One Teacher’s Cry: Why I Hate No Child Left Behind
By Susan J. Hobart
I’m a teacher. I’ve taught elementary school for eleven years. I’ve always told
people, “I have the best job in the world.” I crafted curriculum that made students
think, and they had fun while learning. At the end of the day, I felt energized. Today,
more often than not, I feel demoralized.
While I still connect my lesson plans to students’ lives and work to make it real, this
no longer is my sole focus. Today I have a new nickname: test buster. Singing to the
tune of “Ghost busters,” I teach test-taking strategies similar to those taught in
Stanley Kaplan prep courses for the SAT. I spend an inordinate amount of time
showing students how to “bubble up,” the term for darkening those little circles that
accompany multiple choice questions on standardized tests.
I am told these are invaluable skills to have.
I am told if we do a good job, our students will do well.
I am told that our district does not teach to the test.
I am told that the time we are spending preparing for and administering the tests,
analyzing the results, and attending in-services to help our children become
proficient on this annual measure of success will pay off by reducing the academic
achievement gap between our white children and our children of color.
I am told a lot of things.
But what I know is that I’m not the teacher I used to be. And it takes a toll. I used to
be the one who raved about my classroom, even after a long week. Pollyanna,
people called me. Today, when I speak with former colleagues, they are amazed at
the cynicism creeping into my voice.
What has changed?
No Child Left Behind is certainly a big part of the problem. The children I test are
from a wide variety of abilities and backgrounds. Whether they have a cognitive
disability, speak entry-level English, or have speech or language delays, everyone
takes the same test and the results are posted. Special education students may
have some accommodations, but they take the same test and are expected to
perform at the same level as general education students. Students new to this
country or with a native language other than English must also take the same test
and are expected to perform at the same level as children whose native language is
English. Picture yourself taking a five-day test in French after moving to Paris last
year.
No Child Left Behind is one size fits all. But any experienced teacher knows how
warped a yardstick that is.
I spent yesterday in a meeting discussing this year’s standardized test results. Our
team was feeling less than optimistic in spite of additional targeted funds made
available to our students who are low income or who perform poorly on such tests.
As an educator, I know these tests are only one measure, one snapshot, of student
achievement. Unfortunately, they are the make-or-break assessment that
determines our status with the Department of Education.
They are the numbers that are published in the paper.
They are the scores that home buyers look at when deciding if they should move
into a neighborhood.
They are the numbers that are pulled out and held over us, as more and greater
rigidity enters the curriculum.
I was recently told we cannot buddy up with a first-grade class during our core
literacy time. It does not fit the definition of core literacy, I was told. Reading with
younger children has been a boon to literacy improvement for my struggling readers
and my new English-speaking students. Now I must throw this tool away?
In an increasingly diverse public school setting, there is not one educational
pedagogy that fits all students. We study and discuss differentiated curriculum,
modify teaching strategies, and set “just right reading levels” to scaffold student
learning. But No Child Left Behind doesn’t care about that. It takes no note of where
they started or how much they may have progressed.
As a teacher, I measure progress and achievement for my students on a daily basis.
I set the bar high, expecting a lot.
I don’t argue with the importance of assessment; it informs my instruction for each
child.
I don’t argue with the importance of accountability; I believe in it strongly—for myself
and my students.
I have empathy for our administrators who have to stand up and be told that we are
“challenged schools.” And I have empathy for our administrators who have to turn
around and drill it into our teacher heads, telling us we must do things “this” way to
get results. I feel for them. They are judged on the numbers, as well.
No Child Left Behind is a symptom of a larger problem: the attack on public
education itself. Like the school choice effort, which uses public funds to finance
private schools and cherry-pick the best students, No Child Left Behind is designed
to punish public schools and to demonstrate that private is best.
But I don’t think we’ve turned a corner that we can’t come back from. Public
education has been a dynamic vehicle in our country since its inception. We must
grapple with maintaining this progressive institution. Policy makers and educators
know that education holds out hope as the great equalizer in this country. It can
inspire and propel a student, a family, a community.
The state where I teach has a large academic achievement gap for African American
and low income children. That is unacceptable. Spending time, money, energy on
testing everyone with a “one size fits all test” will not eliminate or reduce that gap.
