Monthly Archives: September 2016

Posted on by

Interview with Dyslexia Expert Dr. Tim Odegard

Odegard, Tim 11-2015We welcome Dr. Tim Odegard to the blog to discuss dyslexia. Dr. Odegard is a dyslexia expert and is currently the Chair of Excellence in Dyslexic Studies and a Professor of Psychology at Middle Tennessee State University.

He is a cognitive psychologist and received his PhD from the University of Arkansas. He speaks locally and nationally on the process of reading and dyslexia.

What are the signs and symptoms of someone with dyslexia?

Students do not have to present with underachievement or difficulties in all of these areas to be said to have characteristics of dyslexia.

  •   Difficulty reading words in isolation
  •   Difficulty accurately decoding unfamiliar words
  •   Difficulty with oral reading (slow, inaccurate, or labored)
  •   Difficulty spelling
  •   Segmenting, blending, and manipulating sounds in words (phonemic awareness)
  •   Learning the names of letters and their associated sounds
  •   Holding information about sounds and words in memory (phonological memory)
  •   Rapidly recalling the names of familiar objects, colors, or letters of the alphabet (rapid naming)

We hear that 1 in 5 students have dyslexia. Is that fact or fiction?

It is a number based on study documenting the prevalence rate of dyslexia. The prevalence rate ranges from 5 – 20 % depending on the nature of the sample included in the study.

The reality is that when schools are required to report the identification rates of dyslexia the identification rate is less that 3%. This reality suggests that we do not have an issue of over identification in our country but one of under identification.

The data on the identification rates of Specific Learning Disability in our public schools also suggests that we have an issue in some states of under identification of specific learning disability. Dyslexia is just one form of specific learning disability.

When identified as having dyslexia, what type of intervention do students need to improve their reading ability?

These students struggle to read words accurately and or quickly. This can limit their ability to comprehend written material and learn new vocabulary from written material. These students need direct instruction that systematically teaches them how to read words.

Advocates say that OG (Orton-Gillingham) intervention is what is needed for all students with dyslexia. Has the OG method been proven to work with students with dyslexia?

Yes, there were several controlled studies conducted to test the impact of various Orton-Gillingham based programs. The results of these studies were summarized in a meta-analysis published in the Annals of Dyslexia. Due to the age of these studies they were not included in the What Works Clearinghouse.

Do all students who struggle with reading have dyslexia?

No, a small number of students with a specific learning disability in reading struggle with comprehension in spite of being able to accurately and efficiently read words and text passages. A specific comprehension problem is not dyslexia.

What are the two biggest misconception when it comes to dyslexia?

Many people still think that dyslexia is a medical diagnosis that must be tested and diagnosed by a health professional. This is not true. The reality is that dyslexia is not a medical condition and does not require a medical diagnosis.

Many people still think that school personnel cannot identify characteristics of dyslexia or dyslexia.

This is not true. The reality is that school psychologists in our public schools are often the best equipped to identify dyslexia. The 2016 Say Dyslexia law helps to clarify this for schools, and the Center for Dyslexia is working to provide educators and parents with valuable resources to aid in the identification of dyslexia.

What does the MTSU Center for Dyslexia offer parents and students?

The Center for Dyslexia has a small staff of experts in dyslexia and literacy dedicated to providing resources to parents, student and educators. We offer assistance to parents in understanding how they can work with their child’s schools in support of school based identification of dyslexia.

We also offer monthly parent workshops of different topics of dyslexia and supporting students with dyslexia. We have a limited capacity to provide testing services to students in the state.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport.


 

Posted on by

Just Kidding

The Tennessee General Assembly this year approved changes to the state’s school funding formula (the BEP) and at the same time, refused to appropriate sufficient funds to pay for the changes.

As a result of this refusal, MNPS is suing the state and demanding full funding of the formula.

The state’s response is pretty remarkable. State lawyers maintain that even though new funding ratios are now state law, the state doesn’t have to follow this law.

Grace Tatter reports:

Metro Nashville Public Schools, which serves about a third of the state’s ELL population, is seeking a court order demanding that the state provide the district with funds promised under its recently revised funding formula known as the Basic Education Program, or BEP.

State lawmakers voted this year to increase ELL funding based on a 1:20 student-teacher ratio instead of the previous 1:30 ration, but only provided Nashville with money for a 1:25 ratio. That’s about $4 million short of what was promised this school year, say Nashville school leaders.

