Error in Star Tribune Article on our Q-Comp Proposal

You may have seen the article in today’s Star Tribune about the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) signing off on our proposal ( http://tinyurl.com/68vyehj ).  In there, they say our district “would scrap it’s ‘steps and lanes’”.  That is not accurate.

Lanes would not change at all, steps would be modified.  Steps would be called “Performance Increments” and could be withheld if someone was not at a proficient level on their observations two years in a row.  Now, there already is language that says steps can be withheld for performance reasons in our current contract, but it is rarely (if ever) used. Districts that have Q-Comp currently say it is also rare in their programs that someone doesn’t get to move to the next step. This modification is required by the MDE for all Q-Comp plans.  I’ve included more specifics after my signature.

It is a change – and one people should consider carefully – but it doesn’t “scrap” our current system.

Chances are this won’t be the last inaccuracy we see in the media. In this case, someone in the district office misspoke (an honest mistake). We’ll work to get you the real story when the errors pop up so you can make an informed vote on March 8^th and 9^th.  Thank you to the eagle-eyed members who brought this to our attention and keep the questions coming,

-Julie

The specific steps on handling performance increments are laid out in the Appeals Process portion of our proposal:

For those who do not successfully complete their observations, there will be options for additional support from the evaluators, colleagues, or administrators along the way. If those do not work, participants can appeal to the Q-Comp steering committee which is made up of half educators appointed by AHEM and half administrators.

If the appeal is not successful, the participant will not receive the incentives and the next year the participant will be on a formal PAS process with their administrator. If the observations in the second year are also not successful, the participant will neither be awarded incentives nor get a performance increment (step) on the salary schedule. 

The standard for success on the observations will start out lower at first to give us time to get used to the plan.  For the first year of our program, success means earning a rating of Proficient or Distinguished on 3 out of the 5 components of the instructional (or equivalent for those not in a regular classroom) portion of our current Performance Appraisal System (PAS). The second year, you’d need to be Proficient or Distinguished on 4 out of 5 components, with the standard moving to being Proficient or Distinguished on all parts of that portion by year three and each year thereafter.

Q-Comp Proposal Signed

Welcome back – I hope your return from break has been a good one.  While you were gone…

Q-Comp:  The Minnesota Department of Education signed off on our proposal on Monday, January 3rd.  Now it is time for us to decide whether or not this plan works for us.  It will take a 75% yes vote of our membership to approve the proposal.

At this Monday's Representative Assembly, we'll decide the exact date of our vote (we are proposing the first week in March).  We will also set up member meetings to review the proposal throughout February around the district.  Look for more information in your boxes about the specifics of the proposal as well toward the end of this month.

If you want to review the structure of the program right now, you can visit ahqcomp.blogspot.com.  There we have all the information we've sent you so far by mail, email and in your boxes, along with a link to where you can download the full application. (you'll notice  the proposal looks like it is over 300 pages long - however, the actual structure of the proposal is on pages 5-28 and 336-364, 51 pages total).

As always, your questions are welcome at ahem@anoka.k12.mn.us.  I look forward to a good discussion as we consider this opportunity.

Q-Comp Update and Flexing Time

Q-Comp – The Status of Our Proposal:  In November, the Minnesota Department of Education responded to our application with a set of clarifications and modifications.  We had a month to respond to them and we will make that deadline by sending in our final changes this week.  This is a common part of the process and the changes they required were minor.  They plan to give us final approval by January.  At that point, we will begin sending out more information about specifics of the proposal for your review. 

You already know the main components of the proposal – participants will create building wide and individual goals, and have three observations (two by a full time peer evaluator and one by a peer of your choice) that work much the same way our current Performance Appraisal System (PAS) works.  If your building reaches its goal, all the participants at the site earn $210.  If you reach your individual goal, you earn a separate $210.  If you successfully complete your observations, you will earn a separate $1728. 

Given this timeline, we plan to get out information via fliers in January, hold member meetings to go over the proposal around the district in February, and take a vote in March (it takes a 75% majority of those voting to pass).  As soon as the state completes their process, we’ll finalize dates for ours.

