www.suffieldteachers.org
*Statement on DeVos Attack*
STATEMENT FROM CEA PRESIDENT SHEILA COHEN ON DEVOS’S ATTACK ON
EAST HARTFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Betsy DeVos’s attack on East Hartford Public Schools is alarming, demoralizing, and unwarranted—but not unexpected from a woman who is totally unqualified and unfit to serve as U.S. Secretary of Education, representing the nation’s public education system.
In an attempt to undermine public education in our country and push her privatization policies, she continues to insult the millions of professional educators who dedicate their lives to teaching and empowering students.
We know that East Hartford teachers are passionate professionals who have dedicated their lives to helping their students succeed, and we will not stand for baseless attacks against them or any other educators providing students with the support, attention, and instruction they need to succeed.
STATEMENT FROM EAST HARTFORD TEACHER AND EAST HARTFORD EDUCATION ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT ANNIE IRVINE
My colleagues are some of the most dedicated and hardest-working teachers you will ever meet. It is demoralizing for our teachers and our community to be subjected to this undeserved attack—especially by someone with no experience in public education who wants to privatize our schools and strip $10.6 billion in funding from public education, taking precious resources from students who need them most.
Rather than criticize what she doesn’t know, DeVos should focus her attention on providing our schools with the education funding so desperately needed to ensure our teachers have the resources they need to help our students succeed. DeVos represents the opposite of what we know leads to student success: well-resourced public schools and community support services, such as health care and after-school programs, that address the needs of the whole child.
We invite DeVos to visit an East Hartford classroom so she can witness for herself the exceptional work of our teachers and students.
EAST HARTFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Betsy DeVos’s attack on East Hartford Public Schools is alarming, demoralizing, and unwarranted—but not unexpected from a woman who is totally unqualified and unfit to serve as U.S. Secretary of Education, representing the nation’s public education system.
In an attempt to undermine public education in our country and push her privatization policies, she continues to insult the millions of professional educators who dedicate their lives to teaching and empowering students.
We know that East Hartford teachers are passionate professionals who have dedicated their lives to helping their students succeed, and we will not stand for baseless attacks against them or any other educators providing students with the support, attention, and instruction they need to succeed.
STATEMENT FROM EAST HARTFORD TEACHER AND EAST HARTFORD EDUCATION ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT ANNIE IRVINE
My colleagues are some of the most dedicated and hardest-working teachers you will ever meet. It is demoralizing for our teachers and our community to be subjected to this undeserved attack—especially by someone with no experience in public education who wants to privatize our schools and strip $10.6 billion in funding from public education, taking precious resources from students who need them most.
Rather than criticize what she doesn’t know, DeVos should focus her attention on providing our schools with the education funding so desperately needed to ensure our teachers have the resources they need to help our students succeed. DeVos represents the opposite of what we know leads to student success: well-resourced public schools and community support services, such as health care and after-school programs, that address the needs of the whole child.
We invite DeVos to visit an East Hartford classroom so she can witness for herself the exceptional work of our teachers and students.
*Keep The Promise: Protect Pensions*
Teachers of Suffield
CEA emailed a letter to you on Friday, April 7, explaining how the Governor and legislators are considering shifting part of the costs of teacher pension contributions from the state to cities and towns. This plan would increase local property taxes and harm local school budgets, leading to layoffs, larger class sizes, and fewer resources.
Here’s how it would impact Suffield. The Governor and legislators are proposing to shift $1,860,799 of teacher pension costs to Suffield taxpayers. That equates to roughly 10.5 percent of the total salary account for all certified educators in Suffield. Consider for a moment that annual teacher salary raises are nowhere near 10.5 percent. Suffield would be forced to increase property taxes by an additional 1.36 mills, lay off employees, cut education funding and services, or some combination of these in order to pay the additional costs.
The total salary account for all certified educators in Suffield includes central office personnel, building level administrators and teachers. The 10.5 percent applies to everyone. This is how it will impact you and all certified employees. Determine your salary and multiply by 10.5 percent. This essentially equates to the amount of money Suffield would be required to pay the State Teachers’ Retirement Board. As an employee of Suffield the cost to employ you is your salary and what the board pays for your health insurance and now the equivalent of an additional 10.5 percent of your salary to cover pension costs.
Shifting ANY teacher retirement costs from the State to the towns would negatively impact the staff and resources available for our students as well as teacher salaries, benefits and working conditions for years to come.