Attorneys for the state say Tennessee isn’t obligated to follow through with its own spending plan — and that Nashville doesn’t have the grounds to seek the order in the first place.

The state doesn’t have to follow through with its own spending plan? Then why even have a spending plan? The state adopted a new funding formula and put new funding ratios into Tennessee Code. But now the state is saying they don’t actually have to follow the laws they passed.

Perhaps what’s most frustrating about this entire situation is that Tennessee has a $925 million budget surplus this year. That’s following a $1 billion surplus last year.

Yes, we have the money to fully fund the formula. Instead, lawyers are now arguing that policymakers are not obligated to follow a formula they proposed and adopted. That’s a pretty strange defense.

The legislature could have phased-in the ratios. Or adopted different, more “affordable” ratios. But they didn’t. Now, the state doesn’t want to be held accountable for meeting the ratios Governor Haslam suggested and the General Assembly adopted. What other laws does the state view as mere suggestions?

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport


 

Posted on by

Federal Report Shows TFA Teachers As Good As Or Better Than Traditionally Trained Teachers

The Institute of Education Sciences’ What Works Clearinghouse recently released a systematic review of all the research on Teach for America (TFA).

What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) is a place where educators can go to determine if programs are scientifically proven to work. It’s a helpful tool for all those educators who wondered, “Does this actually work?”

From their website:

The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) reviews the existing research on different programs, products, practices, and policies in education. Our goal is to provide educators with the information they need to make evidence-based decisions. We focus on the results from high-quality research to answer the question “What works in education?”

WWC doesn’t just review any type of research reports that are thrown out there. Studies have meet certain scientific requirements to be added into a systematic review of the subject at hand.

This current review looked at TFA’s effectiveness in math, science, English, and social studies achievement.

Overall Effectiveness 

Let’s start out with an overall look at the effectiveness of TFA teachers. Afterwards, I will break down the individual subjects achievement data. As you can see below, TFA teachers are better than traditionally trained teachers in math achievement, potentially better in science achievement, and are the same in social studies achievement and English achievement. The systematic review did not find a pattern of TFA teachers being worse than traditionally trained teachers in any subject.

screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-18-31-amscreen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-34-28-am

screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-54-40-am

Math Achievement 

According to this systematic review, TFA teachers see the great achievement with math. The studies involved look at over 65,000 students and found TFA teachers had a statistically significant positive effect on math achievement. The review found a medium to large amount of evidence for this claim. screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-38-48-amScience Achievement 

For science achievement data, the one study included over 36,000 students and found a positive and statistically significant effect of TFA teachers on science achievement.

screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-44-41-amSocial Studies Achievement 

The one study included in this section found no statistical significant effect on TFA teachers in regards to social studies achievement. This means that TFA teachers were the same as traditionally trained teachers when it came to their student’s social studies achievement.

screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-48-54-amEnglish Achievement

For English achievement, the systematic review looked at 5 studies that included over 53,000 students. They found that there was no statistically significant effect of TFA teachers compared to traditionally trained teachers. TFA teachers and traditionally trained teachers were the same when it came to English achievement.

screen-shot-2016-09-14-at-10-51-54-amWhat are the takeaways? 

TFA teachers do better in math and science achievement, but do no worse in English and social studies achievement compared to traditionally trained teachers. The takeaway is that TFA teachers, with limited amount of training, are doing the same or as better as teachers who spend years in training.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport.


 

 

 

Posted on by

How Did MNPS High Schools And Subgroups Do On The ACT?

I recently wrote about the release of ACT scores for the state and specifically for Nashville. We learned that only 11% of MNPS students were college and career ready according to the ACT. 

Today, MNPS released more in depth information on the individual high schools as well as information on specific subgroups in Nashville. 

According to MNPS, 4,376 seniors took the ACT with the average score of 18.2. Seniors need to have a composite score of 21 or above to qualify for the HOPE scholarship. While the percent of high school students qualifying for HOPE scholarship decreased, the number of students qualifying for the scholarship actually increased from from 1,131 to 1,219 students.

Achievement Gap

Before we look at the scores of individual high schools, I want to look at the ACT scores based on subgroups. Below we see the gap between Black (16.7), Hispanic/Latino (16.9), and White (20.7) students. That’s a 4 point different between Black and White students and a 3.8 point difference Hispanic/Latino and White students.

screen-shot-2016-09-13-at-2-46-12-pm

How did individual high schools do?