Instead, we need teacher-led professional development and more local control of
school budgets and policymaking. Beyond that, we need to address the economic
and social issues many children face, instead of punishing the schools that are
trying to do right by these students.
We’ve got things backwards today. Children should be in the front seat, not the
testing companies. And teachers should be rewarded for teaching, not for being
Stanley Kaplan tutors.
Ten years ago, I taught a student named Cayla. A couple of months ago, I got a note
from her, one of those things that teachers thrive on.
“Ms. Hobart was different than other teachers, in a good way,” she wrote. “We didn’t
learn just from a textbook; we experienced the topics by ‘jumping into the textbook.’
We got to construct a rainforest in our classroom, have a fancy lunch on the Queen
Elizabeth II, and go on a safari through Africa. What I learned ten years ago still
sticks with me today. When I become a teacher, I hope to inspire my students as
much as she inspired hers.”
Last week, I received a call from Niecy, another student from that class ten years
ago. She was calling from southern Illinois to tell me she was graduating from high
school this month and had just found out that she has won a scholarship to a college
in Indiana. I was ecstatic in my happiness for her. We laughed, and I told her I was
looking at a photo of her on my wall, building a pyramid out of paper bricks with her
classmates.
I also had a recent conversation with Manuel in a grocery parking lot. He reminded
me of my promise eight years ago to attend his high school graduation. I plan to be
there.
Cayla and Niecy and Manuel are three of the reasons I teach. They are the reasons
that some days this still feels like a passion and not a job.
When I pick up the broom at the end of the day to sweep my class due to budget
cuts, I remember Cayla.
When I drive home demoralized after another meeting where our success is
dissected with a knife manufactured in Texas, I remember Niecy.
When another new program that is going to solve the reading disparity, resulting in
higher test scores, is introduced on top of another new program that was supposed
to result in the same thing, I remember Manuel.
They are the fires that fuel my passion. They are the lifeboats that help me ride this
current wave in education.
Eight or ten years from now, I want other former students to contact me and tell me a
success story from their lives. I don’t want to be remembered as the teacher who
taught them how to sing “Test busters” or to “bubble up.” I want to be remembered
as a teacher who inspired them to learn.
Susan J. Hobart, M.S. Ed., is a National Board Certified Teacher. Reprinted from
“The Progressive” Magazine (http://www.progressive.org)
By Susan J. Hobart
I’m a teacher. I’ve taught elementary school for eleven years. I’ve always told
people, “I have the best job in the world.” I crafted curriculum that made students
think, and they had fun while learning. At the end of the day, I felt energized. Today,
more often than not, I feel demoralized.
While I still connect my lesson plans to students’ lives and work to make it real, this
no longer is my sole focus. Today I have a new nickname: test buster. Singing to the
tune of “Ghost busters,” I teach test-taking strategies similar to those taught in
Stanley Kaplan prep courses for the SAT. I spend an inordinate amount of time
showing students how to “bubble up,” the term for darkening those little circles that
accompany multiple choice questions on standardized tests.
I am told these are invaluable skills to have.
I am told if we do a good job, our students will do well.
I am told that our district does not teach to the test.
I am told that the time we are spending preparing for and administering the tests,
analyzing the results, and attending in-services to help our children become
proficient on this annual measure of success will pay off by reducing the academic
achievement gap between our white children and our children of color.
I am told a lot of things.
But what I know is that I’m not the teacher I used to be. And it takes a toll. I used to
be the one who raved about my classroom, even after a long week. Pollyanna,
people called me. Today, when I speak with former colleagues, they are amazed at
the cynicism creeping into my voice.
What has changed?
No Child Left Behind is certainly a big part of the problem. The children I test are
from a wide variety of abilities and backgrounds. Whether they have a cognitive
disability, speak entry-level English, or have speech or language delays, everyone
takes the same test and the results are posted. Special education students may
have some accommodations, but they take the same test and are expected to
perform at the same level as general education students. Students new to this
country or with a native language other than English must also take the same test
and are expected to perform at the same level as children whose native language is
English. Picture yourself taking a five-day test in French after moving to Paris last
year.
No Child Left Behind is one size fits all. But any experienced teacher knows how
warped a yardstick that is.
I spent yesterday in a meeting discussing this year’s standardized test results. Our
team was feeling less than optimistic in spite of additional targeted funds made
available to our students who are low income or who perform poorly on such tests.
