay $350 to have her name removed from one of the district's buildings.


Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune

The solution: School vouchers

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Daily Southtown Newspaper.


Letter to the Editor: The solution: School vouchers

8/21/2006

By Timothy A. Van Eck, South Holland

Phil Kadner's column (Aug. 15) contends that the educational system in Illinois for some of the poorer districts is analogous to "a plane with an incompetent pilot at the controls."

His analogy is a ringing endorsement for school vouchers.

After deregulation, the airlines had to compete. Fares went down; service went up. New airlines began to compete with the established airlines and gave the passengers economic power they lacked before.

The same rang true for the telephone companies. We are no longer impressed when someone receives or makes a long-distance telephone call.

Once government got out of the way, costs were reduced and better service was demanded. The same can be done with the schools. Let the money follow the child, and let the schools compete for each student. Schools currently cannot succeed because their focus over the past 20 years has been on indoctrinating political correctness into the children, not on education.

One problem with the analogy is that with an airplane, there is a known destination. With the current educational system, we do not know where the children will end up.

According to Dr. Bruce Shortt, "If we have our children in public schools, the public school is indeed our children's teacher and, effectively, their parent. The federal courts agree. In Fields v. Palmdale, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals candidly stated that public-school parents ' ... have no constitutional right ... to prevent a public school from providing its students with whatever information it wishes to provide, sexual or otherwise, when and as the school determines that it is appropriate to do so.' "

This is a main reason why a faction in the Southern Baptist church has repeatedly, with an ever increasingly favorable vote, tried to pass a resolution at its conventions to remove its members' students from the public schools.

If that resolution passes, the question then will be: Will Sen. Meeks continue to pursue his political agenda, or will Rev. Meeks follow the dictates of his denomination and abandon the public education platform that has given him so much media attention?

Newspapers not giving full details of District 158 contract.

Below is a partial post from Cal Skinner's Blog. We hope it is clear to District 158 voters that the referendum they passed two years ago was for the school employees and not the students. Shame on you who supported this referendum, which has frivolously spent your neighbors tax dollars against their wishes.

Christmas in August for Huntley Teachers

Now that teachers are learning some of the details of what's in the contract, many of them are jumping for joy.

The $4,500 "bonus" that negotiators agreed to give high school teachers for teaching a sixth class, (for work most do already) jumps to $6,750 in the 2nd year of the contract.

If a high school teacher made $45,000 last year, then this teacher would receive a 4% pay increase--$1800--plus $4,500 for teaching a 6th class.

That's a $6,300 increase or a 14% increase to $51,300.

In the year after this, their $46,800 base salary would go up by another 5%, a comfortable $2,340 increase.

But, they would also receive a $6,750 bonus for teaching a 6th class.

That would bring the total salary to $55,890.

In 2 years, the $45,000 high school teacher will be making $55,890.

That's a 24.2% pay increase.

To view the rest of Cal Skinners post visit McHenry County Blog.
We also suggest you read his post on the contract titled Huntley District 158 Teachers’ Contract: Payback Time.

A warn for those thinking of supporting future referenda. This too will happen to you.

A note from one of our email subscribers who unsuccessfully tried to defeat a referendum in her community last spring.

FYI - here in Waterloo, Illinois, as you may recall, the tax referendum passed last spring. Already the education fund portion of the referendum has been added retroactively to this year's tax bill! People in the community are up in arms about it. They didn't think they'd get hammered with higher taxes until next year. The community didn't listen to us when we fought the referenda -- now all the sudden when it hits their wallet they're questioning the original sales pitch of the school board. The increase in taxes is much higher than they were told it would be. We tried to warn them . . .

Karen

The following letter to the editor appeared in the August 20th edition of the Northwest Herald.


Fat raises, fewer teachers
[published on Sun, Aug 20, 2006]
To the Editor:

Re: District 15 administration raises.

I recently read an article stating that the District 15 administrators gave themselves 4 percent increases in their salaries.

To me, this is truly unacceptable. I can't help but feel duped. I voted yes to the referendum so more teachers would be hired to alleviate the high student-to-teacher ratio; to bring back programs that were cut or would have been cut; and to keep the buildings and their property open so students would be able to benefit from after-school activities.

I did not vote yes to give the administrators raises.

The school board is not accurately reflecting the feeling of the community by doing this.

I now can see them hiding behind closed doors, wringing their hands and twisting their evil mustaches while congratulating each other on their recent coup.

I am personally happy that my kids will be eating peanut butter-and-jelly sandwiches for dinner so the already-overpaid administrators of District 15 can further fatten their wallets.

I never will vote yes again. Sorry District 15, you messed up big time.


Marjie Lullo
McHenry

Lawrence Miller is voting no on the District 225 referendum. Are you?

District 225 is going to referendum in November to issue $94 million in bonds. They have said what they want the money for, but have not answered the question, “why is a referendum necessary?”

The question arises because it is not necessary to obtain voter approval to issue bonds for building additions and repairs to existing schools, or for refunding bonds -- things the District says it wants to do with the $94 million. District 225 has built huge additions to schools without asking voters if they approved. Refunding bonds were issued in 2003 without voter approval. The fact is, referendum approval is only required for building bonds to build separate new schools, and there is no hint of that here.

