Brian Nestande (R) Plan for the destruction of Public Schools and Teacher's Unions

In the Perspective section of the North County Times on Sunday, Brian Nestande, (R) California State Assembly from Temecula, outlines the Republican California State Assembly plan to destroy public education, teacher unions, and middle class salaries of all teachers in California.

The plan has several innocent sounding points that are actually hidden " torpedoes" meant to punish school teachers for daring to ask for decent middle class salaries and middle class benefits. These torpedoes end all union rights, teacher's rights to speak freely and will if passed re-institute the kind of unlimited principal and district powers that allow for the firing of any teacher at any time for any reason.

My father in law told me the story of such a time with unlimited principal powers back in the 1950's. At the school where he taught music and band, his callous school principal fired a twenty plus year, well-loved, female, English teacher because the Principal's nephew had just graduated from college with a teaching degree in English and needed a job. The principal made no secret of why he was letting the long time teacher go. He seemed almost proud of his power. He hired his nephew to take her place and his nephew happily took the job.

At the time woman teachers were routinely paid about half what male teachers were paid even less experienced male teachers were paid more as the male teachers had 'a family to support'. Woman in the workplace were considered supplemental or temporary not essential or equals. Woman only were holding the jobs until a man could be found to replace them. Woman teachers routinely lived with that uncertainty.

Now it seems we may go 'back to that future' if Brian Nestande and his fellow ANTI public school Assembly members pass the "education plan" he outlines below. His plan is in red with commentary in blue.


http://www.nctimes.com/news/opinion/perspective/article_69441d31-0f9b-5585-aa64-2ed6878ed6ed.html

LOCAL VIEW: Steps for reforming education
State needs to tackle four areas in 'Race'

BRIAN NESTANDE -- Assemblyman Posted: Sunday, October 4, 2009 12:00 am
The governor has called for a special session on education reform to enact changes needed to make California eligible and competitive for billions of dollars in federal funding. I am honored to serve as the vice chairman of the Assembly Education Committee, and I look forward to working with the governor and my colleagues in the Legislature to enact meaningful reforms that will improve the delivery of education for our children.

While many issues will emerge in the special session, I am focused on making changes in these areas:

-- Remove the barrier in state law that prohibits using student achievement on state testing in the formal evaluation of teachers. This is necessary because it is a requirement in the proposed federal "Race to the Top" grants. (Teachers at high wealth schools with high performing teachers will be labeled as good teachers. They will be rewarded with permanent positions, salary bonuses, extra merit pay. Teachers at low wealth schools will be labeled as bad teachers and penalized. It is same idea as No Child Left Behind massive penalties for low wealth schools who fail national standards. Absolutely NO PENALTIES for high wealth schools--see:
While I am in support of this concept, I also believe that student test data should be only one factor in evaluating teacher performance. There are several conditions that affect students' standardized test scores, including parental involvement, public safety (e.g., gangs in the community and on school campuses) and language barriers. Ultimately, a "value-added" (hidden torpedo alert) analysis, such as evaluating a teacher's success at making progress with a pupil, is the most logical way to incorporate pupil performance into formal teacher evaluations.
(Will your students show enough value-added from your teaching for you to keep your job? The answer is many educational studies seems to correlate with square feet in their homes more than with who their teachers are)
-- Enhancing accountability. I favor crafting reforms that promote innovative approaches that properly distribute accountability (hidden torpedo alert!), while granting the necessary decision-making authority to those who are held accountable.

For example, there is evidence of success in educational models that allow principals to be in complete control of their schools, and then hold those principal accountable for results. To promote such models, it would be necessary to enact changes in law that will allow principals to hire whomever they think will do the best job and to fire whomever they need to. (Does the principal have a nephew who needs your job?) Also, incentives could be enacted to encourage school districts to allow principals to spend monies wherever they deem necessary.

Further, the state should do away with or minimize "categorical funding," which dictates to school districts how funds must be spent, rather than allowing local decisions to be made based upon the unique circumstances of each local school. (This idea sounds good to me which worries me. Could there be one good idea in this attack on teachers?)
-- Charter schools. The proposed "Race to the Top" regulations favor fewer restrictions on charter schools. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan has suggested that California should lift the current cap on the number of charter schools allowed. (A charter proposal no matter who proposes it or how poor the planning in the proposal could not be turned down by local school districts. Charters do not have unions. Charters do not have to pay school district salaries. Charters do not have to take the same state tests or even to meet the same standards as public schools. What? Yes incredibly that is true. Charters do not have to meet same standards as public schools. See: )

I favor educational choice and welcome this change in state law. I propose, in addition, that we focus on which charter schools work best and why, and then initiate incentives to duplicate that success in the lowest-performing schools across the state.

-- School vouchers for special education.(hidden torpedo alert!) Funding for special education is overwhelming school budgets, yet special needs children are not always getting adequate attention. Rather than forcing parents to fight with school districts over appropriate levels of care, why not give them the option of purchasing those services from a private vendor or a school that has excelled in that area of service? (Vouchers for private schools that do not teach FACT based science, history and sex education. How did I know that somewhere in here this guy would stick in a proposal for funding schools with public money that do not have to teach FACTS. This form of educational child abuse has been rejected time and time again by the California voters. The last state vote on private school vouchers was on Prop 38 in the year 2000 when over 70% of the electorate rejected vouchers.)


The bottom line for my approach in achieving educational reform is to experiment and promote innovation. The best way to approach reform is to encourage innovation at the local level, while maintaining high standards and enforcing accountability by empowering parents through greater choice and flexibility.

We should exchange the "command and control" model that favors mandates from Sacramento and Washington, D.C., for a model that promotes local innovation and grants local authority.

BRIAN NESTANDE, R-Palm Desert, represents California's 64th Assembly District, which includes all or portions of numerous Southwest County communities including Temecula, Murrieta, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Canyon Lake, Hemet, Wildomar, Winchester and other areas.