As an educator, I know these tests are only one measure, one snapshot, of student
achievement. Unfortunately, they are the make-or-break assessment that
determines our status with the Department of Education.
They are the numbers that are published in the paper.
They are the scores that home buyers look at when deciding if they should move
into a neighborhood.
They are the numbers that are pulled out and held over us, as more and greater
rigidity enters the curriculum.
I was recently told we cannot buddy up with a first-grade class during our core
literacy time. It does not fit the definition of core literacy, I was told. Reading with
younger children has been a boon to literacy improvement for my struggling readers
and my new English-speaking students. Now I must throw this tool away?
In an increasingly diverse public school setting, there is not one educational
pedagogy that fits all students. We study and discuss differentiated curriculum,
modify teaching strategies, and set “just right reading levels” to scaffold student
learning. But No Child Left Behind doesn’t care about that. It takes no note of where
they started or how much they may have progressed.
As a teacher, I measure progress and achievement for my students on a daily basis.
I set the bar high, expecting a lot.
I don’t argue with the importance of assessment; it informs my instruction for each
child.
I don’t argue with the importance of accountability; I believe in it strongly—for myself
and my students.
I have empathy for our administrators who have to stand up and be told that we are
“challenged schools.” And I have empathy for our administrators who have to turn
around and drill it into our teacher heads, telling us we must do things “this” way to
get results. I feel for them. They are judged on the numbers, as well.
No Child Left Behind is a symptom of a larger problem: the attack on public
education itself. Like the school choice effort, which uses public funds to finance
private schools and cherry-pick the best students, No Child Left Behind is designed
to punish public schools and to demonstrate that private is best.
But I don’t think we’ve turned a corner that we can’t come back from. Public
education has been a dynamic vehicle in our country since its inception. We must
grapple with maintaining this progressive institution. Policy makers and educators
know that education holds out hope as the great equalizer in this country. It can
inspire and propel a student, a family, a community.
The state where I teach has a large academic achievement gap for African American
and low income children. That is unacceptable. Spending time, money, energy on
testing everyone with a “one size fits all test” will not eliminate or reduce that gap.
Instead, we need teacher-led professional development and more local control of
school budgets and policymaking. Beyond that, we need to address the economic
and social issues many children face, instead of punishing the schools that are
trying to do right by these students.
We’ve got things backwards today. Children should be in the front seat, not the
testing companies. And teachers should be rewarded for teaching, not for being
Stanley Kaplan tutors.
Ten years ago, I taught a student named Cayla. A couple of months ago, I got a note
from her, one of those things that teachers thrive on.
“Ms. Hobart was different than other teachers, in a good way,” she wrote. “We didn’t
learn just from a textbook; we experienced the topics by ‘jumping into the textbook.’
We got to construct a rainforest in our classroom, have a fancy lunch on the Queen
Elizabeth II, and go on a safari through Africa. What I learned ten years ago still
sticks with me today. When I become a teacher, I hope to inspire my students as
much as she inspired hers.”
Last week, I received a call from Niecy, another student from that class ten years
ago. She was calling from southern Illinois to tell me she was graduating from high
school this month and had just found out that she has won a scholarship to a college
in Indiana. I was ecstatic in my happiness for her. We laughed, and I told her I was
looking at a photo of her on my wall, building a pyramid out of paper bricks with her
classmates.
I also had a recent conversation with Manuel in a grocery parking lot. He reminded
me of my promise eight years ago to attend his high school graduation. I plan to be
there.
Cayla and Niecy and Manuel are three of the reasons I teach. They are the reasons
that some days this still feels like a passion and not a job.
When I pick up the broom at the end of the day to sweep my class due to budget
cuts, I remember Cayla.
When I drive home demoralized after another meeting where our success is
dissected with a knife manufactured in Texas, I remember Niecy.
When another new program that is going to solve the reading disparity, resulting in
higher test scores, is introduced on top of another new program that was supposed
to result in the same thing, I remember Manuel.
They are the fires that fuel my passion. They are the lifeboats that help me ride this
current wave in education.
Eight or ten years from now, I want other former students to contact me and tell me a
success story from their lives. I don’t want to be remembered as the teacher who
taught them how to sing “Test busters” or to “bubble up.” I want to be remembered
as a teacher who inspired them to learn.