The answer to the question, “why a referendum?” is that taxes levied to pay bonds approved by referendum are not subject to the tax cap limitation. And bonds issued in the future to refund referendum approved bonds will also be exempt from the tax cap limitation. This $94 million referendum is a scheme to bust the tax cap.

Tax revenue to pay bonds that were part of the district’s total bond debt as of March 1, 1995, when the tax cap law came into effect, or replacements for those bonds, is also excluded from the tax cap.

In 2005, the District reported long term outstanding bond debt of $ 44.7 million which it proposes to pay off with part of the new $94 million referendum bond proceeds. The proposed refunding will add the “referendum-approved-bond” tax cap exemption to the “existing-debt” tax cap exemption to allow the District to issue approximately $139 million in debt outside the tax cap and triple current taxes for bond debt service and related allowances to approximately $6.4 million annually. This increase will be on top of annual tax increases allowed by the tax cap.

The tax cap law is designed to limit increases in total property taxes billed. The limitation slows the growth of property tax revenues to taxing districts when property values and assessments are increasing faster than the rate of inflation. As a whole, property owners have some protection from tax bills that increase only because the market value of their property is rising rapidly, as it has in District 225. The tax cap law is a good law, and it is working.

Taxpaying homeowners should vote No in November and save the tax cap.

Lawrence T. Miller
Glenview, IL.

llinois not identifying weak teachers well enough: feds

The following article appeared in the Chicago Sun Times. We have a problem in Illinois with teachers who are not highly qualified to teach. School districts and unions insist we must pay more to get qualified teachers. This is absurd, because tenure and the unions refuse to let go of under-qualified teachers to hire more qualified teachers.

Anyone doubt this is happening? Crain's Chicago Business reported that "city schools this year got 18,000 résumés for 1,500 positions - a 12:1 ratio that any employer
would covet". Schools could hire more qualified teachers but unions
prefer protecting union members to serving the very children they are pledged to educate. The city of Chicago employed 25,501 in 2005, only 31.7% of students met or exceeded state goals. 41.7% of students met or exceeded state goals in reading. A humiliating 27.5% of students met or exceeded state goals in math. These teachers and the district are clearly failing to educate these children. There is no doubt that weeding out poor teachers and hiring new teachers from the pool of 18,000 resumes received could improve student performance. Heck even the threat teachers losing their jobs if they do not educate our children would improve performance. But Chicago teachers once tenured are nearly impossible to remove from the district. They have no motivation to improve their performance because their job and pay increases have nothing to do with how they perform in the classroom.

Will legislators change this so school boards can hire the most qualified teachers to teach our children? No way! They receive too much money from the unions, they are more interested in retaining their office and pandering to the unions. For more information on how unions influence legislators we direct you to Scott Reeder's Teacher unions' clout keeps tenure strong.


Illinois not identifying weak teachers well enough: feds
August 17, 2006
BY KATE N. GROSSMAN Education Reporter

Most states, including Illinois, don't do a good job of highlighting concentrations of the weakest teachers in the neediest schools and aren't doing enough to direct highly qualified teachers to those schools, federal education officials said Wednesday.

Each state gave the feds plans for ensuring a "highly qualified teacher" for every student by next June and, for the first time, "teacher equity plans" to ensure that poor and minority students don't get an unfair share of unqualified and inexperienced teachers.

These are elements of the 2002 No Child Left Behind law.

Federal officials said most states put forth a good faith effort but "the message we want to send to states is that the work is not done," said Rene Islas, chief of staff in the office of elementary and secondary education.

Just nine states produced good data and plans. Four missed the boat completely. Another 39 partly met federal requirements, including Illinois. All but nine must resubmit plans by Sept. 29 or face intense scrutiny, and, eventually, potential loss of federal funds. Plans were reviewed by 31 experts.

The feds cited Illinois for failing to document courses not taught by qualified teachers. Illinois also failed to identify schools with significant numbers of teachers who were not highly qualified, except in Chicago.

High marks for data system



Illinois also failed to specify when its professional development programs helped teachers in general versus helping teachers who lack the credentials to rank as highly qualified, the evaluators said.

But the feds noted a new data collection system in the works that will remedy many of these problems. It also said Illinois' plans to help direct highly qualified teachers to needy schools had "sufficient input and research involved to expect some success."

Elements include a "Grow Your Own Teacher" program, which supports residents and parents in becoming teachers in hard-to-staff schools and an "Administrator's Academy" targeted for high-poverty, low-performing schools.

"We are pleased that the U.S. Department of Education has recognized the work we have done so far to accomplish this mandate, and we look forward to working with them as we move closer to achieving the goal of a highly qualified teacher in every classroom," Illinois Board of Education Assistant Supt. Ginger Reynolds said in a statement.

The Education Trust, a Washington-based advocacy group, said most state plans fell short. It chastised the Education Department for failing to gives enough guidance.

"This is a move in the right direction," said Heather Peske, an Education Trust expert on teacher quality. "The department has been way too lax on the teacher-quality front for the last four years. Our hope is that they use this opportunity to take teacher quality seriously. The educational future of poor and minority students depends on it."

kgrossman@suntimes.com

School tax increase again going to voters

The article below describes how the school district is going to the taxpayers yet again for a tax increase. Like a spoiled brat these board members just do not understand the word "NO". 70% of the voters said no to a tax increase in March. In essence, taxpayers told the board "You have enough of our money, now balance the budget!". Note that they have not had a tax rate increase in 39 years. That does not mean that tax dollars to the school district have not increased every year. The district has received more funding every year. The problem is their spending out paces their revenue.

