SAI Report - November 2000

Articles

Potpourri
"Let's (not) get physical!" Are we overreacting?
2001 Legislative Issues: Compensation and Funding
Yes, We Have and We Will!

Tapping the Power of Technology for School/Community Relations


Potpourri
by Dr. Gaylord Tryon, SAI Executive Director

SAI's New Office Building
Construction on our new office building is pretty much on schedule. Ideal weather conditions, materials being readily available, and excellent cooperation from our architect (Simonson and Associates) and our general contractor (Walter Inc.) have made the initial part of the construction project go very smoothly.

By the time you receive this newsletter, the exterior brick work will be done, the parking lot will be paved, and the building should be pretty well buttoned up for the cold weather. The interior walls are all in place and the sheet rock is about ready for taping.

If everything goes as planned, we should be moving into the new building sometime in January 2001.

This is a very exciting project. Members will look at this building for years to come with a great deal of pride. As well you should. It's because of your tremendous support that SAI is in the position of being able to construct its own office building.

Buy-A-Brick Project
As of this writing, we have collected approximately $15,000 from 70 contributors (individuals, local administrator associations, companies) in our buy-a-brick project. Since we have about two weeks left to receive contributions, we are hopeful that we will surpass the $20,000 mark.

IPERS Update
IPERS reported an investment return of 13.05% for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2000. The fund's investment portfolio market value ended the year at $17.1 billion.

The assumption rate used by IPERS is 7.5%. When the investment return exceeds 7.5%, additional funding is available for more IPERS improvements. This should mean, for example, that the death benefit approved during the 2000 legislative session will be enacted (effective January 1, 1999). The actuary should be coming out with some kind of formal announcement later in October or the first part of November 2000.

Also, the 1998 General Assembly approved the Supplemental Annuity for Active Members (SAAM). This is a benefit that can only be enacted if and when there is no unfunded liability regarding the IPERS program. The actuary declared that IPERS was 97% fully funded at the close of the 1999 fiscal year. Since we closed the last fiscal year with a return of 13.05%, we are hopeful the actuary will declare the fund to be 100% funded and that the SAAM will be triggered for the first time ever. Here again, we should know this in late October or the first part of November 2000.

If the SAAM benefit is enacted, money will be contributed to the accounts of active members. Contributions to SAAM are made on a quarterly basis. The money is available upon retirement and can be taken out in a lump sum or in an annuity.

Transition to a New Executive Director
Troyce Fisher will become executive director on January 1, 2001. I am pleased to report that the transition process is going very well. Troyce has been attending several of our SAI district meetings and area superintendent meetings. In addition, she and I have met on several occasions to review SAI policies, procedures, programs, etc. We are both doing everything possible to make this a seamless transition.

A couple of weeks ago, Troyce and I met with an area superintendents' group. At the end of our presentations, Troyce asked the group, "What can SAI do for you." I thought their responses were very interesting and enlightening. This is what I heard them say:

I couldn't help focusing on the last comment, "Be a caretaker of children." I think this statement says it all because caring for/about children is what we are all about. That's so reassuring to hear. It just makes me feel that everything is all right and in good order.

Top



"Let's (not) get physical!"
Are We Overreacting?
by Kathy Lee Collins, J.D., SAI Director of Legal Services

Recently my hubby and I were out to dinner with a couple, and they asked the waiter for some matches. He said the restaurant didn't have any and asked if we wanted to know why. I bit. "Because there was a kid who got burned somewhere and the matches had a company name on them and the kid's parents sued the company, and they were held responsible! So that's why we don't give out matches anymore."

I started to rail against the utter and incredible stupidity of this reason but caught myself, realizing the waiter had nothing to do with the decision; I didn't need to 'shoot the messenger.'