Susan J. Hobart, M.S. Ed., is a National Board Certified Teacher. Reprinted from
“The Progressive” Magazine (http://www.progressive.org)
| Great Public schools are a basic right for every child |
Legislative Action
 | |  | |  | |  |
Good News and What's Next
Counselor positions are exempt from social security withholdings
Commissioner hosts PSRS/SS Issue Meeting; Missouri NEA is at the table
Good News
The Social Security Administration (SSA) has determined that the counselor
position is exempt from Social Security. This determination was made based on
documentation from 1948 that supports the requirement for a counselor to hold a
teaching certificate. At this time, other similar positions including, but not limited to,
school psychological examiners, school psychologists, adult education supervisors,
career education counselors, career education placement coordinators, and
speech-language pathologists are still under scrutiny and are not considered
exempt. Additional applications for clarification will need to be filed with SSA before
they will consider exemption for the other categories listed above.
What's Next
As promised, on November 18, Missouri NEA met with several other education
groups, PSRS, DESE Staff, and Thomas Sadowski, the Missouri Office of
Administration Director. Sadowski is charged with handling the PSRS/SS issue.
Sadowski's powerpoint from the meeting is available at
http://oa.mo.gov/acct/ssa.htm. Commissioner King hosted this meeting to make
sure everyone shared common definitions and had accurate information about the
procedures being used by the SSA to determine exemptions. King also pointed out
that DESE was instrumental in providing the resources to help with documentation
and the research required by the SSA to exempt counselors.
Sadowski reported that he is creating a matrix that can be used to seek clarification
from the SSA regarding the many categories of employees that could be impacted.
Missouri NEA volunteered to work to help establish an appeal process to be used
when SSA makes a determination we do not agree with. However, Missouri NEA
will continue to seek solutions that does not require forms or clarification decisions
for the nearly 500 categories of personnel positions in the 517 school districts
impacted. All of the steps in the process outlined by the SSA takes time. Therefore,
extending implementation beyond July 1, 2009 will continue to be Missouri NEA's
short term priority.
The Missouri Congressional delegation has requested a meeting with the US
Commissioner of Social Security to seek a delay and long term solution. Since this
is a federal issue, Missouri NEA has spent time with federal staff helping them
understand the problem and potential solutions.
Reversing this misguided SSA/IRS decision remains Missouri NEA's long term
priority. To accomplish this we held a second meeting on Nov. 18, with other
associations to divide responsibilities for the political and procedural strategies
necessary to find a solution that will continue to exempt the effected PSRS
members from social security. Stay tuned. Missouri NEA is at work for you.
PSRS/SSA change QA
Counselor positions are exempt from social security withholdings
Commissioner hosts PSRS/SS Issue Meeting; Missouri NEA is at the table
Good News
The Social Security Administration (SSA) has determined that the counselor
position is exempt from Social Security. This determination was made based on
documentation from 1948 that supports the requirement for a counselor to hold a
teaching certificate. At this time, other similar positions including, but not limited to,
school psychological examiners, school psychologists, adult education supervisors,
career education counselors, career education placement coordinators, and
speech-language pathologists are still under scrutiny and are not considered
exempt. Additional applications for clarification will need to be filed with SSA before
they will consider exemption for the other categories listed above.
What's Next
As promised, on November 18, Missouri NEA met with several other education
groups, PSRS, DESE Staff, and Thomas Sadowski, the Missouri Office of
Administration Director. Sadowski is charged with handling the PSRS/SS issue.
Sadowski's powerpoint from the meeting is available at
http://oa.mo.gov/acct/ssa.htm. Commissioner King hosted this meeting to make
sure everyone shared common definitions and had accurate information about the
procedures being used by the SSA to determine exemptions. King also pointed out
that DESE was instrumental in providing the resources to help with documentation
and the research required by the SSA to exempt counselors.
Sadowski reported that he is creating a matrix that can be used to seek clarification
from the SSA regarding the many categories of employees that could be impacted.
Missouri NEA volunteered to work to help establish an appeal process to be used
when SSA makes a determination we do not agree with. However, Missouri NEA
will continue to seek solutions that does not require forms or clarification decisions
for the nearly 500 categories of personnel positions in the 517 school districts
impacted. All of the steps in the process outlined by the SSA takes time. Therefore,
extending implementation beyond July 1, 2009 will continue to be Missouri NEA's
short term priority.