Fiscally responsible pay increases would have avoided the budget shortfall. But the board has continually approved contracts that far outpace the CPI. This is an important distinction that must be considered before supporting a referendum. The tax rates are such that growth, appreciation and CPI increases account for increased tax dollars to the school without increasing the tax rate. Schools receive an increase in tax dollars every year without increases in tax rates. School districts are counting on their failure to properly educate people in the difference between the two so voters will blindly support their referenda.

The following article appeared in the Chicago Tribune.


School tax increase again going to voters

Janice Neumann
Published August 18, 2006

OAK LAWN -- Undeterred by the defeat of their last effort to pass a tax increase, Community High School District 229 officials have decided to resubmit the measure to voters on the November ballot.

The board voted unanimously Wednesday night to ask voters for a 22-cent increase in the education tax fund rate. The hike, which would take effect in the 2006 tax levy and affect taxpayers in 2007, would add about $102 per year to the tax bill on a $200,000 home, according to projections.

With a $2.1 million deficit looming this year, the $2.3 million the increase would add is sorely needed, Assistant Supt. Rick Hendricks said.

"It's been 39 years since the taxpayers approved a tax rate increase in the education fund," Hendricks said. "We understand it's a lot of money, but at the same time, we're trying to do our best to get enough money to cover our deficit."

Nearly 70 percent of district voters turned down a similar referendum question in March, but Hendricks said that doesn't change the need for the funding. The district has kept down costs in all its departments and doubled student registration fees to $300 and technology fees to $75, he said.

Boards should be educated in self-restraint over perks

The following article appeared in the Northwest Herald. Mr. Lyons column speaks for itself, bravo Mr. Lyons.

Kevin Lyons
Boards should be educated in self-restraint over perks

[published on Thu, Aug 17, 2006]
One of the most interesting stories to me in Wednesday's Northwest Herald was Tom Musick's piece about Huntley School District 158's Human Resources Committee, which is taking a look at administrative perks.

They're taking a look into lots of things over there, including a forensic audit, payroll mismanagement, and who hid the chalk, but I'm glad that they also are taking a look at the administrative perks.

Administrators' salaries and benefits are things taxpayers do and should care about. They often are incorrectly blamed for all the ills in education funding because they're easy targets.

The committee recommended cutting vacation days from 20 to 15 for new administrative hires. That's a start. They already get 14 paid holidays and 14 sick days on top of the vacation days.

It took me about 10 years in the private sector to get 20 vacation days. I don't know how many sick days I get, because, knock on wood, it hasn't been an issue. I know from my pay stubs that I have several hundred hours of accumulated sick time that I can enjoy in the afterlife because, unlike a school administrator and like most of the rest of the world, I can't take them with me.

New Superintendent John Burkey didn't squawk too loud and likely is shrewd enough to pick his battles, but he did caution the committee not to cut such perks too deeply so that the district can remain competitive when recruiting new administrators.

"Whether it's right or whether it's wrong, we will be on the low end with 15 days," Burkey said.

Burkey's assessment is on the money. Some districts fork over 25 days with no questions asked.

How many regular people get offered 25 vacation days during a job interview?

You have the right to know what's going on with the tax dollars you've already forked over, and especially when school officials ask you to dig deeper. You have the right to expect the school board members you've elected to be good stewards of your tax dollars and not fret over whether some mid-level school administrator might not take up any desk space if he can't take that cruise in the South Pacific in year one on your dime.

In the private sector, 20 days of vacation isn't an unreasonable offer for a well-experienced high-level manager, as a negotiating point. But in District 158, it's a standing offer to any kid who just walked out of grad school.

So while I'm glad that members of this committee are examining this issue, don't you wonder why school board members across Illinois have allowed this environment where you have to give away the store to entice people to take well-paying jobs that already come with 14 or more paid holidays?

There is no alternative answer other than that if school board members weren't offering lavish job perks across the state, such perks wouldn't make this a competitive issue when looking for new candidates. So knock it off. Use a little self-restraint.

– Kevin Lyons is the news editor for the Northwest Herald. He can be reached at (815) 459-4122 or via e-mail at kelyons@nwherald.com.

ILLINOIS LOOP ANALYSIS OF 2006 ACT TEST RESULTS

The following piece is brought to you by Kevin Killion of the IllinoisLoop.org.

ILLINOIS LOOP ANALYSIS OF 2006 ACT TEST RESULTS

WOW -- Look at what a good PR effort can produce! Here's how the this year's release of ACT scores was headlines this morning:

Tribune: "Illinois ACT Scores Up Across Board"

Sun-Times: "City, State ACT Scores jump, Still Lag"

Daily Herald: "A Tough ACT to Follow / Test Scores Rise Across State ..."

Where the "good" news came from

Yesterday, the ISBE, our state's education bureaucracy, sent out a carefully worded press release selecting specific numbers from the ACT results, which they got to see in advance of the official release. As all good bureaucrats do, the news was spun to highlight the best stories possible.