Contact your state legislators and tell them not to support any plan that shifts teacher pension costs onto cities and towns. http://www.cea.org/calltoaction/
Mark Janick
Suffield Education Association President
Contact your State legislators and tell them to vote NO on any scheme that shifts teacher pension costs onto cities and towns.
Keep The Promise
PROTECT PENSIONS
CEA emailed a letter to you on Friday, April 7, explaining how the Governor and legislators are considering shifting part of the costs of teacher pension contributions from the state to cities and towns. This plan would increase local property taxes and harm local school budgets, leading to layoffs, larger class sizes, and fewer resources.
Here’s how it would impact Suffield. The Governor and legislators are proposing to shift $1,860,799 of teacher pension costs to Suffield taxpayers. That equates to roughly 10.5 percent of the total salary account for all certified educators in Suffield. Consider for a moment that annual teacher salary raises are nowhere near 10.5 percent. Suffield would be forced to increase property taxes by an additional 1.36 mills, lay off employees, cut education funding and services, or some combination of these in order to pay the additional costs.
The total salary account for all certified educators in Suffield includes central office personnel, building level administrators and teachers. The 10.5 percent applies to everyone. This is how it will impact you and all certified employees. Determine your salary and multiply by 10.5 percent. This essentially equates to the amount of money Suffield would be required to pay the State Teachers’ Retirement Board. As an employee of Suffield the cost to employ you is your salary and what the board pays for your health insurance and now the equivalent of an additional 10.5 percent of your salary to cover pension costs.
Shifting ANY teacher retirement costs from the State to the towns would negatively impact the staff and resources available for our students as well as teacher salaries, benefits and working conditions for years to come.
Contact your state legislators and tell them not to support any plan that shifts teacher pension costs onto cities and towns. http://www.cea.org/calltoaction/
Mark Janick
Suffield Education Association President
Contact your State legislators and tell them to vote NO on any scheme that shifts teacher pension costs onto cities and towns.
Keep The Promise
PROTECT PENSIONS
*PEAC's Actions*
The Performance Evaluation Advisory Council (PEAC) took a giant step forward in addressing teachers’ concerns regarding the use of state mastery exam results in teacher evaluations. PEAC defined the clear use and purpose of the state mastery exam, agreeing that it should not be used to evaluate teachers.
PEAC unanimously agreed to recommend new guidelines to the State Board of Education that specifically define how mastery test scores can and cannot be used. The new guidelines say: “The state mastery test results can be used to inform goal setting and professional learning for appropriate educators, but cannot be used as a measure of goal attainment or in the calculation of the summative rating for an educator.” Click here to read the new guidelines or visit blogcea.org.
The recommendation now goes before the State Board of Education. We are hopeful that the SBOE will adopt PEAC’s recommendation at its April 5 meeting so that we can continue to move forward to improve the educational opportunities for all public school students in Connecticut.
PEAC unanimously agreed to recommend new guidelines to the State Board of Education that specifically define how mastery test scores can and cannot be used. The new guidelines say: “The state mastery test results can be used to inform goal setting and professional learning for appropriate educators, but cannot be used as a measure of goal attainment or in the calculation of the summative rating for an educator.” Click here to read the new guidelines or visit blogcea.org.
The recommendation now goes before the State Board of Education. We are hopeful that the SBOE will adopt PEAC’s recommendation at its April 5 meeting so that we can continue to move forward to improve the educational opportunities for all public school students in Connecticut.
*STATEMENT FROM CEA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MARK WAXENBERG ON THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED EDUCATION BUDGET*
The governor's proposed education budget threatens the quality of all our local public schools by dividing schools, parents, and communities into clear winners and losers. That's unfair to all of us, but especially our children. All of our children deserve to be winners and have the resources to achieve.
The state currently underfunds public education by more than $700 million per year. The state needs to focus on a sustainable revenue stream that allows Connecticut to fulfill its constitutional obligation to fully fund public education to provide all children with the funding and resources they need to achieve.
Educators strive every day to do more with less. They make their classrooms places that welcome all students. They help students reach their full potential and contribute to our society and economy. We expect legislators and policymakers to understand this vision and invest in public education so that all students can succeed.
We urge legislators in the strongest way to protect students and to invest in local public schools in every single community.
CEA looks forward to working with all legislators who are willing to renew their commitment to public education and fulfill the promise of an American democracy and education system that stand up for all students.
The state currently underfunds public education by more than $700 million per year. The state needs to focus on a sustainable revenue stream that allows Connecticut to fulfill its constitutional obligation to fully fund public education to provide all children with the funding and resources they need to achieve.