But there it is. A corporate decision made either on the basis of some Urban Myth or the fact that somebody TRIED to file a suit over this type of situation. I'm not going to do the research to try to find out, but I assume, on the basis of my $30,000 legal education, that such a suit just couldn't be successful. Sure, a jury somewhere might have gotten suckered into a verdict for the poor burned plaintiff, but an appellate court would have an easy time tossing that one out. One has to prove a cause-and-effect relationship in this kind of case. There is an enormously insufficient relationship here (no "proximate cause") to hold the company liable.

But this month's CYA column isn't about negligence. It's about overreaction. It's about people making decisions based on the fear of being sued, without assessing the probability of either the unhappy person actually following through and suing, or the merits of that potential suit.

I read a case this week that I'd love to quote from at length. It is a wonderful decision for our team, even though it reverses a school board. Let me tell you about it.

In Detroit, an eighth grade student was playing dodgeball in the gym with several other students when they weren't supposed to be. A teacher came in and told them to leave. This kid started giving the teacher a hard time. The teacher "grabbed him by the arm and pulled him toward the door, telling him that he had to leave." The student tried to get away, threatened to hit the teacher, and directed foul language at him. The kid was not injured, and in fact later apologized to the teacher. But the school board fired the teacher, anyway, for "use of inappropriate and excessive force on a student" which they said violated both the state law on corporal punishment and the board's policy on the same thing. It was this teacher's 'second offense.'

The Court reinstated him, awarding him back pay. But that's not the great part. It's what the court said about this situation that is so important:
"At worst, [the teacher, Mr. Widdoes] found himself having to deal with a student who refused to obey his request and who behaved in a manner totally inappropriate for the school setting. Also significant to us is the fact that [the teacher] did not hurt the student, and that the student later apologized for his behavior. From our perspective the school board was simply too quick to terminate [Mr. Widdoes'] employment over a harmless incident.

"The [termination] disturbs us. We are mindful that a school board must strike a balance between protecting students from the imposition of excessive force and its teachers' interest in maintaining order in the classroom. Nevertheless, the [termination] decision in this case indicates to us that the balance has swung too far in the wrong direction. To affirm the [decision] in this case would risk rendering teachers powerless to maintain classroom order in any meaningful way.

"The general rule allowing teachers to impose reasonable force on students predates the American Revolution. Numerous are the forces that intrude on the classroom to disturb the learning environment, and teachers must be able to deal with such problems promptly and decisively. Sadly, the lack of respect that students have for their teachers and for each other has in recent years become a national fact. Decisions such as [this board's] have the effect of furthering, rather than reversing, this trend.

"Decisions such as [this one], to terminate [Mr. Widdoes] over a harmless incident, do nothing to emphasize to students the necessity to give deference and respect to their teachers and other school faculty. Students instead learn that they are essentially untouchable. Further, teachers who take notice of the decisions of their school board may become uncertain regarding whether any steps they pursue to control or discipline a student will result in their own suspension or termination. This uncertainty results in indecision, apathy, and fear. Rather than risk making the teachers of our state afraid to take appropriate action against students who fail to follow their direction, today we draw the line and affirm the trial court's order reversing the decision. On the facts of this case, the school board would have been better served to support, rather than punish, [the teacher]."

Isn't that great? Of course, I don't mean that a court's reversing a school board is great, but if my instincts are correct, that board probably fired this teacher out of fear that he, having twice 'gotten physical' with students, was some kind of walking time bomb of liability. The Court was far more sympathetic to Mr. Widdoes' working conditions than his employers were.

The court's very strong language reminds me of an Eighth Circuit case from a few years ago involving a teacher in Des Moines who knocked a kid to the floor after the student pushed him. The case was about how much process was due the teacher for a four-day suspension without pay and a transfer to another building. But the Court of Appeals was obviously troubled by the fact that the teacher's discipline arose because he reacted to being "involved in an altercation with a student. [W]hether intentionally, or as horseplay which got out of hand, the student hit Winegar [the teacher] in the chest, causing Winegar to fall backward and hit his head. Winegar then, by his own admission and allegedly in self-defense, kicked the student, aiming at his rear, but the student turned and the kick landed in the groin or upper thigh. Winegar then slapped the student across the face." After deciding that Mr. Winegar was entitled to more process than the district had given him, the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit wrote,
"Finally, we deem it ironic, if not strange, in a day when students often carry knives or guns to school, that a situation where a student admittedly attacks a teacher results in discipline of the teacher but not of the student."