Here are the key "good" stories that the ISBE managed to extricate from the ACT:

-- Illinois' "composite" score was higher than the previous year,
going from 20.3 to 20.5

-- Illinois' Reading score is 20.6 (which is up from 20.3 the previous year)

Now, the REAL story

But today the results are available to everyone, and the story about Illinois is less impressive than those headlines suggest.

It turns out that the ACT scores are up nationally, not just in Illinois.

The new composite ACT score is 21.1, up from 20.9, an "increase" of 0.2. So, Illinois' "increase" by the same 0.2 (from 20.3 to 20.5) turns out to be merely keeping pace with the national score!

So, can Illinois at least claim that it's improving along with the rest of the nation?

Well, we'd like to think that the whole country is improving. But we have to wonder: has the country improved, or has the test gotten a little easier? A rising tide raises all boats. If you see boats going up, that tells you more about the tide than about boats.


So, I looked at results for the 50 states plus the District of Columbia. It turns out that 45 -- 45!-- of them had ACT composite scores that were either improved (37) or unchanged (8). Only 6 states had drops!

Wow -- that means that just about EVERY state had a headline to crow about!
What about specific tests?

Illinois educrats will (no doubt) be cheering about results in each of the areas of the ACT. Illinois scores are up in English, Math and Reading. Only in Science were results flat.

But again, this "rising tide" MUST be compared to the national changes:

Composite English Math Reading Science
National +0.2 +0.2 +0.1 +0.1 0
Illinois +0.2 +0.3 +0.1 +0.3 0

The modest Illinois "math" improvement turns out to be the same as the national change.

Ah, but what about those English and Reading scores, that ARE better than the national changes?

For that, we really need to look at longer trends.

In Reading, the Illinois "improvement" this year (+0.3) is largely a recovery from a drop (-0.2) the year before. The English score is a more consistent increase. Here's the trend:

--Reading-- --English--
Rpt year Ill Natl Ill Natl
2002 20.3 21.1 19.4 20.2
2003 20.4 21.2 19.6 20.3
2004 20.5 21.3 19.7 20.4
2005 20.3 21.3 19.9 20.4
2006 20.6 21.4 20.2 20.6

So, the trends ARE up, and Illinois is at its best score in the five-year series. But once again, notice the "tide" effect: the national scores are up as well.

Finding Good News

The ACT results are a playground for eager public relations people looking for "good" news to crow about. With four subject areas plus a composite score, and then a "rising tide" of scores nationally in the ACT, wow, just about ANY STATE can find something good to announce!

I explored this a little further ...

As reported early only 6 states had declines in their composite scores, so everyone else gets to announce "Overall gains" or at least "Keeping pace".

When we break it out by subject, the spinnable good news (largely thanks the to national score increases). We find:

States that get to announce
Subject "improvements" or "keeping pace"
--------- --------------------------------
Composite 45
English 43
Math 46
Reading 44
Science 41


In another way of looking at the data, I found that 44 states would be able to announce "increases" in one or more of the test results! Only TWO states (Alaska and Rhode Island) were unable to announce even a "keeping pace" in one of the results.


Finding the Pony in the Bad News: The Woebegone Effect

A good PR effort doesn't stop even when it's hard to find the good news.

I wondered about that in looking at the results for our neighbors in Indiana. Poor Indiana! Down in English (despite national increases), flat in Reading and in the Composite (despite national increases), and math and science track at the national rate. Yikes, what can the Hoosier educrats crow about?

Well, I searched, and found that Indianapolis did indeed pull a rabbit from an empty-looking hat:

"Indiana ACT Scores Top National Average for 16th Year"
(See their whole PR release at http://www.doe.state.in.us/reed/newsr/2006/08-August/ACT081606.html)

Yup, when all else fails, shout, "We're better than average!"

So, who IS better than average in the ACT? I found that Lake Woebegone is thriving at the ACT! We have 32 states that have composites better than the national average. Moreover, 36 states get to claim they are at the national average or better in Reading!


FOR ALL THE DETAILS

I have included all of the details behind these conclusions on an Excel workbook that is available for download on the Illinois Loop website: IllinoisLoop.org.

Kevin Killion

Private students have public options - They can officially take part in Geneva schools’ activities

The following story appeared in the Daily Herald. Gee how nice of the "public" (government) school to let district children use the school facilities. Parents who homeschool or send their children to private schools DO pay property taxes, essentially paying tuition twice. Private schooled children are a bonus to government schools that receive taxes without the expense of these students. The policy below should not even have to exist. Parents should be able to use the schools as they see fit. School districts should not be regulating how property tax-paying parents use these schools.

Private students have public options
They can officially take part in Geneva schools’ activities

By Gala M. Pierce
Daily Herald Staff Writer
Posted Tuesday, August 15, 2006



What has been practice in Geneva’s public schools turned into policy Monday.

Geneva school board members unanimously adopted a policy that would allow district students who are home-schooled or in private schools to enroll in any curricular, co-curricular or extracurricular activity in District 304.

A committee of staff members will draft guidelines that will accompany the policy in the next couple of months, Superintendent Kent Mutchler said.

“This is really an effort to come closer to compliance with state legislation,” school board President Dean Kilburg said.

It’s a growing trend, school board member Timothy Moran said.