Educators strive every day to do more with less. They make their classrooms places that welcome all students. They help students reach their full potential and contribute to our society and economy. We expect legislators and policymakers to understand this vision and invest in public education so that all students can succeed.
We urge legislators in the strongest way to protect students and to invest in local public schools in every single community.
CEA looks forward to working with all legislators who are willing to renew their commitment to public education and fulfill the promise of an American democracy and education system that stand up for all students.
*CT Ed Watch*
To get the latest update on Connecticut's source for public education news, please click on the link below.
CT Ed Watch
CT Ed Watch
*New Teacher Preparation Program Lacks Quality; Will Hurt Students*
State must reject the Relay alternate route to certification program because it will decrease requirements and diminish quality allowing ineffective teachers in the classroom.
"Relay teachers do not receive the same training other teachers do; instead, they are given a crash course in teaching that focuses on increasing student test scores, not on increasing student skills," said CEA President Sheila Cohen. "There are no do-overs for the students whose classrooms are managed by unprepared, inexperienced teachers who weave their way into the profession through these dubious, subpar teacher training programs."
"Connecticut should put funding into strengthening and growing successful state teacher prep programs, not lowering teacher quality," said CEA Executive Director Mark Waxenberg. "Children in urban areas need high-quality teachers who complete established and successful teaching programs—not fly-by-night, unproven programs that put poorly prepared teachers in front of our neediest students."
Teachers are the most important school-based factor in ensuring student achievement. That is why ensuring that new teachers enter the profession with the necessary skills, knowledge, and abilities is a critical function of state policies governing teaching—one that the State Board of Education (BOE) should take seriously.
To read the full article, please click on the following link:
http://www.cea.org/issues/press/2016/oct/31/new-teacher-preparation-program-lacks-high-quality-will-hurt-students.cfm
"Relay teachers do not receive the same training other teachers do; instead, they are given a crash course in teaching that focuses on increasing student test scores, not on increasing student skills," said CEA President Sheila Cohen. "There are no do-overs for the students whose classrooms are managed by unprepared, inexperienced teachers who weave their way into the profession through these dubious, subpar teacher training programs."
"Connecticut should put funding into strengthening and growing successful state teacher prep programs, not lowering teacher quality," said CEA Executive Director Mark Waxenberg. "Children in urban areas need high-quality teachers who complete established and successful teaching programs—not fly-by-night, unproven programs that put poorly prepared teachers in front of our neediest students."
Teachers are the most important school-based factor in ensuring student achievement. That is why ensuring that new teachers enter the profession with the necessary skills, knowledge, and abilities is a critical function of state policies governing teaching—one that the State Board of Education (BOE) should take seriously.
To read the full article, please click on the following link:
http://www.cea.org/issues/press/2016/oct/31/new-teacher-preparation-program-lacks-high-quality-will-hurt-students.cfm
*SBAC Denies Student Basic Civil Rights*
SBAC Denies Students Basic Civil Rights
New survey finds test is critically flawed and puts students in high-poverty districts at a clear disadvantage.
Education is the great equalizer, opening doors of opportunity and success for all students, but a new survey finds those doors are closing on the children in the state's poorest communities.
Research conducted by Abacus Associates for the Connecticut Education Association (CEA) and released to the members of the state Mastery Examination Committee today, gives new weight to growing concerns raised by legislators, educators, parents, and others that SBAC is not only critically flawed but also disproportionately burdensome and unfair to students and teachers in high-poverty districts.
The scientific survey of 600 CEA teachers who teach subjects and grade levels tested by the SBAC assessment—either math or English language arts in grades 3 through 8—found impediments, especially for students in high-poverty districts, that run counter to Connecticut's obligation to provide every student with an equal opportunity to learn and succeed. It also raised concerns regarding the denial of basic civil rights to students who are harmed by inequities caused by the construction and technical administration of the test.
"It is unacceptable to require schools to use the SBAC test for high-stakes purposes, such as labeling a child a failure, because it creates barriers to equal access and school success for students, predominantly minority students in high-poverty schools," said CEA President Sheila Cohen. "This survey adds to the mounting evidence from other states and education experts across the country, highlighting serious concerns and issues with the validity, reliability, and fairness of the SBAC test and the harm it is doing to children."