There's a lesson for us, I think, in these two cases. Let us not be so overzealous in our protection of the student as to overlook what the student did that triggered the employee's reaction. While there is a general rule of thumb that striking and hitting kids is not appropriate, each situation should be examined on its own facts.

As for Iowa's law on Corporal Punishment, it has been amended so much that, frankly, it appears the exceptions have swallowed the rule. The statute currently prohibits "corporal punishment" (defined oh-so-cleverly as "physical punishment"), but then goes on to exempt or excuse the following situations where a school employee uses physical force with a student:

a. Encouraging, supporting, or disciplining the student.
b. Protecting the employee, the student, or other students.
c. Obtaining possession of a weapon or other dangerous object within a student's control.
d. Protecting employee, student, or school property.
e. Quelling a disturbance or preventing an act threatening physical harm to any person.
f. Removing a disruptive student from class or any area of the school premises, or from school-sponsored activities off school premises.
g. Preventing a student from the self-infliction of harm.
h. Self-defense.
i. Any other legitimate educational activity.

It doesn't appear that there is much of a "ban" on corporal punishment at all, does it? I mean, if we can use physical force on a kid for the purpose of "disciplining" him or her and it's not corporal punishment, what is? The phrase that comes to mind is "The legislature, in its infinite wisdom..."

I still hear (less frequently now) "Don't touch kids!" or "You can't touch kids!" and I always want to jump in with those 9 exceptions above to let everyone know that we CAN and sometimes HAVE TO touch kids. Let's especially remember to look at the whole situation before we start tossing out suspensions ­- for students OR for employees.

Top



2001 Legislative Issues: Compensation and Funding
by Dr. Marcus Haack, SAI Associate Executive Director

The SAI legislative committee has been meeting during the late summer and early fall to identify key issues for the 2001 legislative session. Rather than develop a long "laundry list" of discrete and unrelated items, the committee chose to focus on several broad issues of critical importance to the Iowa educational system. Those issues included educator compensation, adequacy of funding, educator shortages, health insurance and early childhood.

At their October 19th meeting members of the SAI representative council and executive committee took considerable time to discuss and debate the merits of each of the five issues identified by the legislative committee. There was general agreement that each of the identified issues was important. However it was noted that the legislature has established a pattern of funding which the educational community finds disturbing.

First, there has been a trend toward funding discrete "pet programs" in the name of educational reform accompanied by inadequate funding for allowable growth and other long-term educational programs. The explanation is always been the same, "We've already taken care of you!" The second trend has been to play the old shell game, which is to cut funds from one educational program and shift them to another program. In other words, little or no new money for schools' operating budgets, just a realignment of existing funds.

Obviously one of the most talked about legislative initiatives during the summer and fall has been the need to provide additional funding for teacher/educator compensation. This issue highlights the governor's educational agenda for the legislature and has also been identified as a major goal by leadership in both parties.

Virtually all educational organizations agree with our elected leaders on the need to beef up educator salaries, along with the need to identify new ways of structuring salary systems. But here's where we begin to differ with our elected leaders. We're hearing once again that, in spite of the critical need to increase educator pay, the state budget is tight. Therefore we'll need to "realign existing funds" in order to provide the much needed pay increases.

Here we go again! Pitting one segment of the educational community against the other in the battle of shifting funds. We simply can't accept that. The need is real. The crisis is beginning to be felt across the state. If Iowa is as committed to increased educator pay as it claims to be, the state will have to come up with new sources of revenue to resolve the crisis.

Interestingly enough, the debate is on how to bring teacher pay up to the national average. Let's see. "Average pay" to make Iowa's schools the best in the nation and the world. Seems like something's wrong with that equation. But that's another topic for another article!