The Missouri Congressional delegation has requested a meeting with the US
Commissioner of Social Security to seek a delay and long term solution. Since this
is a federal issue, Missouri NEA has spent time with federal staff helping them
understand the problem and potential solutions.
Reversing this misguided SSA/IRS decision remains Missouri NEA's long term
priority. To accomplish this we held a second meeting on Nov. 18, with other
associations to divide responsibilities for the political and procedural strategies
necessary to find a solution that will continue to exempt the effected PSRS
members from social security. Stay tuned. Missouri NEA is at work for you.
PSRS/SSA change QA
Capitol Action Day - April 8, 2009
By Otto Fajen
MNEA Legislative Director
Dec. 16, 2008
2009 Session Pre-Update
SESSION RETURNS IN JANUARY
The next legislative session begins on January 7, 2009. The MNEA Daily Legislative Update
2009 will return to cover daily events when the session begins. The daily updates will be
available by email. The updates will keep you informed in a timely manner concerning
developments on legislation affecting school children and school employees and will advise you
of actions you can take to affect the legislative process. A weekly MNEA Legislative Update
digest will also be posted on the MNEA website and will summarize legislative activity for the
week.
NOVEMBER ELECTION BRINGS CHANGE
Missouri NEA members helped achieve key victories for students and public education in the
November 4, 2008 election. President-Elect Barack Obama and Governor-Elect Jay Nixon will
support policies that ensure great public schools for every child and oppose anti-public
education attacks. The Association supported current legislators and new candidates who will
support students, adequately fund public schools and respect education employee rights.
Missouri NEA’s goal for the state legislature was to create a "home field advantage" in 2009 for
ideas to advance public education by electing a pro-public education majority in both the House
and the Senate. The election results in the Missouri legislature are less clear: the support for
public education varies by issue. Some issues will have a clear majority for public education and
education employees, some issues will not have a majority and some may have majority support
if MNEA members work diligently to educate legislators unfamiliar with the issues.
NEW LEADERSHIP, BIG PROBLEMS FOR THE UPCOMING SESSION
The upcoming session will include many new state leaders, including Governor-Elect Jay Nixon,
new House Speaker Ron Richard and new Senate President Pro Tem Charlie Shields. This will
be an important year for the future of public education in Missouri. The recent economic
downturn has created uncertainty regarding future state revenues. The state started the fiscal
year with an operating balance of over $850 million, but withering state revenues mean that
significant state budget cuts are expected during the current budget year and even bigger cuts of
perhaps 15% to 25% will be made in next year's budget.
Meanwhile, the state is being sued by parents, students and nearly half of Missouri school
districts for inadequate and inequitable funding, and the trial before the Missouri Supreme Court
will be conducted during the next legislative session. The Association urges the General
Assembly to address the structural budget deficit, improve the fairness of the state tax code and
ensure adequate funding for public education and other vital public services.
Missouri NEA will continue to promote an agenda that strengthens public education and public
educators for the benefit of children. Key issues for the upcoming session will include: supporting
adequate funding for public education, protecting the constitutional rights of education
employees by enacting a good collective bargaining law, and ensuring all children have
healthcare and come to school ready to learn.
INVESTING IN PUBLIC EDUCATION
MNEA believes public schools are a great investment that promotes economic prosperity for all
Missourians. Unfortunately, current state school funding is neither adequate nor equitable. Worse
still, the state is facing a bleak fiscal outlook for the next few years, due to economic slowdown
and harmful tax cuts and increasing tax credits. The CEE school funding lawsuit will also go to
trial before the Missouri Supreme Court in the first half of 2009 while the legislature is in session.
The formula base-level funding and student-need weighting factors should be raised to research-
based adequacy figures. Local property assessments should be accurate and uniform across
the state, and local property taxes should be deducted at a level all districts can reach.
MNEA supports adequate and equitable funding for public higher education institutions and
increased funding for student financial aid.
MNEA supports tax reform to provide fair and adequate taxation that supports investment in
public education and promotes economic prosperity for all Missourians.