Cohen added, "Students deserve assessments that are free from bias and are designed to benefit them. A mastery exam is supposed to measure knowledge in a fair, uniform manner, and not discriminate against students on the basis of income or whether they have desktops, laptops, or computer tablets at home."
To read the rest of the article, please click on the link below:
http://www.cea.org/issues/press/2016/oct/19/sbac-denies-students-basic-civil-rights.cfm
New survey finds test is critically flawed and puts students in high-poverty districts at a clear disadvantage.
Education is the great equalizer, opening doors of opportunity and success for all students, but a new survey finds those doors are closing on the children in the state's poorest communities.
Research conducted by Abacus Associates for the Connecticut Education Association (CEA) and released to the members of the state Mastery Examination Committee today, gives new weight to growing concerns raised by legislators, educators, parents, and others that SBAC is not only critically flawed but also disproportionately burdensome and unfair to students and teachers in high-poverty districts.
The scientific survey of 600 CEA teachers who teach subjects and grade levels tested by the SBAC assessment—either math or English language arts in grades 3 through 8—found impediments, especially for students in high-poverty districts, that run counter to Connecticut's obligation to provide every student with an equal opportunity to learn and succeed. It also raised concerns regarding the denial of basic civil rights to students who are harmed by inequities caused by the construction and technical administration of the test.
"It is unacceptable to require schools to use the SBAC test for high-stakes purposes, such as labeling a child a failure, because it creates barriers to equal access and school success for students, predominantly minority students in high-poverty schools," said CEA President Sheila Cohen. "This survey adds to the mounting evidence from other states and education experts across the country, highlighting serious concerns and issues with the validity, reliability, and fairness of the SBAC test and the harm it is doing to children."
Cohen added, "Students deserve assessments that are free from bias and are designed to benefit them. A mastery exam is supposed to measure knowledge in a fair, uniform manner, and not discriminate against students on the basis of income or whether they have desktops, laptops, or computer tablets at home."
To read the rest of the article, please click on the link below:
http://www.cea.org/issues/press/2016/oct/19/sbac-denies-students-basic-civil-rights.cfm
*Team CEF Needs You*
Teachers laced up their running shoes for the Hartford Marathon last Saturday to support a good cause—but they still need your help. Teachers ran on Team CEF to raise money for children and teachers in need and would greatly appreciate donations to the Connecticut Education Foundation (CEF).
CEF is CEA's charitable arm, and helps children and teachers with extraordinary personal hardships as well as students planning teaching careers. (Read more about the foundation here.) This is CEF's third year as an Official Charity of the Eversource Hartford Marathon.
For more information, contact CEA Vice President and CEF President Jeff Leake at jeffl@cea.org.
Every donation is greatly appreciated and goes a long way toward helping students and teachers. CEF prefers donations via check to avoid online fees. You can send a check made out to CEF. Mail it to Jeff Leake, CEA, 21 Oak Street, Suite 500, Hartford, CT 06106. Or you can donate online.
Check out SEA President, Mark Janick, in the video below on donating his time to a worthy cause.
master.m3u8
CEF is CEA's charitable arm, and helps children and teachers with extraordinary personal hardships as well as students planning teaching careers. (Read more about the foundation here.) This is CEF's third year as an Official Charity of the Eversource Hartford Marathon.
For more information, contact CEA Vice President and CEF President Jeff Leake at jeffl@cea.org.
Every donation is greatly appreciated and goes a long way toward helping students and teachers. CEF prefers donations via check to avoid online fees. You can send a check made out to CEF. Mail it to Jeff Leake, CEA, 21 Oak Street, Suite 500, Hartford, CT 06106. Or you can donate online.
Check out SEA President, Mark Janick, in the video below on donating his time to a worthy cause.
master.m3u8
*Teacher / School Hours*
|
Spaulding
8:20 - 3:30 (8:35 - 3:15) |
McAlister
8:20 - 3:30 (8:35 - 3:15) |
SMS
7:25 - 2:35 7:40 - 2:20) |
SHS
7:10 - 2:20 (7:25 - 2:05) |
Teachers are required to come 15 minutes before and after school
*CCJEF Ruiling*
A message from CEA President, Sheila Cohen:
Dear Colleagues,
Today, State Attorney General George Jepsen asked the Connecticut Supreme Court to appeal certain aspects of the broad and overreaching court ruling in the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding v. Rell (CCJEF v. Rell) lawsuit.