Given the discussion and the input from the SAI legislative committee, executive committee and representative council, it appears we will be spending most of our time on the areas of educator compensation and adequacy of funding. While the final SAI legislative proposal still needs approval by the representative council, it looks as though our platform will consist of the following:

Educator Compensation
Currently the governor is working with legislative leaders of both parties to fashion a common teacher compensation package from the two existing reports prepared by the Pomerantz and the Forsyth committees. The governor has consistently indicated this will be the major education topic for debate in the 2001 legislative session.

SAI supports efforts to increase salaries and benefits for teachers and administrators. In addition, SAI believes the improved compensation package should include an increase in teacher contract days in order to secure additional time for professional development, student class time and school improvement activities. Funding for increased compensation should come from new revenue sources instead of a realignment of existing funds.

Adequacy of Funding
School districts in Iowa face increasing difficulty in providing and maintaining educational programs designed to meet the needs of all their students. It is imperative that, in addition to educator compensation issues, the legislature provides adequate levels of financial support for Iowa's school districts so they are able to accomplish their educational mission. Therefore SAI supports establishing a guaranteed allowable growth rate of 6% for all schools districts. Funding for allowable growth must be kept separate from funding for educator compensation plans.

There it is, short and sweet. The bottom line is that we must keep the pressure on the legislature to adequately fund the system, and that can only happen if the state comes up with new revenues to fund a minimum 6% allowable growth AND to drastically improve educator compensation plans.
In order to keep up with the latest legislative information, be sure to check SAI's Web site frequently. If you're interested in up-to-the-minute information delivered via your e-mail, sign up for SAI's legislative listserve. Directions for signing up are also included on SAI's Web site. Sign up today and become part of the SAI lobbying team.

Top



Yes, We Have and We Will!
by Dr. Elaine Smith-Bright, SAI Director of Professional Development

As you are well aware we have a new Executive Director, Troyce Fisher, coming on board in January. She and our current director Gaylord have been out and about the state, meeting members, attending regional events, sharing SAI news, and assessing members' needs. At those events, Troyce has posed the question, "What can SAI do for you?" There have certainly been many excellent responses, which SAI is carefully reviewing. One such request was, "Help us deal with diversity!" Our answer is, "Yes, we have and we will continue to!"

We recognize, as do all of you, that your BEDS document continues to show a growing number of students who do not fall in the "White Caucasian" category. Nationally, articles on dealing with diversity continue to dominate current publications. The May 1999 School Administrator magazine from AASA devoted the entire issue to "The New Multiculturalism: Seven Commentaries on Dealing with Diversity Today." The Sept. 27, 2000, Education Week included 10 pages of charts, graphs, maps and text to validate the premise, "Minority Groups to Emerge as a Majority in U.S. Schools." The columnist wrote:
"Anyone who wants to glimpse the future of America's school age population can look to California. Today, a majority of the school-children in the Golden State are members of a minority group. But as the demographer Harold L. Hodgkinson likes to say, 'What's happening in California is coming to a high school near you.'"

Two of the forces driving interstate migration are jobs and the quality of life. The Omaha, Neb., public schools have seen their population of limited-English-proficient students soar from 500 in 1992 to 3,000 this school year. In addition to Hispanics, the community has a sizable population of Nuer immigrants from southern Sudan, who fled their country's civil war.

In our own state, Department of Education staff with input from the State Advisory Committee on Educational Equity examined research on diversity and the summary of community conversations that had been held, whose purpose had been to encourage deliberative discussions on diversity and integration issues. Their objective was to develop a set of principles that would form the foundation for future state policy on developing inclusive schools and communities. It is the intent of the State Board that the proposed policies result in schools which provide a welcoming and supportive learning environment for all students, high levels of academic achievement for all students, and which foster respect for diversity within the school, community, the state and the nation. The ambitious plan, known as "Building Inclusive Schools and Communities," aims to reshape Iowa schools to embrace multiculturalism. Minority students made up 10 percent of Iowa's 496,000-students enrollment in the fall of 1999, compared with just 2.5 percent in 1985.