“I think this policy gives a great deal of enlightenment to parents who might otherwise not know what this district is willing to do for those students,” Moran said.

Jane Gazdziak, assistant superintendent for curriculum, said the district already has allowed students to enroll in its programs and most of her requests relate to band activities.

Families often turn down the invitation, though, when they realize they have to provide transportation.

The policy will accommodate private students only if there’s space available and if they pay any relevant participation, tuition or materials fees. If a waiting list exists, students enrolled full time in the school will be given first priority.

It’s possible that on Geneva High School varsity teams for which students try out, such as basketball, that a private student might win a spot on the team and not a student at the high school, Kilburg said. However, the athletic director will give input on the guidelines.

gpierce@dailyherald.com

The Education Intelligence Agency

I just want to remind people of a great resource the Education Intelligence Agency.
Below is the partial posting for the Communique for August 14, 2006 ,to view the full Communique visit the the Education Intelligence Agency website.
The full Communique is a must read for all taxpayers (that is everyone) and parents.

The Story Thus Far. I realize not all of you travel over to Intercepts during the week for the latest, so allow me to quickly recap.

Since last week's communiqué revealed the contents of AFT's communications audit and a number of audio files of interviews with AFT staffers, there has been widespread action and inaction – depending on where you sit and who you are. Inside AFT headquarters, there has been a lot of activity, not only as a response to EIA's story, but as a response to the recommendations of the audit itself. Personnel changes have been made, which EIA will report once they are confirmed.

Outside of headquarters, however, AFT has been silent. Not a single official or semi-official word has been uttered publicly. AFT's web sites and listservs merrily pretend everything's normal, which is either an indication that union officers hope the whole thing will dry up on its own, or they aren't yet primed to release a response. The media, for their part, don't seem to quite know what to do with it. If I remember correctly, the Kamber report didn't get a whole lot of mainstream press in 1997, either. The education blogosphere has been quicker, but still tentative.

Meanwhile, CleverSpin tried to cover all the bases by claiming it had notified the FBI and "state and federal law enforcement officials," while at the same time demanding, under threat of legal action, that EIA destroy the evidence (the audio files) those officials would undoubtedly want to see. Happily, EIA was able to quickly retain top-notch legal representation to attend to any harassment on that front.

Rumors, witch hunts and conspiracy theories are running rampant, all for naught, since AFT officials already know how I obtained these materials – because I told them, one hour before releasing the report last Monday.

Where it goes next, nobody knows, but EIA is ready for anything.

Mounting school fees taking toll on Southland parents

The following article appeared on the Students First website and in the Daily Southtown newspaper. When will we finally stand up and just say
no? How long are we going to put up with this? School districts are walking all over us. The richer they become the more powerful they become. What kind of future are we leaving our children and our neighbors children? Do not think that passing a referendum is the solution, the same tactics and threats will continue as our districts rate of spending outpaces revenue. Fee increases and referenda will not cease. They won't stop; they're already pressuring legislators into income tax increases. Once passed, the spending will increase and referendum cycle will continue. Think it won't happen? History has proven it time and time again. What drives a person to pay 2,500 dollars to 10,000 dollars in property taxes for schools and accept without resistance registration fees, books fees, etc?

Mounting school fees taking toll on Southland parents

8/14/2006

By Angela Caputo
Daily Southtown

Students at Oak Lawn Community High School grabbed their books, maps of the school and new identification cards at registration.

But their parents were left to do the heavy lifting - picking up the tab for school fees, which essentially doubled this year.

"Now I've got to figure out a way to pay for it," Colleen Lesko said after getting the $1,568 bill for her three teens to attend school.

Even with a two-income household - she drives a school bus and her husband is a mechanic - they don't exactly have that kind of cash lying around.

Lesko's bill included $300 registration fees and $75 technology fees for each student plus between $15 and $25 per class that require workbooks and other class materials.

Last year students were charged $150 to register and a $50 technology fee.

The Leskoes may divert some money from a home equity loan they recently took out to rebuild their garage to cover the fees, which are at least $100 per student more than in neighboring districts.

The family is bracing for even more back-to-school expenses: Daughter Amanda Eversole, 16, is in theater productions, on the color guard squad, the forensics team and in the choir, all of which have extra expenses.

And her sons Ken, 15, and Josh, 14, are always needing new athletic gear and school supplies, which add up quickly.

"(With each activity) it's $20 here and more money there. It never stops," Lesko said.

The higher fees are expected to give the district a $420,000 boost, which will help trim the deficit to $2.1 million this year.

The school board is expected to vote Wednesday on whether to ask voters in November to approve a tax rate increase.

The proposal likely will mirror a referendum question that taxpayers overwhelmingly rejected last spring. That measure asked voters to pay, on average, an additional $102 a year for a $200,000 home.

If the referendum were to pass, it would bring in an additional $2.3 million to offset the district's annual deficit.

"Next time not only will fees be impacted but we're going to see some major cuts," Supt. Jim Briscoe said.

"Everything would be considered."

Teachers, extra-curricular activities and the number of courses offered could be affected.

Maureen McLaughlin said she's not thrilled with the $990 bill to register her two daughters, Emily and Cathleen Litz.

But she prefers it to a property tax increase.

"I'll pay the fees," she said. "Other people shouldn't have to pay for them to go to school."