The CCJEF ruling found that Connecticut’s education funding system is flawed and recognized the need to do more for students in high-poverty districts and we agree—but it failed to require the state to provide adequate funding for all schools—the heart of the CCJEF v. Rell lawsuit. We are disheartened that the state did not appeal this part of the ruling.
Many of our children, especially minority children and those living in high-poverty districts, are being disproportionately and negatively impacted by the state's flawed funding system. We need to fully-fund education to meet the state constitutional guarantee that all children in Connecticut receive adequate educational opportunities, regardless of their zip code.
The state attorney general made the right decision to appeal the part of the judge’s ruling that imposed mandates on everything from determining how teachers are evaluated to denying education to severely disabled children to requiring new graduation standards. These education policy issues are clearly within the purview of the state legislature and executive branches of government—the democratic process which allows input from all stakeholders—and should not rest in the hands of a single person.
We will continue to work with education stakeholders to improve, rather than devalue, the teaching profession, and secure the resources and opportunities that all students deserve.
Next week you will receive a survey in the mail asking for your opinion on the important issues raised in the CCJEF case, as well as other important issues facing Connecticut teachers. I hope you will take the time to share your comments with us.
We are stronger together.
Dear Colleagues,
Today, State Attorney General George Jepsen asked the Connecticut Supreme Court to appeal certain aspects of the broad and overreaching court ruling in the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding v. Rell (CCJEF v. Rell) lawsuit.
The CCJEF ruling found that Connecticut’s education funding system is flawed and recognized the need to do more for students in high-poverty districts and we agree—but it failed to require the state to provide adequate funding for all schools—the heart of the CCJEF v. Rell lawsuit. We are disheartened that the state did not appeal this part of the ruling.
Many of our children, especially minority children and those living in high-poverty districts, are being disproportionately and negatively impacted by the state's flawed funding system. We need to fully-fund education to meet the state constitutional guarantee that all children in Connecticut receive adequate educational opportunities, regardless of their zip code.
The state attorney general made the right decision to appeal the part of the judge’s ruling that imposed mandates on everything from determining how teachers are evaluated to denying education to severely disabled children to requiring new graduation standards. These education policy issues are clearly within the purview of the state legislature and executive branches of government—the democratic process which allows input from all stakeholders—and should not rest in the hands of a single person.
We will continue to work with education stakeholders to improve, rather than devalue, the teaching profession, and secure the resources and opportunities that all students deserve.
Next week you will receive a survey in the mail asking for your opinion on the important issues raised in the CCJEF case, as well as other important issues facing Connecticut teachers. I hope you will take the time to share your comments with us.
We are stronger together.
*Students and teachers hurt by court RULING...*
Dear Colleagues,
As most of you have heard, the Superior Court issued a ruling in the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding (CCJEF) v. Rell lawsuit, which challenged the constitutionality of the state's education funding system. The 254-page court decision issued on Wednesday recognizes the necessity to do more for students in the greatest need—those attending schools in high-poverty communities—but did nothing to rectify the problem.
The court declined to provide any remedy for the lack of resources and revenue for students in the state's poorest communities, and the decision went well beyond the focus of the funding issue—the essence and heart of the CCJEF litigation.
The court’s ruling imposes one-size-fits-all mandates that erode flexibility and local education control, penalizing the majority of Connecticut’s schools. These mandates fly in the face of the new federal Every Student Succeeds legislation, and are clearly within the purview of the state legislative and executive branches of government responsible for setting education policy in Connecticut.
The state has 180 days to address the mandates, which include:
· Creating new requirements for how teachers are paid, hired, evaluated, promoted, and fired, as well as potentially linking compensation to evaluations;
· Creating a new alternative funding formula to redistribute existing education funds to the poorest schools—in essence robbing funds from some students to provide funds to others;
· Requiring high school students to pass an exit exam in order to receive a high school diploma;
· Requiring elementary school students to pass an exit exam before being promoted from elementary to secondary school; and,
· Restructuring how special education students are evaluated and served by making judgments regarding which disabled students can benefit from education and which cannot, and reducing funding accordingly.
CEA has been a leader on many of these issues, and with your input will further assess how the order impacts Connecticut’s schools so we can continue taking actions necessary to do what is right for our students and our profession.
For the past two legislative sessions, CEA has advocated for a better teacher evaluation system with less bureaucracy, unnecessary busywork and paperwork, and more authentic, reliable and valid multiple-measures of student growth. We will continue to work for the improvement of the teaching profession, not only in the majority of schools where students are performing well, but especially in high-poverty communities where students deserve well-qualified, certified, and experienced teachers and administrators.