In February, SAI provided a full day leadership lab on "Engaging the Community" which focused on the changing demographics of Iowa including figures on student's race/ethnicity and the increase in ELP enrollments. At that same lab a presentation on Multicultural Gender Fair provided specific approaches to equity/diversity staff development, and a session on Creating Awareness of Diversity shared examples of activities that could be used with any age student.

This fall for the Secondary Principals Workshop on Thurs., Nov. 30, at the Sheraton Four Points in Clive, Iowa, Ellyn Wrzeski, superintendent, and Dan Marburger, high school principal, from the Perry Community Schools will be on hand to describe the transitions their community has undergone. When I spoke with her, Ellyn was anxious to share the successes and challenges their district has faced with a major influx of diverse students and families. Touching on many areas Ellyn and Dan will talk about curriculum and classroom adjustments, special education enhancements and supports, collaborative efforts with other agencies and community groups, staff development training, and parental involvement.

Don't miss this opportunity to hear first- hand how to work with your changing community. As for SAI, we pledge to continue sponsoring informational presentations and reports from school districts that have already grappled with their expanded demographics and have much to teach those districts that will face it in the near future! Students are at the heart of what we do each day, and we have a responsibility to instruct all students about diversity so they can succeed in a global community and economy.

Top




Tapping the Power of Technology for School/Community Relations
by Lisa Bartusek, communications director, Iowa Association of School Boards

Today's tech-savvy school districts are tapping the power of emerging technologies to share information, listen to their constituents and involve parents and others in education. If your school communications program includes only the traditional printed newsletters and open houses, consider how these other tools can connect you with your key audiences.

Databases: Electronic databases can allow you to customize mailing lists and target specific needs. By tracking demographic information, interests or participation, school districts can decrease vague "dear resident" mass mailings and send targeted information to specific audiences, such as business leaders, preschool parents, senior citizens, community service leaders or others. For a large district, a neighborhood-specific database can provide administrators with useful links to businesses, area preschools, church leadership and human service organizations as a way to build collaboration and school involvement.

Web sites: School districts are using Web sites as a way to reach opinion leaders, provide round-the-clock access to information, and showcase the district's strengths. The Web allows you to reach beyond your traditional boundaries, providing information to potential new community residents or school alumni. To be effective, your Web site must be easy to use, timely and interactive. It's important to tap the full power of the Web as an interactive tool, not just an on-line brochure. Consider feedback forms, on-line surveys, e-mail news bulletins, searchable information and other interactive tools to build two-way communication with constituents. If all you do is put all your printed information on the district Web site, it's the equivalent of purchasing classroom computers and using them only to do electronic worksheets.

Telephonics: Automated voice messaging services, homework hotlines and other phone technologies are helping school districts stay in touch with parents and constituents and reduce the overload on support staff during peak times. In addition, telephone polling technology can allow a district to survey residents using an automated telephone system.

Fax: A broadcast fax can help keep key opinion leaders informed, often drawing more attention than a standard mail piece. "Fax on demand" systems allow patrons to obtain often-requested information, such as how to register for kindergarten.

Cable Television: School broadcasts on cable television allow patrons to observe school board meetings, learn more about school issues and programs, and observe classroom instruction--all from the comfort of their home or business. In a world where nearly three-fourths of citizens don't have children in school, cable television can bring the school to life for a broader audience in your community.

These "new media" allow your school district to go direct to key audiences with your message at increased speed, often in an interactive way. But high-tech community relations can't replace quality customer service and personal interaction. These tools allow you to supplement your regular print communication and the personal relationship-building with parents and community leaders that is the foundation of a school communications program.

Resource for this article: Presentation by Nora Carr, Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District, North Carolina; at August 2000 SAI Conference

Top


home

www.sai-iowa.org