The top traditional high schools for ACT achievement are Hume-Fogg (26.8), MLK (26.3), and Nashville School of the Arts (20.5). The lowest traditional high schools are Pearl Cohn (14.5), Whites Creek (15.7), and Maplewood (15.7). Obviously, the top three schools are all magnet schools.

MNPS points out a few things about this year’s data:

Stratford tested many more students in 2016 and had an increase of 0.5 points. East Nashville, Whites Creek and Metro Nashville Virtual School saw test score increases while having modest increases in the number of test takers. LEAD Academy tested slightly fewer students but saw an increase in scores.

screen-shot-2016-09-13-at-2-51-38-pm

How do we improve?

MNPS is working with Alignment Nashville to give free ACT preparation classes to students who cannot afford them. Last year, Alignment Nashville worked with Hunters Lane, Hillsboro, Maplewood, and Overton. Additional schools may be added this year.

I am so glad that Alignment Nashville is partnering with our schools to prepare our students for the ACT. We are doing a disservice to our students who graduate from high school not prepared for college or career. It breaks my heart that thousands of students are missing out on the HOPE scholarship. More must be done to help these students, and all of that shouldn’t be left to our high school teachers.

Preparing our students for graduation starts before the students even get to the high school level. MNPS transformed our high schools years ago towards the academy model. I think it’s time to start looking at the transformation of elementary and middle schools.

Elementary and middle schools need more supports in place to help close the gaps before students move on to high school. I don’t have all the answers, but I hope MNPS will be looking into ways to give more support to our lower grades.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport.


 

Posted on by

What Makes a PAC a PAC?

The curious case of Williamson Strong (as told by Williamson Strong). A summary: The Tennessee Registry of Election Finance found that parent advocacy group Williamson Strong was a PAC and issued a fine. Williamson Strong is appealing that decision. Meanwhile, a group calling itself the Sumner Sentinel was determined NOT to be a PAC by the same Registry.

Here’s the story as Williamson Strong sees it:

Our appeal hearing with the Tennessee Registry of Election Finance is set for November 3-4.

As you know, Susan Curlee and subsequently the Tennessee Registry of Election Finance (TREF) have been prosecuting a case against the five of us since late 2014. It has been an eye-opening experience: what appears to be (or have been) a very close relationship between Curlee and the Registry, false and harassing charges from Curlee, demonstrably fabricated statements and charges from the state, multiple attempts by Curlee to get the DA to charge us with various crimes, deleted public records, “accidentally deleted” public audio recordings, and deposition testimony regarding the proper preparation of turnips.

This case isn’t technical. This case isn’t normal.

We are involved parties and you will and should read this—and our subsequent and previous updates—with that in mind. We will cover multiple aspects of the story and provide links to source materials when possible. Despite the Registry’s and Ms. Curlee’s efforts to seal and hide many of the records, most of the documents in this case are public records: the depositions, the motions, the responses, the transcriptions of the hearings themselves.

Through the Registry, Curlee and her powerful political allies have been effective in using state tax dollars and the power of the state government to investigate us and harass us, to transmit to the public lies about us, and to damage our reputations (as Curlee gleefully acknowledged the day of the ruling in an email to Jean Barwick, the paid executive director of the Williamson County Republican Party).

(Note: When Ms. Barwick familiarly refers to “Patricia,” she is referring to Registry member Patricia Heim, former Davidson County Election member and active Davidson County Republican Party and Nashville Republican Women member.)

The Registry jumped in with both feet in support of Susan Curlee. Lest you think we’re exaggerating when we point out that the Registry’s behavior in this case is different than their behavior and judgment throughout their history, let’s take it from the Registry itself. Drew Rawlins, long-time Executive Director of the TREF, has testified that, to the best of his knowledge, with the exception of the Williamson Strong case, TREF has NEVER in its existence:

1) Fined a group for failing to register as a PAC without evidence of cash contributions.

2) Found that a group supported or opposed a candidate without an express endorsement or opposition to any particular candidate for public office.

3) Found that presenting factual information regarding candidates for public office constituted support for or opposition to a candidate within the meaning of the PAC definitions.

4) Determined that a group reporting on another entity’s endorsement of candidates constituted support for or opposition to a candidate by the group sharing that information.

5) Determined that the act of meeting with candidates for public office constitutes PAC activity.

6) Found that a nonpartisan [and non-candidates specific] “get out the vote” effort constituted a contribution or expenditure under the campaign finance laws.

