State Legislature takes on Teacher Tenure (SB 955)

Check out the MDUSD Voice Blog. They've written about SB 955 that takes on the issue of tenure reform.

From their blog:
On April 21st, a California legislative education sub-committee voted 5-4 to pass along Senate Bill 955. SB955 revises the teacher layoff notice deadline from March 15 to June 15, removes the seniority provision and allows districts to layoff teachers based on subject needs and teacher effectiveness, and provides school boards the final say when firing a teacher thus shortening the process of removing a teacher from the classroom.

Check it out. Something tells me that parents may be open to changes in this regard, and something else tells me teachers will not. Hmmmm, how do we close that gap? What kind of private sector job can you have that you're essentially guaranteed job security as long as you just keep showing up?

Update: The MDUSD Voice has reported the following:
State Senator Mark DeSaulnier has met with CTA and has decided to support CTA’s decision to oppose the bill. Senator DeSaulnier represents the 7th District which includes all of MDUSD. Senator DeSaulnier’s phone number is (925) 942-6082 or you can email him by going to his website http://dist07.casen.govoffice.com/Senator DeSaulnier’s staff could not confirm if the Senator also met with parents in his district to hear their concerns.

Let's Talk Teachers. Last In, First Out? There's another way...

Last In, First Out is something we hear when talking lay-offs. If you were one of the last teachers hired, you'll be the first ones asked to go. What about performance? WOW! What a concept I know. But don't we all know some teachers that stay and survive the "pink slip" year after year because they have that thing called "seniority?" Yes, we do. Sadly, there are teachers in our school who are sour, and more interested in drama and politics than the students. Those are likely the ones there a long time, the ones in many cases who NEED TO GO! Do you know one of these?

Surely I will be the first to say I know MANY, MANY lovely veteran teachers with oodles of experience and years of structured know how that benefits students every year, but there are those.... I hate that they "get to stay" simply due to their seniority.

New York has another idea... see this article for a new approach that I wish we could attempt here. But imagine, if we wanted to deal with teachers on a "performance" measure vs. seniority, I'm certain there would be some sort of war declared.

But there, I said it, there are some teachers who need to go.

After what I've seen at my own school this year, I will be hard pressed to ever stand shoulder to shoulder with teachers in support of their "rights." What about the rights of my student(s) to have happy, focused teachers? What about a school community free from political drama and infighting? What ever happened to working together, team work, community?

We don't talk about it because we don't want to discredit our schools, bring disrespect to the teachers who do a great job every day, or create a hostile environment for our students. So we stay quiet... sad but true.

What are your thoughts? Certainly not all brand new teachers are automatically bright and wonderful either? Some say it would allow the districts to lay off more senior teachers because they cost more. I don't advocate that either, but there must be a better way. Arizona abolished seniority rules, so maybe we should take a closer look at how that's going. I'll admit, I've only begun the research...

Ok, so from the article:

“Nobody I’ve talked to thinks seniority is a rational way to go,” Mr. Klein said. “Obviously there are some senior teachers who are extraordinary. You recruit young talent you think is good for the future, and to just get rid of that by the numbers seems to me to be a nonsensical approach.”

MDUSD board votes to eliminate jobs and hours Tuesday night

Theresa Harrington at the CCTimes has recapped the cuts the MDUSD is looking to make at Tuesday night's school board meeting. Check it out: Contra Costa Times

MDUSD Schools Named as "Persistently Lowest Achieving"

The names are out. Here is the PRESS RELEASE from the California Department of Education.

According to the press release:
State and federal laws associated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) and the School Improvement Grant (SIG) program require California to identify the state's low-achieving schools and to require the persistently lowest-achieving 5 percent of those schools to implement one of four school intervention models. The identification of the 5 percent of persistently lowest-achieving schools in California is a multi-step process that is informed by both federal and state law (SBx 51) by Senator Darrell Steinberg, (D-Sacramento).

The 6 Mt. Diablo School District Schools include:

Tier 1 Schools (Tier 1 List):


Tier 2 School (Tier 2 list):

Mt. Diablo High School

For more information on the Persisently Lowest Achieving Schools including definitions of Tier 1 and Tier 2 check it out HERE.

So it looks like some major changes are in store for these schools. Stay tuned...

Board Meeting March 9th - Agenda

Some very important items on the agenda this time around, including:

BUDGET CUTS - see agenda item for spreadsheets and supporting data in order to cut over 15 million dollars annually. Includes district wide support staff, special ed cuts, change of high school graduation requirements, more.

The Second Interim Report will be discussed.

14.4 Resolution ordering an election to authorize up to $348 million of General Obligation Bonds and establish specifications of the election order. Resolution PDF

Parent Involvement Policy Revisions

Certificated lay-offs / Agenda Item

Elimination of PM custodians at Diablo View Middle currently funded by City of Clayton

Roll over (through 2013) of current collective bargaining agreement with MDEA. Agenda

Day of Action Around Town

Statewide Day of Action!