Proposition A, approved in November by voters, repealed gambling boat loss limits. Prop A may
eventually bring in some additional revenues, though the economic slowdown may postpone any
real effect for one or more years. School districts on the formula may eventually see as much as
a $100 per-pupil increase due to this measure.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
MNEA's key legislative focus last session was to protect the recently won collective bargaining
rights for all education employees. Governor-Elect Jay Nixon will support education employee
rights and oppose attempts to deny teachers the same bargaining rights provided under
Missouri’s Constitution to other public employees.
An effective bargaining process must have a unified employee voice. MNEA supports legislation
that would treat all public employees fairly and that is built on broad consensus among public
employee groups and public employers. An effective bargaining law must provide for exclusive
bargaining representation, a duty for both employees and employers to bargain in good faith,
binding agreements with a clear ratification process and a fair process to resolve impasse and
grievances.
TAX CREDIT VOUCHERS
Proven school improvement strategies help to ensure great public schools for every child. Tax-
credit vouchers are not the answer: they do not ensure great public schools for every child. All
schools need the tools and resources and proven strategies to help children succeed in school.
All children deserve great public schools. Private school tax-credit vouchers leave too many
children behind. We need to focus on learning, not bureaucracy. Taxpayers want money to go
toward improving schools, not to creating new bureaucracies to administer private school tax-
credit vouchers.
Changes in Missouri’s legislative leadership, including the selection of new House Speaker Ron
Richard and the likely appointment of MNEA-recommended Rep. Maynard Wallace as a key
committee chair on education issues signal a hope that the legislature will spend less attention
on the tax-credit voucher proposals in 2009.
MISSOURI NEA’S COMPREHENSIVE GR PROGRAM
Missouri NEA will depend upon a grassroots lobbying effort led by MNEA and carried out by our
Government Relation Teams and our membership. Our members must take the initiative to
contact legislators about the key issues affecting public education.
Here's what you can do to support MNEA's legislative agenda:
1) Be a part of your local Government Relations Team.
2) Take the initiative to contact local legislators now to discuss our key issues.
3) Attend the legislative brunch or dinner in your area.
4) Attend the Missouri NEA Capitol Action Days for your Governance District. Capitol Action
Days begin in early February and include most Wednesdays until the first week of May.
5) Receive and read the daily MNEA Daily Legislative Update 2009 via email while the
legislature is in session from January to May.
6) Visit the Missouri Legislative Action Center:
By Otto Fajen
MNEA Legislative Director
Dec. 16, 2008
2009 Session Pre-Update
SESSION RETURNS IN JANUARY
The next legislative session begins on January 7, 2009. The MNEA Daily Legislative Update
2009 will return to cover daily events when the session begins. The daily updates will be
available by email. The updates will keep you informed in a timely manner concerning
developments on legislation affecting school children and school employees and will advise you
of actions you can take to affect the legislative process. A weekly MNEA Legislative Update
digest will also be posted on the MNEA website and will summarize legislative activity for the
week.
NOVEMBER ELECTION BRINGS CHANGE
Missouri NEA members helped achieve key victories for students and public education in the
November 4, 2008 election. President-Elect Barack Obama and Governor-Elect Jay Nixon will
support policies that ensure great public schools for every child and oppose anti-public
education attacks. The Association supported current legislators and new candidates who will
support students, adequately fund public schools and respect education employee rights.
Missouri NEA’s goal for the state legislature was to create a "home field advantage" in 2009 for
ideas to advance public education by electing a pro-public education majority in both the House
and the Senate. The election results in the Missouri legislature are less clear: the support for
public education varies by issue. Some issues will have a clear majority for public education and
education employees, some issues will not have a majority and some may have majority support
if MNEA members work diligently to educate legislators unfamiliar with the issues.
NEW LEADERSHIP, BIG PROBLEMS FOR THE UPCOMING SESSION
The upcoming session will include many new state leaders, including Governor-Elect Jay Nixon,
new House Speaker Ron Richard and new Senate President Pro Tem Charlie Shields. This will
be an important year for the future of public education in Missouri. The recent economic
downturn has created uncertainty regarding future state revenues. The state started the fiscal
year with an operating balance of over $850 million, but withering state revenues mean that
significant state budget cuts are expected during the current budget year and even bigger cuts of
perhaps 15% to 25% will be made in next year's budget.