7) Held that the act of purchasing a voter list constituted an expenditure or a contribution in support of or in opposition to a candidate.

That’s pretty much the whole case against Williamson Strong.

So why? Why did the Registry act the way it did? We could compare this to lots of other cases (and we might), but let’s just pick a contemporary one for now. Let’s look at a case that happened just this year, one that was fully resolved within a couple of months. The Registry has the same members, but they reached a dramatically different decision.

The Sumner Sentinel

The Sumner Sentinel is a political website, Facebook page, and printed “newsletter” in Sumner County. The newsletter version of the Sentinel was printed and mailed a total of three times in two years. The mailed, printed version was linked to the website and the Facebook page; you could read the “newsletter” through the website and so forth.

The Sumner Sentinel team describes itself as:
“a group of citizens focused on bringing transparency and accountability to local government through publications, advocacy opportunities and online forums”

Some of their content in their “Election Issue” arguably advocated for the election of some candidates and for the defeat of others. Their election intent was clear.

The Sumner Sentinel had nice things to say about the incumbent Sumner County Assessor of Property John Isbell and disparaging things to say about his opponent. That shouldn’t be shocking, given that Isbell was the founding administrator of the Sumner Sentinel Facebook page and the owner of the Sumner Sentinel website domain. John Isbell also actively campaigned on the Sumner Sentinel’s Facebook page.

The Registry, however, found that the Sumner Sentinel, which had web hosting fees as well as over $11,000 in printing costs, was “the media” and thus was not a PAC.

The Registry did not comb through the content of the Sumner Sentinel website, Facebook page, and printed material (as they did with us) to determine if their content met the standards of advocating for or against the election of a candidate. Nor did the Registry ask (or demand, as in our case) that the Sumner Sentinel team defend themselves against the claim that they were expressly advocating for or against the election of certain candidates. Nope. The Registry concluded that the Sumner Sentinel was a media publication and was therefore covered by the First Amendment. Very simple. The Registry made it clear that editorial content – at least in this case – cannot be considered a contribution. It is a First Amendment issue, in the Sumner Sentinel’s case, according to the Registry.

Registry counsel explained that, according to the law, the only way the media could be considered a PAC is if it were “owned” (partly or wholly) or controlled (partly or wholly) by a candidate. Note that John Isbell was a candidate for office and the Sumner Sentinel promoted him. Though John Isbell administered the group’s Facebook page, owned the website domain, and was described as “on the team” on the newsletter itself, he didn’t “own” the newsletter part. That was owned by Dr. David Black (Congressman Diane Black’s husband). Dr. Black explained (in an affidavit) that when Isbell was described as “on the team,” all he really did was set up the website.

So candidate John Isbell wrote for the Sentinel, owned the website, and administered the Facebook page, but had “nothing to do” with the content? He was labeled “part of the team” but really wasn’t?

Apparently, a group of people can spend eleven grand to print a political newsletter and expressly promote the candidate “on the team” of their publication, but they are not a PAC.

Maybe what really matters is who your friends (and enemies) are?

For more on education politics and policy in Tennesse, follow @TNEdReport


 

 

Posted on by

Emotional Rescue

Tennessee won’t be a part of a national collaboration around social and emotional learning in schools and, according to state Senator Jim Tracy of Shelbyville, we have Jim Tracy to thank (or blame?) for that.

Just last month, the Department of Education announced our state’s selection to participate in a multi-state collaboration around social and emotional learning.

Since then, the plan has faced some criticism, including from lawmakers.

Chalkbeat’s Grace Tatter reports that Rep. Sheila Butt of Columbia questioned the need for such collaboration at a recent hearing:

The recent pushback over social-emotional standards also has included a wariness of collaborative work across state lines, an attitude that contributed to the state’s decision to scrap the Common Core academic standards for math and reading in favor of “homegrown standards” that Tennessee will roll out in 2017.

“I don’t understand why we have to constantly collaborate with other states,” Rep. Sheila Butt said during a summer study session last month. “We don’t have to do it that way.”

Oh, and there’s Jim Tracy. He penned an op-ed in the Daily News Journal of Murfreesboro taking credit for Tennessee rejecting the funding for the project.

Tracy:

After hearing from many constituents about potential funding for this controversial program, I contacted the Department of Education. This action helped in the decision making process by the DOE to decline funding for it.

Tatter explains the “controversial” initiative this way:

The social and emotional standards developed with CASEL would have set benchmarks for what students should know or be able to do in each grade when it comes to skills such as decision-making, self-awareness, social awareness, self-control, and establishing and maintaining healthy relationships.