Together, we stand ready to work with educational partners to ensure adequate and equitable resources for all students in the state of Connecticut. We will focus on real solutions to economic and social problems that threaten to cripple our state’s education system and hurt our students.
STRONGER TOGETHER!
As most of you have heard, the Superior Court issued a ruling in the Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding (CCJEF) v. Rell lawsuit, which challenged the constitutionality of the state's education funding system. The 254-page court decision issued on Wednesday recognizes the necessity to do more for students in the greatest need—those attending schools in high-poverty communities—but did nothing to rectify the problem.
The court declined to provide any remedy for the lack of resources and revenue for students in the state's poorest communities, and the decision went well beyond the focus of the funding issue—the essence and heart of the CCJEF litigation.
The court’s ruling imposes one-size-fits-all mandates that erode flexibility and local education control, penalizing the majority of Connecticut’s schools. These mandates fly in the face of the new federal Every Student Succeeds legislation, and are clearly within the purview of the state legislative and executive branches of government responsible for setting education policy in Connecticut.
The state has 180 days to address the mandates, which include:
· Creating new requirements for how teachers are paid, hired, evaluated, promoted, and fired, as well as potentially linking compensation to evaluations;
· Creating a new alternative funding formula to redistribute existing education funds to the poorest schools—in essence robbing funds from some students to provide funds to others;
· Requiring high school students to pass an exit exam in order to receive a high school diploma;
· Requiring elementary school students to pass an exit exam before being promoted from elementary to secondary school; and,
· Restructuring how special education students are evaluated and served by making judgments regarding which disabled students can benefit from education and which cannot, and reducing funding accordingly.
CEA has been a leader on many of these issues, and with your input will further assess how the order impacts Connecticut’s schools so we can continue taking actions necessary to do what is right for our students and our profession.
For the past two legislative sessions, CEA has advocated for a better teacher evaluation system with less bureaucracy, unnecessary busywork and paperwork, and more authentic, reliable and valid multiple-measures of student growth. We will continue to work for the improvement of the teaching profession, not only in the majority of schools where students are performing well, but especially in high-poverty communities where students deserve well-qualified, certified, and experienced teachers and administrators.
Together, we stand ready to work with educational partners to ensure adequate and equitable resources for all students in the state of Connecticut. We will focus on real solutions to economic and social problems that threaten to cripple our state’s education system and hurt our students.
STRONGER TOGETHER!
***New Contract 2016 - 2019***
*Educators for Excellence (E4E) Information*
A message from CEA President, Sheila Cohen, regarding Educators for Excellence (E4E):
A corporate, anti-union, anti-public education organization, Educators For Excellence (E4E), has been attempting to make inroads into our school buildings and districts, assuming the cover of “teacher voice” as their hook into the classrooms and into the faculty rooms within our school buildings.
This group has been funded to go into schools (with food and with happy hour drink coupons) promising teacher voice, but requiring teachers to sign a pledge card that promotes divisive policies designed to split unions over issues that pit newer members against older ones. Their modus operandi is to build a membership to then advocate against teacher protections. This is about cheap labor for CMOs, and E4E is purposefully divisive toward their goal, even if our members do not realize it or see it. The protections E4E want to eliminate include seniority and due process/teacher tenure, and they espouse the virtues of merit pay and a market-based system of recruitment and retention.
For purpose of background, E4E is not only funded by Gates, but it is also funded by certain players, whose financing practices are in fact contrary to the spirit of public education, including Connecticut’s own Jonathan Sackler. Sackler owns Stamford’s Purdue Pharma (Oxycontin). He is the creator of ConnCAN, 50CAN, and Achievement First. He is literally father to the “Superman” rhetoric-laden movie “The Lottery”, produced by his family, and he sits on many boards of anti-public school groups such as New Schools Venture Fund, which promotes takeover and privatization efforts. He also sits on E4E’s board.
E4E is also funded by the Carmen and Lucia Buck Foundation. Buck funds education reform groups like ConnCAN, CCER, and others who have as their mission increasing corporate managed charter schools at the expense of traditional public schools.
Other corporate funded advocacy groups that support E4E include Education Reform Now and Democrats for Education Reform (DFER). In 2010, Education Reform Now ran a rather infamous television commercial in New York State that included a “parent” saying, “Stop listening to the teachers’ union.” E4E’s fundraising has reportedly skyrocketed since 2012 allowing them to expand, including into Connecticut.
