HMS Grading Ninjas!: Dance of the Lemons! AB 555 Meeting!

Very educational experience this morning. Although there are provisions that CCSD supports in the bill, we see there are also areas that should be modified. See https://nelis.leg.state.nv.us/76th2011/App#/76th2011/Bill/Text/AB555 for the text of the bill.

Areas of concern:

Sec. 12: Commencing on July 1, 2012, each licensed employee is employed on a contract basis for a 1-year period and has no right to reemployment, regardless of the date of his or her initial hire.

This section would completely eliminate teacher tenure for all licensed employees; teachers, administration, librarians, specialists, etc. However the employee does retain the right to due process. Supporters of the bill stated no correlation between teacher tenure and student performance as well as no correlation between increased education in the teachers and student achievement. Compensation that had previously been given to advanced degrees would now go to merit based pay. Chairwoman Smith stated concern that the merit (or performance) based pay replacing the advanced degree pay would be reduced $120 million dollars.

Sec. 15: If the board of trustees of a school district determines that a reduction in the existing workforce of teachers in the school district is necessary, the decision to lay off a teacher must be based upon the effectiveness of the teacher to improve the academic achievement of pupils and upon the evaluation of the teacher conducted pursuant to NRS 391.3125 and 391.3127 and must not be based upon the seniority of the teacher.

Statistically 99% of Nevada's teachers receive a satisfactory evaluation, and questions were raised as to how the RIF can not be based on seniority if almost all receive a satisfactory evaluation. In response to the assertion to the private sector doesn't use seniority, Mr. Kirner pointed out that the business model doesn't have a pension plan so seniority must be an aspect of the evaluation process.

Sec. 16: 1. The board of trustees of a school district shall not increase the salary or wage rate or other compensation of a teacher based upon his or receipt of a master's degree or a doctoral degree from an accredited degree-granting postsecondary educational institution. 2. This section does not prohibit the board of trustees of a school district from increasing the salary or wage rate or other compensation of teachers employed by the board of trustees on the basis of merit.

As the bill stands, people are in the middle of any educational step (Master's & Doctorate) would be frozen where they are for the biennium and in subsequent years it would be eradicated. New hires with an existing degree would not receive an increase in pay either. Mr. Vice-Chairman Conklin summaries that a person with an education makes no difference on a persons achievement, but disagrees saying a person aught to know what they are going to teach. Mr. Vice-Chairman Conklin continues to say that the pay scale steps for education should be looked on as an incentive rather than as merit pay reward. Senior Advisor to the Governor Sandoval, Mr. Erquiaga, stated that when money is available in 2013 we can reassess merit pay.

Clark County School District lobbyist Joyce Haldeman (and Superintendent Dwight Jones) with Washoe County School District lobbyist Steve Hull generally support the bill with the modifications below:

Sec. 2: Amended to include administration
Sec. 3: Support
Sec. 4: Support; especially remediation & professional development for teachers who receive less than satisfactory evaluations
Sec. 6: Support timing of evaluations
Sec. 12: Concerned - Instead supported Ab 225 which said after 2 bad evaluations and remediation with professional development teachers would be placed back on probationary status (with due process rights)
Sec. 15: Reduction in force should be based on effectiveness, not seniority alone. Agree in short term that unsatisfactory evaluations, non-medical absenteeism, disciplinary actions, and criminal conduct should be used in conjunction with seniority. In the long term, we should come up with a more comprehensive list.
Sec. 16: Amended to create grace period to allow those in progress to finish educational degrees so they receive their pay raise - as this was the good faith promise

Dr. Dotty Merrill, the Executive Director of Nevada Association of School Boards also generally supports the bill

Sec. 3: Support
Sec. 4: Support; Creates 4 categories for overall performance (Highly effective, Effective, Minimally effective, or Ineffective)
Sec. 12: Agree w/ CCSD
Sec. 15: Agree w/ CCSD
Sec. 16: Dr. Merrill said education makes a difference in the value of teachers that you can get - and this incentive is needed to recruit, especially in rural schools. Dr. Merrill is also concerned that the July 1, 2011 date is too soon to implement everything.

Other information:

- Pay is frozen at your pay scale for next 2 years

- Las Vegas, Henderson, Reno-Sparks, & Asian Chambers of Commerce support the bill in its entirety because it will bring jobs to the economy.

- You can still write to your legislators!

Chair – Debbie Smith @ dsmith@asm.state.nv.us

Vice Chair – Marcus Conklin @ mconklin@asm.state.nv.us

Paul Aizley @ paizley@asm.state.nv.us

Kelvin Atkinson @ katkinson@asm.state.nv.us

David Bobzien @ dbobzien@asm.state.nv.us

Maggie Carlton @ mcarlton@asm.state.nv.us

Joseph Hogan @ jhogan@asm.state.nv.us

April Mastroluca @ amastroluca@asm.state.nv.us