Will you participate after school? See the MDEA site for information about after school activities. KRON 4 news this morning has been having ongoing coverage outside El Monte Elementary in Concord.

This is a photo a friend sent just now from in front of El Dorado Middle School on Concord Blvd. Hopefully we'll see more photos and more involvement throughout the day. Will Sacramento listen? Why do I feel pessimistic about that?

March 4th Statewide Day of Action

Have you heard? Schools around the state, and within MDUSD, will be recognizing the Statewide Day of Action, this Thursday , March 4th.

Here is some more information about the Statewide efforts:

http://www.standupforschools.org/

Locally, I heard the Mt. Diablo School District schools will be having a "disaster drill' at each school at 8:30am.

From CVHS:
On March 4, 2010 the Clayton Valley High School community will START THE DAY FOR STUDENTS!

On March 4th please join CVHS students, teachers, staff and community members in the Statewide Day of Action in an effort to speak out about the painful effects cuts are having on students, schools and communities throughout California. In the last two years, $17 billion was cut from California schools and colleges and now students and schools are being threatened again. We can't let that happen!

We are asking you to join us and be a part of the campaign to fight for the resources our CVHS students deserve.

On Thursday, March 4th at 7:00 a.m. we will gather in front of the high school to send a message to Sacramento that education is essential to building a better California. Please consider joining other parents and community members in this important demonstration of support for our school.

There will be a district-wide "Disaster Drill" at 8:30am.

This "Disaster-Drill" will occur simultaneously at MDUSD schools to symbolize the disastrous conditions our students face as a result of the cuts to public education in California.

At CVHS there are ways to get involved too:

On Wednesday, March 3 in the afternoon and evening we will be working on posters in the C-Wing. Please consider joining us. Everyone is welcome.

If you prefer, make signs with your students at home. We do ask that all signs use appropriate and inoffensive language. Some examples of slogans include:

Public Education Cuts are a Disaster
State Cuts Threaten the Future of CVHS
Protect CVHS Students from the Budget Disaster
Budget Cuts = The Death of Quality Education

___________________________________________

Finally the Mt. Diablo Education Association (MDEA) is organizing after-school demonstrations at the following locations:

Ygnacio Valley Rd and Oak Grove;
Treat and Clayton Rd; and
Monument and Contra Costa Blvd

MDEA has also posted links to flyers, information pdf documents and more. They call for the district wide disaster drill to be at 9am, so I do believe they are leaving it to the school sites for the most convenient times. I hope you'll join in somehow. Our voices need to be heard.

Special Ed needs meaningful discussion, is the status quo working?

So .... after reading the CAC parent letter about the MGT report, and characterizing it as recommending a "dismantling" of MDUSD Special Ed programs, it seems clear that CAC did not like the report recommendations. If I am correct, CAC agreed with the choice of MGT, or perhaps even recommended MGT as the firm to conduct the study. Now, MGT came up with a solution that could, if adopted, save the district upwards of 29.5 million dollars. (See Exhibit ES-1 on page 10 of the MGT study).

Also according to the study, I see that it notes that our students are not performing as well. The report notes "Lower percentages of students with disabilities scoring at each level for both English and Language Arts and Math compared to the state." Are we concerned that it appears our special ed students are underperforming when compared to the state and other districts? (Exhibit 1-5).

I guess what I'm curious about, and maybe others are as well, is what is the solution? For a savings of 29.5 million dollars it certainly seems the report deserves a good, objective look, don't you think? In light of the findings that our kids are underperforming those statewide and in comparable districts, shouldn't we consider there might be a better way? I'm just asking . . . and hope we can bring some intelligent, objective solutions to the table.

In light of the fact that special ed is ~23% of our district's budget, yet serves only 11% of our students, it seems we need to be diligent in the assessment of what next...

Are kids transported all over because specific programs are built in particular (sometimes far away) locations, and not necessarily served at their home schools?

Should Principals be empowered at their own school sites? Or are the directives from the "top down" (district to school site) the best way?

I'd like to see discussion amongst parents. Objective, thoughtful discussion and ideas would be useful now. Completely bashing the report in light of some of the discoveries within it, hardly seems reasonable. So what next? Share your ideas here.

Parent Letter: Dismantle MDUSD Special Ed/Student Services Dept, says study

Below is a letter from a concerned parent (not this blog):

Special Ed. Study Recommends the Dismantling of Mt. Diablo School District’s Special Education/Student Services Department and for the Principals to be Responsible for the Program Management of Our Students with Special Needs and 504 Plans.

The Mt. Diablo School District hired MGT of America, a consultant firm, to perform a study of their Special Education Services/Programs. The report has been received and recommendations include the complete dismantling of the Special Education/Student Services Department. Instead, there would be:

• One Director.
• Three Program Specialists to train site staff.
• ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) to be handled by the district legal counsel.

Principals to take on the primary role of program management for their special education/504 students.

In addition to the increased responsibilities they have acquired due to staff reductions, Principals would now be responsible for special education/504 student services/programs.