Meanwhile, the state is being sued by parents, students and nearly half of Missouri school
districts for inadequate and inequitable funding, and the trial before the Missouri Supreme Court
will be conducted during the next legislative session. The Association urges the General
Assembly to address the structural budget deficit, improve the fairness of the state tax code and
ensure adequate funding for public education and other vital public services.
Missouri NEA will continue to promote an agenda that strengthens public education and public
educators for the benefit of children. Key issues for the upcoming session will include: supporting
adequate funding for public education, protecting the constitutional rights of education
employees by enacting a good collective bargaining law, and ensuring all children have
healthcare and come to school ready to learn.
INVESTING IN PUBLIC EDUCATION
MNEA believes public schools are a great investment that promotes economic prosperity for all
Missourians. Unfortunately, current state school funding is neither adequate nor equitable. Worse
still, the state is facing a bleak fiscal outlook for the next few years, due to economic slowdown
and harmful tax cuts and increasing tax credits. The CEE school funding lawsuit will also go to
trial before the Missouri Supreme Court in the first half of 2009 while the legislature is in session.
The formula base-level funding and student-need weighting factors should be raised to research-
based adequacy figures. Local property assessments should be accurate and uniform across
the state, and local property taxes should be deducted at a level all districts can reach.
MNEA supports adequate and equitable funding for public higher education institutions and
increased funding for student financial aid.
MNEA supports tax reform to provide fair and adequate taxation that supports investment in
public education and promotes economic prosperity for all Missourians.
Proposition A, approved in November by voters, repealed gambling boat loss limits. Prop A may
eventually bring in some additional revenues, though the economic slowdown may postpone any
real effect for one or more years. School districts on the formula may eventually see as much as
a $100 per-pupil increase due to this measure.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
MNEA's key legislative focus last session was to protect the recently won collective bargaining
rights for all education employees. Governor-Elect Jay Nixon will support education employee
rights and oppose attempts to deny teachers the same bargaining rights provided under
Missouri’s Constitution to other public employees.
An effective bargaining process must have a unified employee voice. MNEA supports legislation
that would treat all public employees fairly and that is built on broad consensus among public
employee groups and public employers. An effective bargaining law must provide for exclusive
bargaining representation, a duty for both employees and employers to bargain in good faith,
binding agreements with a clear ratification process and a fair process to resolve impasse and
grievances.
TAX CREDIT VOUCHERS
Proven school improvement strategies help to ensure great public schools for every child. Tax-
credit vouchers are not the answer: they do not ensure great public schools for every child. All
schools need the tools and resources and proven strategies to help children succeed in school.
All children deserve great public schools. Private school tax-credit vouchers leave too many
children behind. We need to focus on learning, not bureaucracy. Taxpayers want money to go
toward improving schools, not to creating new bureaucracies to administer private school tax-
credit vouchers.
Changes in Missouri’s legislative leadership, including the selection of new House Speaker Ron
Richard and the likely appointment of MNEA-recommended Rep. Maynard Wallace as a key
committee chair on education issues signal a hope that the legislature will spend less attention
on the tax-credit voucher proposals in 2009.
MISSOURI NEA’S COMPREHENSIVE GR PROGRAM
Missouri NEA will depend upon a grassroots lobbying effort led by MNEA and carried out by our
Government Relation Teams and our membership. Our members must take the initiative to
contact legislators about the key issues affecting public education.
Here's what you can do to support MNEA's legislative agenda:
1) Be a part of your local Government Relations Team.
2) Take the initiative to contact local legislators now to discuss our key issues.
3) Attend the legislative brunch or dinner in your area.
4) Attend the Missouri NEA Capitol Action Days for your Governance District. Capitol Action
Days begin in early February and include most Wednesdays until the first week of May.
5) Receive and read the daily MNEA Daily Legislative Update 2009 via email while the
legislature is in session from January to May.
6) Visit the Missouri Legislative Action Center:
Plan now to make the trip to Jefferson City to attend your Capitol Action Days. Talk to other
members about attending, too. Contact Lucian Biesiadecki (x6209) to arrange to attend.
Our Capitol Action Day will start with a briefing at 10 a.m. in the 2nd Floor Capitol Rotunda
area to provide you with the most up-to-date information.