And here’s how the program was described when it was announced:

The standards will be developed in collaboration with the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning, also known as CASEL, which announced this week that Tennessee will join the initiative along with California, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Washington. The national organization previously has partnered with urban districts including Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools but is branching out into state policy to spread strategies around social and emotional learning.

Tennessee’s new standards will be drafted beginning Sept. 1 by a team that includes researchers, parents and educators. The final product will be reviewed next July by the State Board of Education.

A multi-state collaboration with both national experts and Tennessee educators and parents on an issue shown to have a clear impact on student behavior and performance — that’s what we just scrapped.

For its part, the state says it will still focus on social and emotional learning, just without the input of CASEL or the collaboration from state partners.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport 


 

 

 

Posted on by

Testing Resolve

The Tullahoma City Schools Board of Education will vote September 19th on a resolution related to state standardized tests. Specifically, the resolution calls for a shift to the use of ACT/SAT assessments and a significant reduction in the amount of time students spend taking tests.

A similar resolution was passed by the Board last year.

Here is the resolution:

A RESOLUTION OF THE TULLAHOMA CITY BOARD OF EDUCATION
IN SUPPORT OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE ACT OR SAT SUITE OF ASSESSMENTS TO MEET TCAP AND “EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT” REQUIREMENTS IN OUR END OF COURSE ASSESSMENTS AT THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL AND AT THE 3-8 GRADE LEVELS

WHEREAS, the Tullahoma City Board of Education is the local governmental body responsible for providing a public education to the students and families of Tullahoma City, Tennessee; and

WHEREAS, the State of Tennessee through the work of the Tennessee General Assembly, the Tennessee Department of Education, the Tennessee Board of Education, and local boards of education has established nationally recognized standards and measures for accountability in public education; and

WHEREAS, the Tennessee Department of Education is currently working to implement a replacement to the former Tennessee Comprehensive Assessment Program (TCAP) for the 2016-2017 school year; and

WHEREAS, these new assessments are called TNReady for the areas of English/language arts and math, grades 3 – 8 and TCAP Social Studies Achievement and U.S. History End of Course (EOC) exams; and

WHEREAS, during the assessment cycle of the 2015-16 school year an attempt to administer the assessments was deemed by the Tennessee Department of Education to be a “No-Go;” and

WHEREAS, the Tennessee Department of Education terminated the contract with Measurements, Incorporated and has secured the services of Questar to provide assessment services for Tennessee; and

WHEREAS, ACT and SAT have been used for decades as standard measures of college readiness and that all universities and colleges in Tennessee and the United States utilize the ACT as an admission assessment; and

WHEREAS, Pursuant to T.C.A. § 49-6-6001, all public school students must participate in a postsecondary readiness assessment such as the ACT or SAT. Districts may choose to administer the ACT or the SAT. Districts can also provide both assessments and allow their students to choose the assessment that is right for them; and

WHEREAS, one of the strategic goals of the Tennessee Department of Education is an increase of the average composite score to 21, and the benchmark for college readiness is a composite score of 21. The ACT has further broken down the benchmarks into an 18 for English, 22 for Math, 22 for Reading, and 23 for Science. If a student is able to score at, or above, these important benchmarks, they have a high probability of success in credit-bearing college courses. School districts are distinguished by the percentage of students meeting college readiness benchmarks; and

WHEREAS, both the ACT and the SAT are designed to assist colleges, universities, employers, and policy makers in the determination of college and career ready students, and experts in education administration, child development, and child psychology endorse standardized testing as a limited measure of progress and effectiveness in the important task of learning;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED

The Tullahoma City Board of Education implores the Tennessee General Assembly and the Tennessee Department of Education to allow school districts the opportunity to select either the math and English language arts assessments provided by the State of Tennessee or an English or math test that is part of the suites of standardized assessments available from either ACT or SAT.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,

The Tullahoma City Board of Education implores the Tennessee General Assembly and the Tennessee Department of Education to direct psychometricians, contractors, and developers to construct assessments designed to inform instructional practice and to provide accountability that would not require for administration a period of time in hours greater in aggregate than the specific grade level of the said child, and not to exceed eight hours in length per academic year.

More on testing:

Still Too Much Testing?

Testing Time Reductions Announced

Questar’s Challenge

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport


 

Posted on by

Leaving Teaching After 18 Years

Educator turned blogger Mary Holden talks about why she left teaching after 18 years of service.