• Can our Principals handle this extra responsibility?
• How much time will be taken away from the everyday management of their site due to this additional responsibility?
• Are our Principals knowledgeable in State/Federal laws regarding the district’s responsibility for serving our students with special needs?
• With only one Assistant Director for special education under the Curriculum and Instruction department, who will provide necessary support/guidance to our Principals and staff?
• Will Principals be able to learn every aspect of every disability to be able to confidently place and serve every special ed./504 child placed at their site?
• Currently there are different programs at different sites. Will Principals know which students should be placed in which programs?
• Who will coordinate the related service providers i.e., speech/OT/PT/Nursing?
• When it is time for students with special needs to transition from preschool to elementary to middle to high school, how will the Principals know which sites to assign the transitioning students. Or will every site have full time staff to provide all the programs/services every student in their school will need? Who will coordinate?
• MGT is also recommending the elimination of the Mental Health Collaborative and placing these students in their home schools with a site clinician. The MH Collaborative is supported and paid, approximately 95%, by County Mental Health Services. If students are placed back at their home schools, County Mental Health will not provide services to these students due to their own budget restraints. Will the district hire therapists at each site to provide the services these students require? How will Principals deal with these students placed on their campuses? Whose safety will be compromised?

Why would the board of education implement these recommendations?

• Cost of the study was over $99,000. If the district does not implement the recommendations, will their constituents complain about the dollars spent?
• They do not understand what is cost effective vs. more costly.
• They would not have to admit their failure in not adequately using their resources in the district to determine reductions without compromising the integrity and compliance of the program.
  o Did they request specific budget reductions from qualified staff in the district?
  o Did they ask the CAC to assist them in developing specific recommendations?
  o Have they factored in the “Cost of Reconstruction” after they butcher the foundation of the consent decree?
  o Have they factored in long term costs onto the cuts for a “real value”?
  

Why should the board of education NOT implement MGT’s recommendations?

• MGT of America is a consulting firm based out of Florida who apparently does not understand California law or Mt. Diablo’s philosophy of providing required services to students with special needs.
• Implementing MGT’s philosophy would be jeopardizing the health and welfare of all students, special ed. and general ed. by placing students in improperly supervised programs.
• The recommendations are not appropriate for our district needs.
• Programs could potentially go out of compliance due to lack of program knowledge.
• Lack of support will lead to more litigation.
• Costs of mismanagement will “encroach” on the general ed. fund.
• Parents will not request ADR from the District’s legal counsel; therefore, parents will file directly to the State and legal costs will skyrocket.
• Most important, it is not good for kids - all of our kids!
  

It took 10 years with a Consent Decree for Mt. Diablo to build an infrastructure that is in compliance and working. If we follow MGT’s recommendations and restructure, it will definitely bring about noncompliance and millions in litigation costs.

We need to act responsibly. The board, district staff and parents need to work together to determine the most appropriate way to reduce costs without reducing compliance and jeopardizing the safety of all of our students.


To view the complete report, you can go to the Mt. Diablo School District’s website at http://www.mdusd.org/ and look under the Board of Education Agenda or the CAC blog at http://www.mtdiablosped.blogspot.com/. I am also attaching the report to this email. (see agenda: http://esbpublic.mdusd.k12.ca.us/public_agendaview.aspx?mtgId=281)


To receive emails all year long regarding special education events/activities
in the Mt. Diablo School District, please register at mdusdcac@yahoo.com


Parents / Staff / Community Members
Attend the Board of Education meeting on Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 6:00pm to express your opinion.

Please do not count on others to attend and speak on your behalf.

Meeting with be held at Monte Gardens Elementary School
(next to the District office)


Send Emails to the District Superintendent and Board Members
Dr. Steven Lawrence
Superintendent
lawrences@mdusd.k12.ca.us

Paul Strange
President
paul@mdusd.net

Gary Eberhart
Vice President
gary@mdusd.net

Dick Allen
Board Member
dickallen_dallen@yahoo.com

Linda Mayo
Board Member
mayolk@aol.com

Sherry Whitmarsh
Board Member
sherry@mdusd.net

PLEASE SHARE THIS INFORMATION WITH OTHERS. THANK YOU.

MDUSD Special Meetings Coming Up

SPECIAL NOTICE

The Community Advisory Committee (CAC) for Special Education will hold their regular monthly meeting on Monday, March 1, 2010 in the Board Room at the district office. The meeting time has been changed to 6:00 p.m. in order to include enough time for a study session to discuss the special education study which was completed by MGT of America.

There will be a Special Mt. Diablo School Board Meeting on Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. at Monte Gardens in the Multi-Use Room. At this meeting, MGT will present their report with recommendations that may impact special education services in the district.

Please mark your calendars to attend both of these very important meetings:


CAC
Monday, March 1, 2010
6:00 p.m.
Board Room, District Office

Special Board of Education Meeting
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
6:00 p.m.
Multi-Purpose Room, Monte Gardens Elementary School
(school right next to the district office)