Culture and Climate Survey Results

The results of the culture and climate survey are now available by clicking here. You may have noticed when you took the survey that some of the questions did not seem to be designed for our district and our situation. We used a tool provided by KNEA's Wade Anderson for the survey so as to avoid allowing any of our own biases to enter into the question-writing. That means that interpreting the results can only be done with both a knowledge of the district/building and an open mind!

The district administration is interested in working with LNEA to use these results to improve the educational experience for our students. We would appreciate your suggestions! As you look through the results, what do YOU think should be our priorities? Please email us at lneanews@gmail.com!

Questions about your evaluation?

A number of faculty members have expressed concerns about their most recent evaluation to LNEA teachers' rights' representatives. I had the opportunity to attend a training by Sue Pressler, whom I understand has also trained district and building administrators, and I would like to share some of the information I gleaned from that session. If you were there, please feel free to add your comments!

Just as we design rubrics when we want kids to know what quality work looks like, the rubrics of "Framework for Teaching" (FFT) are designed to show us what quality teaching looks like and aid administrators in discussing our work with us.

Ratings of "basic" are not "bad" ratings. There's nothing wrong (according to the trainer) with being in the basic category. Furthermore, if your teaching assignment or the curriculum changes, you can expect to go back to basic. A 30-yr veteran should have exemplaries but NOT necessarily in everything. Ratings that are "exemplary" across the board should mean you are not only very experienced and accomplished at teaching what you're teaching, but also practically a candidate for canonization!

The professional appraisal system is designed to focus on teacher growth by emphasizing reflection on our teaching and by encouraging discussion among teachers and their supervisors about what constitutes good teaching. Our professional development and PLC or other collaborative work should be intricately meshed with the evaluation process. Evaluation should not feel like a "hoop" that we must jump through, but a natural part of the improvement process--and we all have room to improve.

The LNEA members who participated in the development of the evaluation system were striving to ensure that it met the quality standards described by KNEA at http://www.knea.org/profession/qualitystandards.html. The evaluation system is part of the negotiated agreement, so we would like to hear your suggestions about how to strengthen it and ensure that it is put into practice in a manner that helps teachers improve.

If you are interested in this topic, here are two related resources that you may want to review:

"Improving Student Learning Requires District Learning," by Robert Rothman in Kappan, September 2009, pp 44-50.

"Creating Strong Evaluation Systems," by Peg Dunlap in KNEA Issues, October 2009, pp 4-5.

Ginger Riddle

Collaboration and Negotiations

Greetings! LNEA has entered into a commitment to collaboration with district leadership. Board members, central office staff and LNEA leadership are committed to finding the best possible way to work together toward the common goal of school improvement. Dr. Harris, in her statement regarding the leadership qualities we are looking for in our administration, has said, “It is important to me that our building leaders can build relationships with our staff and students and that their main mission is to help teachers and students grow. We want to build a family and create a culture where our staff and students feel valued. We want our teachers to feel that our leaders are here to help them grow instructionally to improve student achievement.” And, she has asked for further input from staff regarding specific leadership qualities. Additionally, LNEA leadership and Dr. Harris have signed a document, “Commitment to Collaboration,” that states: “We believe the most effective way to improve student achievement in USD #453 is through collaborative efforts. Positive leadership at all levels in the district minimizes conflict and fosters collaboration which in turn improves student achievement and the general health of our district. We wish to collaboratively pursue creative ways to address empowerment and improvement of staff, especially training in collaborative decision making through Partners in Collaboration – Kansas (PICK), a support for interest-based bargaining.” In addition to committing to collaboration in this formal way, the school board recently voted to endorse this training. We see a firm commitment from board members to support interest-based bargaining this spring. We are looking forward to the training in this method of bargaining, which will take place at the board office on Saturday, March 6. We believe this training will allow us to approach negotiations in a collaborative, rather than a potentially divisive, positional posture.