Even with some cutbacks, McLaughlin isn't worried her daughters, who are honor-roll students, will meet her ultimate expectation of going on to college.

"You can't have everything you want," she said. "If you have to cut stuff, you have to cut stuff."

Kate O'Brien has a hard time saying "no" when it comes to making sure her three teens have more than just the school basics.

Even if it means running a tab on her credit card, she said.

After dropping nearly $1,500 on registration fees this week, O'Brien bought three yearbooks, two sets of school pictures and gym clothes for her 17-year-old daughter Claire, and sons Conor, 16, and Christopher, 14.

She also joined the booster club and the PTA, which brought her bill to $1,607.

O'Brien admits she could have cut corners in the registration line or told her kids "no" to joining some extra-curricular activities.

"But that's the kind of stuff you want to do for your kids," she said.

If the referendum question makes it on the November ballot, O'Brien, who is a teacher, said she'll support it. But like most Oak Lawn residents, she isn't excited about it.

In light of the new fees, Lesko said she's tapped out already and has had enough.

"Give us all a break," she said. "Granted they're getting an education, but do we have to go poor for it?"

Fees commisery loves company

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Daily Herald. We say don't pay those fees see article on our CRAFT front page. .

How do we resolve this problem? Get involved. Go to the school board meetings with your friends and neighbors and tell the board to stop charging fees. You and your friends and neighbors need to write the school board and letters to the editor and tell them to stop charging fees. Do not re-elect the current board, stop voting for incumbents or run yourself. Stop re-electing legislators all across Illinois who pander to school boards, administrators, service unions and teachers' unions. In McHenry County both Jack Franks and Pam Althoff except union and teacher union dollars. Do not re-elect them. More often than not they support legislation that hurts children and taxpayers and both have proposed legislation that favors school employees and hurts taxpayers and students.

Fees commisery (sic) loves company

In response to Sandy Karmen Wisiniewski’s letter (Fence Post, Aug. 7), don’t feel too badly. I’ve been paying school fees for five children for eight years. We moved to Illinois nine years ago this September, and every year I still can not get over the fact that I have to pay to send my children to public schools. What are my taxes for? How are the school districts allowed to get away with this?

It’s only gotten worse as the years have gone by. Fees have steadily increased and now the K-8 district charges a late fee if we don’t have the fees in by a certain date. The high school district is no better.

The base fee is $127 with an added $10 “technology fee”; and the driver’s ed fee went up $100 from what I paid in the past, and is also included in the school fee at the beginning of the year. The high school also wants a signed statement that if books are lost, they will be paid for in full, along with a $10 “processing fee” for each lost book. If any fees are not paid by the time of graduation, the diploma will be withheld.

Then, of course, there are also lab and activity fees tacked on. The fee for my two high school students was over $800 this year. That’s one month’s grocery money for us. I had to use a payment plan.

I can honestly say we do not live an extravagant lifestyle. Until recently, we were only a one-car family and even the second car we recently purchased is 16 years old.

Do Illinoisans realize other states do not charge yearly registration fees for public schools? We moved from upstate New York and there were never any fees.

It also seems that no one can give a straight answer on what all this money from fees is actually going for. I have heard things like “it’s for testing,” and “it’s for books.” Again, then what are my taxes for? Thanks for allowing me to sound off.

Gina Rehberg

Hainesville

Illinois lowers required score on a key exam for teachers

The following story appeared in the Chicago Tribune.
If this is not a solid reason for Education reform, we do not know what is. Our children continue to suffer under the draconian system controlled by the unions and the legislators and boards that pander to their every whine. The understanding of history is crucial so that history does not repeat itself.


Illinois lowers required score on a key exam for teachers
History/social science exam was too tough, officials contend

By Stephanie Banchero
Tribune staff reporter
Published August 11, 2006

The Illinois State Board of Education voted Thursday to lower the passing score on the social science/history test that teachers must pass before receiving their licenses, saying that too many prospective teachers were failing the exam.

The board voted unanimously to drop the bar from 64 to 57, making it significantly easier for teacher candidates to pass. A score of 57 means the test taker answered 57 of 100 questions correctly, state officials said.

Under the old bar, only 56 percent of test takers would have passed the most recent social science/history exam, administered in June. Using the new lower standard, 82 percent will now pass.

The social science/history exam is taken by college students who hope to teach middle school or high school history.

"There were concerns about the test and the fact that the scores have been continually low," said Linda Jamali, who oversees teacher certification for the state board. "We have a process in place where we look at the test itself and ensure that everything is OK, that there is no bias. The group looked at all the evidence and decided to lower the score."

The board also voted to set at 30 the number of questions testees must get correct (out of 100) to pass a newly created special education licensing exam.

The votes come about seven years after state officials launched an aggressive effort to ratchet up requirements for becoming a classroom teacher.

In the late 1990s, Illinois had one of the most lax teacher certification systems in the nation. Prospective teachers had to graduate from an accredited teaching program and pass relatively simple basic skills and subject matter tests to get a license. They could renew it simply by paying an annual $4 fee.

But the previous board of education and state lawmakers began cranking up the demands. In 2000, the board scrapped the much-maligned 8th-grade-level basic skills test, replacing it with a college-sophomore-level licensing exam.