Flexing Time:  We are getting a good number of responses on last week’s question about your thoughts on flexing your duty day.  The vast majority of the messages have been from people who want some flexibility in the beginning and end times of the duty day as long as it doesn’t end up actually increasing the number of the hours in the week or simply eats up work days.  People are citing most often the reasons for flexing as finding time to meet with colleagues, parent communication, and medical issues.  Wanting to “be treated as a professional” was a common phrase.  What does being treated as a professional in the context of flex time mean to you?  We meet as a Labor Management team to begin discussing this issue just before winter break.  If you’d like to add your ideas before then, email us at ahem@anoka.k12.mn.us.

Meet & Confer and Flexing Time

Last Tuesday’s Meet & Confer:  Thank you to all who braved the icy roads on Tuesday to attend Meet & Confer, and to the over 600 of you who had the chance to complete the workload survey.  Our speakers, Beth Popalisky, Ryan MacSwain, LeeAnne Clauer, Tom Kobelinski, Sarah Weil, Marti Biegler, Heather Hjelle, Kari Kaehn, Jay Wilkins, and Sheila Davies did a terrific job laying out some concrete ideas for reducing our workload.  Key ideas were:

•      Increases in workload are outpacing reductions in workload

•      Autonomy and individuality decreases workload

•      Paperwork can be decreased in many areas

•      Workload problems at any level increases workload at every level

•      Time to work together is better than other kinds of training

•      Everyone needs to let something go – district administration, principals, and teachers

Their statements seemed to help our school board members show a willingness to work toward solutions.  Look for an article in our newsletter coming out later this month for a summary of the survey and ideas.

Flexing Time – What Do You Think?:  Our Labor Management Committee - a team of representatives from AHEM, school board, and district administration who meet to work on workplace issues – has been focusing so far this year on finding ways for collaborative teams to meet, especially those who are “singletons” at their sites.  Out of that discussion, we decided we need to discuss how flex time is being used across the district for PLC’s and other reasons.  We are thinking of flex time as when you work outside your duty day in exchange for taking the same amount of time off your duty day down the road.  It seems that how this works around the district varies widely.  We’d like to know what you think – do you flex your time for something at your site?  What have your experiences been with attempts initiated by you or by others to flex your day?  How would you like this to work?  Should we flex our time at all?  Email us at ahem@anoka.k12.mn.us with your thoughts.

Meet and Confer, Workload Survey, Q-Comp, Board Statement

Meet and Confer on Workload:  Our next opportunity to share information with our school board will be at our Meet and Confer on Tuesday, November 30^th, from 5:00 pm to 7:00 pm at the Staff Development Center.  By popular demand, we have chosen the topic of Less with Less: Solutions to Workload Issues.  We invite you to attend and discuss with the school board how we can make our work more manageable.  We have made the case over the years that workload is one of our biggest concerns, and though the message has been heard, the problem remains.  Our next task is to get more concrete on how to solve the problems in light of changing resources and expectations.  We also want to begin a discussion about the challenges facing traveling and itinerant teachers.

Workload Survey: To prepare for Meet & Confer, we need your help to better understand our options in reducing workload.  We’ve developed a 10 question survey to get your ideas for paring down our work.  Answer as many of the questions as you’d like, we just ask that you give us feedback by this coming Friday, November 19^th.  We’ll share the results with the school board, administration and all of you.  Visit http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/W97SBJX to tell us what you think.

Q-Comp:  The Minnesota Department of Education sent us a response to our proposal and we met with their representatives to discuss their questions this week.  They had a number of clarifications, but no substantial concerns with the plan’s structure itself.  However, as has happened in all but 2 of the 109 proposals in the history of the program, to answer their questions we will need to submit significant additional information.  As a result, our Representative Assembly (AHEM’s highest governing body made up of representatives from each site) decided to postpone our vote until after we get final approval from the MDE, which will take until the end of the year.  Most likely, we are now looking at a vote in February or March.

Statement to the School Board: On Monday, October 25^th, I addressed the school board at the direction of our Representative Assembly on the recent concerns around school climate for our gay and lesbian students.  I urged the board to listen to our students’ concerns and give us the tools to ensure all of our students and staff members feel safe and valued at school.  I based my remarks on recent research done by the Great Lakes Center, a regional research arm of the National Education Center called Safe at School (the report can be found at www.greatlakescenter.org) as a starting point for concrete steps we can take to improve our school climate.  My entire statement can be found at http://ahemweekly.blogspot.com/2010/10/statement-to-school-board-on-school.html.