Negotiations: Notice letters for negotiations were exchanged on February 1, as required by law. LNEA opened 4 articles: Duration, Salary, Fringe Benefits, and School Calendar. The board opened 6 articles. In addition to the opening Duration, Salary and School Calendar, they also opened Duty Day and Vertical and Lateral Movement. Obviously both teams feel the need to concentrate on financial issues this year. Please know that we will do our best to secure the most beneficial working conditions and financial situation possible, and we are confident that interest-based bargaining is the best way of achieving this.

AYP FAQs

Many of us have heard about the need to make AYP in our inservice and staff meetings recently. A “sense of urgency” is indeed the issue. As a group of professionals, we always want our students to achieve, and to gain the life skills we know they need. Making AYP and achieving those magic numbers in reading and math has never been as important as it is right now. We certainly are focusing on new strategies to help each of our students and our district as a whole to achieve AYP.

As we move toward that goal, however, teachers have had many questions of us. Below are the most frequently asked questions and answers.

Has my tenure in this district been negated because Leavenworth is “on improvement”?

Not in any way, shape, or form. K.S.A. 72-5436 et.seq., known as the due process law, has not been repealed, nor has any other statute been passed that negates your due process rights.

If I am tenured in Leavenworth, and if we don’t make AYP in 2010, am I in danger of losing my job?

You will not lose your job simply because your building or our district does not make AYP. Our evaluation process, the professional appraisal system, which is part of the negotiated agreement by reference, requires administration to make efforts to help you improve in areas previously specified. You would have to have been placed on the professional assistance track of this system. The entire plan is posted on the district’s intranet. Everything you read regarding the professional appraisal system is part of the negotiated agreement. K.S.A. 72-5436 requires that you be given “due process” before your contract is non-renewed or terminated. This process requires administration to document your shortcomings and place that information in your personnel file. You are to be notified of any information such as this, and given an opportunity to respond. Further, before a teacher’s contract is actually non-renewed, administration must show that efforts to aid in improvement have been resisted, or that the teacher has failed to achieve the measures of improvement clearly set forth. The only exception to this is if a licensed employee is convicted of a felony.

Will our district lose its accreditation if we don’t make AYP?

So far, districts that have not made AYP, even those who are in “worse shape” than Leavenworth, have not lost their accreditation.

Will the state take over our district if we continue to not make AYP?

While the state technically has the right to do so, again, so far, districts that have not made AYP have not been “taken over.” They continue to function under their own governance, with curriculum support from KSDE. Given the financial situation in the state, it’s hard to imagine that KSDE would choose to use their very limited resources to literally “take over” a school district. They are suffering from the same funding and staffing issues as we are.

Even if “the state” should “take us over,” they would be required to follow the same laws that our administration is required to follow. In other words, the due process law would be in full effect.

Are there other districts in our situation?

Yes. According to an August, 2008 report made by the Kansas State Department of Education, there were 19 Title 1 districts on improvement for 08-09. Four districts on this list were in their 5^th year of being “on improvement” during the 08-09 school year. Leavenworth was in its second year of being “on improvement” last year. The 09-10 year is our third year.

What kinds of sanctions have been imposed on districts that are in worse shape than Leavenworth, and/or have been on improvement longer than Leavenworth?

While there is certainly a good deal of supervision and guidance provided by KSDE and Cross & Joftus, the consulting company assisting KSDE, we’re finding that these districts are receiving much needed support, to include additional funds in some cases. To date, no district in Kansas has been sanctioned for not making AYP.

I need more information about Cross and Joftus. Who are they, and what do they do?

Cross and Joftus is an organization that has been hired by KSDE to assist them in assisting school districts that have not made AYP. This same company is working with all districts in Kansas that are on improvement. Below is some information from their website:

Cross & Joftus works with states, foundations, school districts, and nonprofit organizations to meet their education goals. We help our clients build internal capacity so they can quickly find solutions to problems and do what they do better. Just as we encourage our clients to always reevaluate their products and services to ensure quality, we believe in continually refining our approach to client support.

If you have any other questions you feel should be addressed here, please e-mail us and we will make every effort to find an answer and get it posted.