We are aware that they have attempted to attract members in Bridgeport, East Hartford, and Danbury, and are also involved in Norwalk, an AFT-CT local.
We ask that if and when you are aware of an E4E presence within your district, you notify me and your UniServ person immediately.
Please be aware that wherever they show up within CEA Land and are allowed access to our schools and our members, we will be aggressive and will be filing an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) against that Board of Education.
Thank you for your attention to this issue, and have a healthy and happy holiday season.
Sincerely,
Sheila
A corporate, anti-union, anti-public education organization, Educators For Excellence (E4E), has been attempting to make inroads into our school buildings and districts, assuming the cover of “teacher voice” as their hook into the classrooms and into the faculty rooms within our school buildings.
This group has been funded to go into schools (with food and with happy hour drink coupons) promising teacher voice, but requiring teachers to sign a pledge card that promotes divisive policies designed to split unions over issues that pit newer members against older ones. Their modus operandi is to build a membership to then advocate against teacher protections. This is about cheap labor for CMOs, and E4E is purposefully divisive toward their goal, even if our members do not realize it or see it. The protections E4E want to eliminate include seniority and due process/teacher tenure, and they espouse the virtues of merit pay and a market-based system of recruitment and retention.
For purpose of background, E4E is not only funded by Gates, but it is also funded by certain players, whose financing practices are in fact contrary to the spirit of public education, including Connecticut’s own Jonathan Sackler. Sackler owns Stamford’s Purdue Pharma (Oxycontin). He is the creator of ConnCAN, 50CAN, and Achievement First. He is literally father to the “Superman” rhetoric-laden movie “The Lottery”, produced by his family, and he sits on many boards of anti-public school groups such as New Schools Venture Fund, which promotes takeover and privatization efforts. He also sits on E4E’s board.
E4E is also funded by the Carmen and Lucia Buck Foundation. Buck funds education reform groups like ConnCAN, CCER, and others who have as their mission increasing corporate managed charter schools at the expense of traditional public schools.
Other corporate funded advocacy groups that support E4E include Education Reform Now and Democrats for Education Reform (DFER). In 2010, Education Reform Now ran a rather infamous television commercial in New York State that included a “parent” saying, “Stop listening to the teachers’ union.” E4E’s fundraising has reportedly skyrocketed since 2012 allowing them to expand, including into Connecticut.
We are aware that they have attempted to attract members in Bridgeport, East Hartford, and Danbury, and are also involved in Norwalk, an AFT-CT local.
We ask that if and when you are aware of an E4E presence within your district, you notify me and your UniServ person immediately.
Please be aware that wherever they show up within CEA Land and are allowed access to our schools and our members, we will be aggressive and will be filing an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) against that Board of Education.
Thank you for your attention to this issue, and have a healthy and happy holiday season.
Sincerely,
Sheila
*State Teachers' Retirement System Funding*
Over the past several weeks, the funding of the State Teachers’ Retirement System (STRS), along with the state employees retirement system, has been extensively covered in the media. Specifically, Governor Malloy has put forth his proposals for modifying how the obligations of the pension funds will be financed over the long-term. CEA has been fully included in discussions with the State Teachers’ Retirement Board (STRB), the Office of Policy and Management (OPM), and the Office of State Treasurer Denise Nappier because we all have the shared goal of ensuring the long-term solvency, the stability, and the benefit structure of the state teachers’ retirement fund. To that end, CEA will continue to closely monitor any and all proposals in our longstanding and continued effort to protect the retirement security of our active and retired members.
Please do understand that there are no benefit changes to the existing teacher retirement system associated with this funding issue. The sole focus is how to deal with the present and future funding of the pension system. Many opinions have surfaced about how to accomplish this, but there are clearly two choices, neither of which is pleasant politically: “Pay me now or pay me later”.
A plan must be developed to “smooth” the pension payments for State employees and teachers, active and retired, to level existing payments to both systems and avoid a balloon payment of billions of dollars in the future.
Be assured that CEA leadership is in constant conversations with officials at the State to assure that the STRS will continue to remain financially sound today and in the future, and any emails or assertions suggesting drastic changes are on the horizon are very misleading.
Very simply there is no plan to reduce the benefits of active or retired teachers being proposed by the Governor or anyone in state government. The singular issue is how to fund the pension systems of both the Teachers and State Employees over the next few years to avoid a “fiscal cliff” that would place a burden on the rest of the State budget.