Here’s a small excerpt:

I knew being a teacher here would be rough. But we moved here anyway. And we love it here. It’s a great place to raise a family. We love the schools in Nashville. Great things are happening here in spite of all the BS. However, as a teacher, I tried to do my best while biting my tongue. But ultimately, I couldn’t do it.

I saw my colleagues, unlike me, seemingly more able to not worry about these issues so much. Maybe they were used to it? Or maybe they felt like I did but didn’t dare speak up. But I hated it. I hated that 50% of my evaluation was based on my students’ test scores. I hated that we talked about the damn tests almost more than anything else. This was definitely not the reason I became a teacher. I didn’t want to be a part of that culture. It really weighed on me.

READ MORE about Mary’s journey in (and ultimately out of) the classroom.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport


 

Posted on by

Wilson County Teachers to See Raises

The Wilson County Commission recently passed a budget that includes funds to build a new middle school and provides a pay raise for educators.

From the Tennessee Education Association:

Thanks to the efforts of the Wilson County Education Association, the Wilson County Commission passed a pay raise for educators and approved funds to build a new Gladeville middle school.

The approved raises include $1,000 dollars to teachers with one to five years of experience, $2,000 to teachers with six to 10, and $3,000 for teachers with 11+ years. The district is required to use the allocated money exclusively for teacher raises.

WCEA President Melissa Lynn and other WCEA members lead the push to get the increase passed, securing raises and construction funds to ease serious over-crowding issues.

WCEA President Lynn was given an opportunity to address the commission to make the case for teacher raises and new schools. Her remarks are included below.

Good evening. My name is Melissa Lynn. I am a mother, public school teacher and life-long resident of Wilson County.

Having raised a child on a teacher’s salary, I know how important every penny is to a family’s budget. So asking for a property tax increase is not something I take lightly. But as an educator, I know first-hand how critical this increase is for our students, our schools and the future of this community we all love. We simply cannot afford to not do this.

Wilson County is growing at an incredible rate. New homes and businesses are being built every day. If we want our community to continue to be a desirable place for families and businesses, we must have a strong system of public schools. A strong local economy is built upon a foundation of strong public schools – which requires investing our resources in updating facilities and attracting the best educators for our students.

Wilson County Schools are bursting at the seams with over-crowded classrooms and hallways. In order to keep class sizes down and keep our students safe on campus, we really need to build more schools. To date, the growth of our school system has not kept up with the growth of our community.

The second main concern in addition to over-crowded schools, is the county’s ability to attract and retain the most qualified and committed educators. It is our responsibility to our children to ensure every student has an excellent teacher in their classroom. We will not attract the best and brightest educators without competitive pay and benefits. While the county does a good job of providing quality benefits to those teachers who take advantage of the health insurance offered, a teacher cannot put food on her table or pay her bills with health insurance premiums.

Wilson County faces some stiff competition from other districts in Middle Tennessee who offer better salary and benefits packages AND better facilities for educators. Teachers who live here in Wilson County, and would prefer to work here, are choosing to work in other districts because of these things. We need to bring these educators home, and attract the best of the best from other districts, by offering a salary and benefits package that enables educators to provide for their families.

I know you share my belief that our kids deserve the very best. It is up to us now to step up and invest in the future success of our children and our community. That is why I am here tonight to ask that you please vote “YES” to approve the budget and proposed property tax increase before you.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport


 

 

Posted on by

About Jill Speering

TC Weber recently interviewed MNPS Board Member Jill Speering and it’s up on his blog.

Here’s an excerpt about what makes Jill Speering want to serve:

Well, a community representative came to me and said she was aware Mark North was not going to seek reelection, and a group of Madison residents were trying to think who might be a good school board representative. My name came up and so they called me and asked if I would consider running for school board. I really didn’t know what that would entail, but as I pondered it, I thought, well, I could make a difference in reading for children. My experience with board members was they wanted to talk with teachers but then would easily dismiss any advice given. For example, I suggested that we needed a common definition of reading so that we could pick and choose the programs that work with what we believe reading is, and a board member said, “that will never happen.” But my first year being on the board, that’s exactly what did happen. In looking back on things, that’s what made me decide, Yes! I want to run. I can make a difference in the lives of kids!

Read more of this interview and learn more about one of Nashville’s school board members.

For more on education politics and policy in Tennessee, follow @TNEdReport