Now, prospective Illinois teachers must pass three tests before they can obtain a license. College students who want to enroll in an Illinois teacher college must pass the basic skills test first. They must then pass a specific subject matter test before they can work as a student teacher.

Finally, the state board has added a third exam, which measures knowledge of teaching methods.

Jeff Mays, president of the Illinois Business RoundTable, said the Thursday votes by the state board roll back the progress Illinois has made. "We are backsliding," said Mays, whose group has been active in teacher reform and student testing efforts. "Every survey you see, in terms of impacting kids' learning, the teacher is the most important factor. We should not be lowering the scores. We should be bumping them up and then putting the resources behind making sure folks can meet the higher standard."

State officials said the history test has long been one of the most troublesome for prospective teachers. "We've had a lot of calls on this and letters from people who simply cannot pass it," said Lori Gibler, a principal consultant with the state board.

Board member Ed Geppert, the former chief of staff for the Illinois Federation of Teachers, said the test is difficult for potential teachers because it's "extremely broad" and covers a range of subjects. "I think it would be very difficult to prepare someone academically for this exam," he said.

But board member David Fields suggested that the state's colleges of education might bear some of the fault. He suggested that colleges of education should be held to the same standard that elementary and high schools are held to under federal No Child Left Behind reforms.

"I would think that they would want to see a higher percentage of their students passing," he said.

----------

sbanchero@tribune.com

Monkey business afoot in D-300 - Monkey Business afoot at the Northwest Herald

The following piece appeared in the Northwest Herald. Allison Smith's bias continues to be all too apparent in her reporting. What a deal D - 300 has a public relations person working for the local paper without having to pay her one dime. Equally disgusting is that D - 300 and Crates think that depriving hard earned dollars from D -300 residents based on half-truths, shoddy accounting and extremely poor projections to pass the referenda is something to joke about.


Monkey business afoot in D-300

[published on Fri, Aug 11, 2006]
CARPENTERSVILLE – The first monkey memento appeared in Cheryl Crates' office a month after the School District 300 referendums passed this spring.

Someone had nailed above her computer a framed pair of drawings of Curious George, who poured dark liquid into a funnel, then keeled over as if dead. Below the drawings was a playful message typed by a prankster.

The picture was the first of several monkey items to appear unexpectedly in her Carpentersville office. The insiders' joke had grown legs – long, hairy ones.

To view the rest of this piece of useless reporting go to the Northwest Herald.

To view exceptional reporting by a journalist on education issues visit Scott Reeder's website with his series that appeared in the Small Newspaper Group newspapers.

Two retired school officials take over D-36 superintendent duties

The article below appeared in the Northwest Herald.

Mr. Dodds retired in 2004. In his first year of retirement his pension was at least $116,036.62. This amount is paid annually. After five years this amount will increase 3% per year. By his ninth year of retirement he will have collected over 1 million dollars in primarily taxpayer funded dollars. While collecting this retirement of $116,036.62 in retirement he is allowed to continue to work without a decrease in this pension. District 36 is paying him 400 dollars a day, it is also likely that his old District 15 is paying his medical insurance until he reaches medicare age. Likewise Ms. Fleshman is earning $75,992.25 in retirement while collecting 400 dollars a day from District 36. The TRS system as it is set up allows able-bodied people to retire at 55 with full pensions many well over 100,000 dollars a year and still allows them to work part-time. Illinois taxpayers could be saved millions of dollars annually if teachers retired at 65 like social security recipients. We would also save millions of dollars annually if teachers and administrators were not allowed to work and also collect a full pension.

Two retired school officials take over D-36 superintendent duties
Publication Northwest Herald

WONDER LAKE - Two retired administrators are leading Harrison Elementary School District 36, which paid former Superintendent Charles Barber $60,000 last month as part of a resignation agreement.

JoAnne Fleshman, Barber's predecessor, and William Dodds, who retired as McHenry District 15's superintendent in 2004, began sharing superintendent responsibilities July 5, with only one working each day, board President Linda Amettis said.

The district is paying them a $400 daily stipend, or a combined $96,000 for the academic year, Amettis said. State law allows a retired administrator to work up to 120 days a year; the district does not provide medical benefits.

That cost is less than the $113,667.79, including retirement contributions, that the district paid Barber last year. Barber, who completed the second year of a five-year contract, offered his letter of resignation and signed the deal May 23. He worked through June 30.

Under the agreement, the district provided a recommendation letter that characterizes Barber as a "people person" who improved the district's deficit budget, facility needs, and staff concerns.

"I think it just wasn't a good fit," school board Vice President Karen Parks said. "Hopefully, there's no hard feelings on either side."

Amettis added that Barber's personal life changed recently but declined to offer further details.

Attempts to reach Barber for comment this week were not successful. He said in his resignation letter that he was proud of the district's progress over the past two years, but "I feel the need to serve education in another role for the rest of my career."

A longtime district resident, Bob Anderson, said he was disappointed to see that the district had paid Barber such a large sum.

"I'm very disappointed that the board would give him $60,000 to get rid of him," said Anderson, who drove a district school bus for 35 years.

"But I'm not shocked," Anderson said. "I'm sure the taxpayers won't be happy to see that."