Please do understand that there are no benefit changes to the existing teacher retirement system associated with this funding issue. The sole focus is how to deal with the present and future funding of the pension system. Many opinions have surfaced about how to accomplish this, but there are clearly two choices, neither of which is pleasant politically: “Pay me now or pay me later”.
A plan must be developed to “smooth” the pension payments for State employees and teachers, active and retired, to level existing payments to both systems and avoid a balloon payment of billions of dollars in the future.
Be assured that CEA leadership is in constant conversations with officials at the State to assure that the STRS will continue to remain financially sound today and in the future, and any emails or assertions suggesting drastic changes are on the horizon are very misleading.
Very simply there is no plan to reduce the benefits of active or retired teachers being proposed by the Governor or anyone in state government. The singular issue is how to fund the pension systems of both the Teachers and State Employees over the next few years to avoid a “fiscal cliff” that would place a burden on the rest of the State budget.
*Personal Leave*
A number of concerns have recently been brought to the SEA regarding “Article 30 Personal Leave”
The SEA in coordination with the CEA, are prepared to handle the situation based on current contract language, but we need all members to follow the contract as specified.
Please use the following as directed:
Article 30 – Personal Leave states under part A:
“A total of five (5) days of personal leave per year shall be granted to teachers for reasons of a personal or emergency nature, which made absence from school unavoidable and necessary, subject to the approval of the building principal or immediate supervisor.”
Article 30 – Personal Leave states under part C:
“Application for such leave shall be made as far in advance as practicable and, except for emergencies, shall be made at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the date of the leave. Such leave shall be granted except in cases of extreme hardship or disability to the school system and permission will not be unreasonably withheld.”
* When applying for a personal day, your principal or immediate supervisor WILL AND CAN ask for a reason. However, there are ONLY TWO POSSIBLE RESPONSES as detailed below:
“It is of a personal nature, which is unavoidable and necessary”
Or
“It is of an emergency nature, which is unavoidable and necessary”
* If more questions are asked at that point, you DO NOT have to give details. Reassure your principal that it is in fact personal or emergency in nature.
* Although it is not written as part of the language, it is understood that these personal days will not be used to extend a vacation, long weekend or similar that do not fall under the criteria above.
* Data shows that we (as an association) do not excessively abuse these days and we need to continue to be able to use them as required per the contract.
*TENURE: WHAT IT MEANS*
The term “tenure” means: The completion of thirty school months of full-time continuous employment for the same board of education for teachers initially hired prior to July 1, 1996; and forty such school months for teachers initially hired on or after said date provided the superintendent offers the teacher a contract to return for the following school year.
For purposes of calculating continuous employment towards tenure, the following shall apply:
1. For a teacher who has not attained tenure, two school months of part-time continuous employment by such teacher shall equal one school month of full-time continuous employment except, for a teacher employed in a part-time position at a salary rate of less than twenty-five per cent of the salary rate of a teacher in such position, if such position were full-time, three school months of part-time continuous employment shall equal one school month of full-time continuous employment;
2. A teacher who has not attained tenure shall not count layoff time towards tenure, except that if such teacher is reemployed by the same board of education within five calendar years of the layoff, such teacher may count the previous continuous employment immediately prior to the layoff towards tenure;
3. A teacher who has not attained tenure shall not count authorized leave time towards tenure if such time exceeds ninety student school days in any one school year, provided only the student school days worked that year by such teacher shall count towards tenure and shall be computed on the basis of eighteen student school days or the greater fraction thereof equaling one school month.
For purposes of calculating continuous employment towards tenure, the following shall apply:
1. For a teacher who has not attained tenure, two school months of part-time continuous employment by such teacher shall equal one school month of full-time continuous employment except, for a teacher employed in a part-time position at a salary rate of less than twenty-five per cent of the salary rate of a teacher in such position, if such position were full-time, three school months of part-time continuous employment shall equal one school month of full-time continuous employment;
2. A teacher who has not attained tenure shall not count layoff time towards tenure, except that if such teacher is reemployed by the same board of education within five calendar years of the layoff, such teacher may count the previous continuous employment immediately prior to the layoff towards tenure;
3. A teacher who has not attained tenure shall not count authorized leave time towards tenure if such time exceeds ninety student school days in any one school year, provided only the student school days worked that year by such teacher shall count towards tenure and shall be computed on the basis of eighteen student school days or the greater fraction thereof equaling one school month.
*Helpful Links*
The following links will allow you quick access to some of the most frequently accessed sites associated with the SEA:
