Coming back from a late August vacation, I caught up on emails and was struck by Mayor Fuller’s August 28 update, which focused on the current school department contract negotiations, providing the equivalent of an open letter to the Newton Teachers Association. As a person who offers professional advice to companies and individuals on negotiation, I couldn’t understand why she choose to publicly address the union members in this way. What was her purpose? To make sure they understood her good faith desire to reach an agreement? To weaken their negotiating position? To give political cover to herself if she ultimately accedes to their major contract demands? And why was the message coming from her? The jurisdiction for this negotiation centers on the School Committee. Yes, she is an important member of the School Committee, but why is she presenting herself as the decision-maker in this dispute?
If the purpose was to strengthen the City’s bargaining position, the issue was all the more confused because the administration has been sending mixed signals to the union and the public. On the one hand, the Mayor makes clear her view that the allocation of the City budget to the schools is fixed, presumably based on her assessment of the limits of City funds that are available. But then actions by the Mayor seem to contradict that implied limitation. For example, she was the person who forcefully pushed for and achieved the expansion to full-day kindergarten, adding costs to the school budget over what would have otherwise been the case. She did so notwithstanding, reportedly, that expansion of the kindergarten day was not a priority of the school system. She is also the person who issued a no-bid contract for several hundred thousand dollars to assess the scope, scale, and location of a new senior/community center (NewCAL), employing free cash from the City’s accounts. And she also proposes to spend $16 million on that new project, not counting annual operating costs. So, if I’m representing the union, am I supposed to believe that funds for the teachers contract are limited to the current allocation?
On the other side of the coin, there are people representing the City in the negotiation who believe that the salaries of school teachers must be raised to be comparable to surrounding communities. Maybe and maybe not. If we look at the rate of successful recruitment of teachers who’ve been offered jobs and at the high rate of retention (89.3%), there is no indication that Newton has any problem attracting and keeping the best talent for our children. Achieving the rate of pay in surrounding communities would be a budget-buster, making it all the more difficult to fund other educational priorities and interfering, too, with the Mayor’s other stated priorities with regard to future pension obligations and the like. While there might be a temporary downturn in enrollment that could provide some financial wiggle room, such patterns do not last forever. Salary increases do; in fact, they compound over time. So, is the Mayor’s email meant to plow the earth with the public in the event she gives in to the union on such matters, attempting to make us think that she has bargained hard?
So, really, what was this all about?
@Paul Levy
Your data on recruitment and retention doesn’t really address the question on whether we’re actually getting top talent or the next level below.
The fact that our test scores lag those of communities with similar SES status suggests that we’re not doing something as well. Unless you have a better theory on our substandard test scores, we’ll stick with the simple axiom- you get what you pay for.
Wow, so much could be said in response. I think your premise is wrong, as I’ve seen no indication that our teachers are second best. But if they were, do you think that raising their salaries to encourage even less turnover is a good way to “clean them out?” How many years of higher wage rates would it take to recruit a new cadre?
There are probably better ways to manage things and spend money to address the achievement gap, if there really is an achievement gap.
Paul- you’re a data guy… How much time have you spent with teachers in other systems to have any comparative sense of Newton teachers’ quality? What other comparative data is out there beyond student outcomes?
Our MCAS and SAT scores lower than peer communities. Not by a lot, but there is a clear gap.
Why would we think an in-demand teacher would voluntarily choose a lower salary given competing offers? After years of being less competitive in salaries, those incremental choices of the best teachers choosing other towns begin to pile up.
Between the common sense of this and the actual test scores, I’m actually surprised you’d be arguing the opposite.
I think that email from Fuller was just PR. I feel like everything she does is just one big PR campaign.
It’s hard to gauge if there’s slippage because of significant overhauls to both the SAT and MCAS exams in recent years. That said, a completely unscientific glimpse at recent scores suggests that there does seem to be some negative movement compared to peer districts.
SAT 14/15 (out of 2400) – Watertown: 1,533, Needham: 1764, Wayland: 1782 Brookline 1794, Weston: 1829, Newton 1805, Lexington: 1908
SAT 17/18 (out of 1600) – Natick: 1174, Needham: 1242, Newton: 1258, Weston: 1262, Brookline: 1259, Wayland: 1272, Lexington: 1319
Additionally, I’m not quite sure I agree that a 89% retention rate is excellent, but rather pretty average among peer districts. Watertown is a 90.1%, Needham 91%, Wayland 90.9%, Brookline 84.5%, Weston 87.6%, and Lexington at 90.5%. I would also note that our high school retainment is a bit concerning at 81.5% compared to 92.1% at Brookline High, 88% at Weston High, 91.5% at Lexington High etc.
sources:
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/staffingRetentionRates.aspx
http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/statereport/sat.aspx
SAT scores measure a students intellectual capacity. Smart
kids are not created by teachers. Newton schools provide a good
education. Each child may or may not achieve depending on a multitude of factors. Usually well educated professional couples
produce very smart children. In Newton that is what I observed
over the years. Kids from Newton North have more economically diverse backgrounds and their scores are not as high as south side students.
As for Mayor Fuller, who knows what her goal may be. Perhaps someone could ask her. As we know politics shapes most things our elected officials do and say.
Paul –
This same situation has occurred at the end of negotiations many times in the past – too many times. Don’t you remember how Mayor Mann “found”money to finish out the contract negotiations? It became a bit of a joke, but the truth of the matter is he understood he had to be flexible in dealing with the budget to get things done.