Meanwhile, Fleshman and her husband, John, a retired principal, are conducting the search for a permanent replacement. The board will review applications and conduct several interviews after the Fleshmans advertise the position and create a list of qualifications with public input.

The couple, who conducted a similar search for Grass Lake School District 36 in Antiochin 2004-05, are donating the time for the search. The district will reimburse their travel and phone expenses.

"We [will] facilitate by talking with different groups of people," JoAnne Fleshman said. "We're going to set up a meeting with the community and teachers where we talk about the different roles and characteristics."

By JILLIAN COMPTON

jcompton@nwherald.com

Gas tax approved

The following article appeared in the Northwest Herald. Bravo to the three Aldermen who did not raise the gas tax. Shame on those who did vote for the tax increase. Remember Harvard you will have another tax increase to face in November or next spring. District 50 will push hard to pass the referendum. This one you will get a chance to vote on. The more times a referendum is pushed on the public the more likely it is to pass. This is why you must get to the polls and vote no when and if the school referendum is on the ballot.

One last question. Will nepotism play a part in the hiring of the new position now created because of this tax increase?

Gas tax approved

[published on Wed, Aug 9, 2006]
By JENN WIANT
jwiant@nwherald.com

HARVARD – "Boos" rang out from the audience Tuesday when the Harvard City Council passed a 5 percent natural-gas tax in a 5-3 vote.

"We're very, very disappointed," said Ruth McCarthy, representing a group of about 20 older Harvard residents who spoke against the tax at the City Council meeting. "I think if they would have even gone down to 1 percent or 2 percent, we could have lived with that, but to throw in that 5 percent is terrible."

The tax will increase Harvard residents' natural-gas bills by 5 percent beginning in two to three months, Harvard Mayor Jay Nolan said after Tuesday's City Council meeting.

He said the city would not receive any of the tax's expected annual revenues of $177,600 for four or five months.

Money from the tax will be used to hire a code enforcement officer, pay for more police gang enforcement, buy a piece of land adjoining Milky Way Park, and pay for tree planting and city beautification.

Aldermen Brian Leyden, Phil Ulmer and Joel Berg voted against the tax. Berg said he cast his "no" vote "with great reluctance," saying that the community likely would be "worse off" without the tax.

But he put aside his own opinion to represent the strong opposition of many of his constituents.
"I haven't gotten this many phone calls in the six years I've been on the City Council for any single issue," Berg said.

Alderman Tom Hay voted for the tax, which he said was the only way the city could raise money to pay for things that residents complained about, such as code enforcement.

"If we had gotten home rule ... we wouldn't be imposing a gas tax because under home rule, there would have been numerous other ways in which we could have generated the revenue," Hay said.

Harvard residents had voted against home rule in March with 286 in favor and 798 against.

P.S. Check out the article on Cal Skinner's Blog.

D -158 did the right thing and appointed a fiscally responsible candidate for the vacant school board position.

Wondering about those Dist. 128 fees - Don't pay your fees.

The following letter to the editor appeared in the Daily Herald.

Letters to the Editor
Wondering about those Dist. 128 fees
I’m curious to know if you Libertyville District 128 parents believe we shouldn’t be paying the yearly fees and extra charges the schools are charging us. This year, I wrote two checks for $160 for both of my high school kids totaling a whopping $320.

We were also charged for fees we did not pay during the school year. They included keyboarding ($100 per child), Spanish ($25 per child), and miscellaneous classes were an additional $30 charge.

Article 10 of the Illinois Constitution states that the public schools are free. The law states that public schools’ budgets are supposed to come from our taxes. So what happened here?

I don’t know about you, but I look at my tax bill, scratch my head and think, aren’t we paying enough in taxes? Since when does the school, which is part of the government, not have to obey laws? Where is that money that we’re sending in going anyway?

I’d be interested in your feedback. Please e-mail me at sandychuck@anet.com.

Sandy Kamen Wisniewski
Libertyville

Jim's don't pay fees Letter to the Editor.

August is here. According to the school districts it is time to pay those school fees, I say do not pay. The school districts are hoping you forget that you have already paid for your child's schooling with huge property taxes and they are also hoping you forget you have another huge property tax bill due in September.

School districts routinely punish voters who turn down their demands for more money by forcing them to pay fees. Some like Fox River Grove have the gall to charge you fees even though they passed referenda. To impose fees is not only disgraceful, but flatly unconstitutional.

Lets have a look at Article X of the Illinois Constitution (www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con10.htm). Pay attention, school
boards. Right there in black and white "Education in public schools through the secondary level shall be free." Not "free if you're poor", just plain, honest-to-goodness "free". What part of "free" do school boards not understand? Amazingly, school-wide registration fees at public schools are common.

Since our schools have no respect for the rule of law, perhaps its time for parents to drive the issue home. Across the state,
parents should simply refuse to pay any fees not used for their children's extracurricular activities. Tear up your checks in
front of them for dramatic effect. If questioned, simply indicate that you're complying with the terms of the Illinois Constitution. The ISBE has already made it clear that schools cannot punish parents who do not pay. (Ask District 36 Superintendent Charles Barber if you have any doubts)

A failed referendum means "Don't take any more of our money". It doesn't mean "Please find devious, unconstitutional ways to take the same money we denied you in the referendum and it does not mean cut programs either." This practice must stop.