The teachers aren’t asking for large raises – just a fair increase that puts us back in the game with comparable communities. And no one is asking anyone to “give in”. That has a negative connotation on the ordinary process of negotiations. The fact is you can’t add expensive programs without adding to the allocation. This isn’t rocket science. As Bill Clinton said, it’s arithmetic.
It is getting harder to attract top candidates in a way that may not be visible to the community. In the early 2000’s when a position opened up, a committee would comb through resumes and identify the top three candidates to send to the principal to interview. By the time I retired, we had an opening every year for three years in the same position and the committee combed through many resumes, often for weeks, to find one candidate to send to the principal. The time put into this process was taken away from teaching, planning, meeting with colleagues, etc. No one in the community was aware of it, but that’s what teachers are referring to when they say it’s getting harder to recruit top candidates.
Here’s the issue in concrete terms: my son graduated from his Master’s program with $80,000 in debt. He had two job offers, one with a better salary scale than the other. No need to explain which job he took and why. We have a whole generation of smart, creative, dedicated teachers who are swimming in debt that they will be paying off for decades. That’s the reality the Newton Public Schools has to deal with.
Thanks, Jane. The other reality that the City of Newton has to deal with is that a substantial portion of the people who pay the increasing level of property taxes live on fixed incomes, have no defined benefit plan, pay the full cost of their own health insurance, cover maintenance and repair of their dwellings, and otherwise face equally difficult financial constraints as the young people you mention. There has to be a balance here, with a concern about the paying constituency as well as the paid constituency.
You state: “And no one is asking anyone to ‘give in’. That has a negative connotation on the ordinary process of negotiations.” Indeed, I imagine that people on both sides are looking for concessions, i.e., asking the other party to “give in” on certain terms. Of course, there have to be legitimate trades back and forth to produce an agreement, but there is no negative connotation to that term.
I don’t see how your comment that there was “an opening every year for three years in the same position” jibes with a documented turnover rate among teachers of less than 11%. It is my impression, too, that a very high percentage of people who are offered teaching jobs in the city accept those jobs. This remains a desirable place for teachers to work. It is not necessary to have parity with other employers to create a good work environment. As an example, the hospital I ran had a policy of offering the second- or third-ranked salary schedule for nurses; but we had an exceptionally low turnover rate and vacancy rate because we took actions to create a more collegial, welcoming, caring, and supportive work environment than our peers.
But the main point of my post was to question what the Mayor’s purpose was in issuing an open letter to the union members. As an experienced person in this field, did you see any benefit to the negotiation process or the public interest in her doing so? If so, what was that benefit? I’d welcome your observations and those of other readers on those questions.
I don’t agree with the sentiment that everything the Mayor does is PR. It’s a good thing that she sends out e-mails so that we know what her office is doing. Our former mayor (Setti Warren) was probably decent, but I wouldn’t know because I didn’t get a weekly e-mail from the mayor about the things going on in the city.
Not every student takes the SAT, some take the ACT, some take no test. It is quite possible more students in Newton with more varied abilities take the SAT. And the score differences between communities seems marginal.
There are many things in the City that need funding – fire, police, roads, sewers, parks,… plus the looming pensions/health care issues. I, too, find the whole NewCAL and compensation for elected officials discussions mind-boggling – where is the money coming from? Raising property taxes might be necessary, but it won’t help keep Newton affordable.
One thing to remember when looking at test scores is that many of the other towns/cities listed send kids to vocational schools such as Minuteman, while Newton serves them here. That will affect the test score averages (which I have other reasons for not considering a particularly useful metric, but that’s another topic).
Personally I find all of the Mayor’s communications more like a PTO newsletter-often no point, certainly no real priorities and mostly chatty and long winded.
The focus on standardized tests as the basis for evaluating the quality of Newton’s teachers makes, if not absolutely no sense, then at least very little sense. With two kids entirely through the Newton school system and a third child most of the way through, my family’s experience has been rather mixed. “Meh” pretty much sums it up. Many OK teachers at all levels. Some excellent. But really, more on the low end than should have been the case for a school system with the external reputation of Newton. Perhaps my Jesuit secondary education experience has produced unreasonably high expectations for what constitutes a strong high school education.
I am not sure what this really means in terms of union negotiations though I do find it hard to believe that “breaking the bank” will vastly improve the experience of people like me. On the other hand, would a fiscally responsible approach really reduce quality in the short term? Big systems do not change all that rapidly one way or the other.
Elmo,
It’s preposterous to have teachers evaluated based on how students perform on standardized tests. What is the objective for these tests, how do students gain enrichment from them, and why is the focus so unbalanced? It suppresses the true essence of organic learning. This is the antithesis of what the learning process is about.
As a current Newton South parent, I am impressed by many teachers, however my son, is now a senior and NONE of his freshman teachers are around any more:
English teacher – first year teacher in Newton and left after that one year;
Social Studies teacher – amazing teacher; moved to another state for family reasons
Physics teacher – last year before retirement and was only in school four days a week;
Spanish teacher – great teacher, last year before retirement
Math teacher – second year Newton teacher and left;
I noticed that year my son either had first year teachers or last year teachers. Sophomore year teachers – some are still there. I recall in my own high school days, we had teachers that had been there a long time and were excellent. Where are the long term teachers at South? Did we get unlucky?