Partnership for Educational Justice

  • About Us
    • Our Mission
    • Our History
    • FAQ
    • Contact Us
  • Teacher Quality Lawsuits
    • New York Lawsuit (Wright v. New York)
    • Minnesota Lawsuit (Forslund v. Minnesota)
    • New Jersey Lawsuit (HG v. Harrington)
    • Permanent Employment
    • Other Initiatives
  • Legal Filings
    • Wright v. New York Legal Filings
    • Forslund v. Minnesota Legal Filings
    • HG v. Harrington Legal Filings
    • DACA Amicus Brief Filings by PEJ
    • Partnerships
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • Blog
  • Action
    • Donate
    • Share your Story
    • Sign up for our Email List
    • Follow Us on Social Media
    • Read the Research on Teacher Quality

PRESS RELEASE: Parents Ask Minnesota Supreme Court To Hear Lawsuit Challenging Excessive Teacher Job Protections

October 4, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 4, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, (917) 428-6692
Click here to read today’s petition to the Minnesota Supreme Court

St. Paul, MN—A group of mothers from across Minnesota today petitioned the state supreme court to hear Forslund v. Minnesota, which challenges state education laws that provide outsized job security to chronically ineffective teachers. The State defendants have 20 days to submit a response and once fully briefed, the Minnesota Supreme Court will issue a determination as to whether they will hear the case. At issue is whether the Minnesota courts will provide judicial review on issues related to the quality of public education, which is protected as a fundamental right in the state.

A full copy of the parents’ petition to the Minnesota Supreme Court, along with all other legal filings related to the case, is available for download here.

###

About Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ)
An affiliate of the national education nonprofit 50CAN, PEJ pursues impact litigation that empowers families and communities to advocate for great public schools through the courts. PEJ is currently working with parents and students in Minnesota, New York, and New Jersey in support of legal challenges to unjust teacher employment statutes in those states. In all three states, PEJ has connected families with pro bono legal representation and is providing parents with ongoing legal, advocacy, and communications support.

About Students for Education Reform Minnesota (SFER-Minn)
SFER-Minn organizes students and families to fight for educational justice in their communities. Their members identify issues that are driving inequities in the education they receive, share their stories, and push for lasting policy change on campus, in the community, at the Capitol, and – when necessary, in the courts – to ensure every child in Minnesota receives an equitable education. Other current SFER-Minn efforts include addressing Minnesota’s broken remedial education system, promoting statewide standards and oversight for how police work in schools, and monitoring local school board performance.

Filed Under: Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE: Newark Parents Request Appeal of Dismissal of LIFO Lawsuit

May 25, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 25, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061

Newark Parents Request Appeal of Dismissal of LIFO Lawsuit
 
The parents’ filing to the appellate division court is attached to this email and available online here
Trenton, NJ—A group of Newark parents yesterday filed a formal request to appeal a trial court judge’s dismissal earlier this month of their lawsuit challenging the state’s “last in, first out” teacher layoff law. Filed last November, the parents’ lawsuit asserts that the LIFO statute violates students’ right to an education by unjustly requiring school districts to retain ineffective teachers while cutting other areas of education spending or laying off more effective teachers when faced with funding deficits.
Defendants from Newark Public Schools (NPS) and the State of New Jersey did not move to dismiss the case. Instead, NPS admitted nearly every allegation made about the impact of New Jersey’s LIFO law on children within NPS. The motions to dismiss the case granted earlier this month were raised by intervening defendants from local and national teachers unions, including the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA), and the Newark Teachers Union (NTU).If the parents’ request for appeal is granted, arguments from the Newark families and the teachers unions will be reviewed by a panel of four judges from the Appellate Division of New Jersey Superior Court.

“Public schools are here to educate our children, first and foremost,” said Wendy Soto, plaintiff and mother of two Newark Public School students. “Everyone knows that many New Jersey school districts are in a serious funding crisis. Politicians have not protected our children’s right to a quality public education, and parents like me have nowhere to turn. The quality-blind LIFO law makes a difficult situation even worse for students in struggling schools. Enough is enough. It’s time to end this ridiculous law.”

“New Jersey’s LIFO law forces school districts like Newark to retain ineffective teachers and, in fact, put them back in the classroom while cutting spending to other critical areas of public education. Students are constitutionally entitled to more than this,” said Kathleen Reilly, attorney with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, one of the firms representing the Newark parents pro bono. “These decisions – made to evade application of the LIFO law – harm children. The negative impact of LIFO is pervasive today in Newark public schools and these families deserve to have their case heard in court.”

Since at least 2012, NPS has avoided laying off effective teachers by paying millions of dollars per year to cover the salaries of ineffective – but more senior – teachers even when no school would agree to their placement in the school. This expensive work-around, which is costing the district $10 million dollars in 2016-17, diverts valuable resources from educational programming and other critical components of an adequate public education. Because NPS employs more than half of the state’s ineffective teachers, it also puts Newark students at significant risk of being assigned to an ineffective teacher.

After it was announced that New Jersey State education funding would remain essentially flat for the 2017-18 school year, NPS acknowledged a looming $30 million deficit because of rising costs. Facing similar budget gaps over the past three years, NPS administrators restricted hiring practices, forcing teachers previously without placement into schools without mutual consent from the teacher and the principal. Research shows that teacher quality is the most influential in-school factor when it comes to student learning. It also shows that student achievement improves when principals are allowed to hire school staff according to quality and fit, rather than restricted by seniority.

To learn more about the parent-led lawsuit to end LIFO in New Jersey, please go to edjustice.org/nj. All legal filings related to the lawsuit are available online here.

About Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ)
Founded in 2014, Partnership for Educational Justice is a nonprofit organization pursuing impact litigation that empowers families and communities to advocate for great public schools through the courts. In addition to supporting teacher layoff litigation in New Jersey, PEJ is currently working with parents and students in New York and Minnesota in support of legal challenges to unjust teacher employment statutes in those states.

###

Filed Under: Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE: Newark Parents Oppose Teachers Unions’ Motions to Dismiss LIFO Lawsuit

March 30, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 30, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061

Newark Parents Oppose Teachers Unions’ Motions to Dismiss LIFO Lawsuit
Oral arguments before a Mercer County Superior Court judge are scheduled for May 3

Trenton, New Jersey — Six Newark parents yesterday opposed motions to dismiss HG v. Harrington, the lawsuit they filed last November challenging the constitutionality of New Jersey’s quality-blind “last in, first out” (LIFO) teacher layoff law. The motions to dismiss the case were filed earlier this month by local and national teachers unions, who intervened as defendants in the case last December. Oral arguments on the motions to dismiss are scheduled for 2pm on May 3 before the Mercer County Superior Court. Defendants from Newark Public Schools and the New Jersey Department of Education did not move to dismiss the case.

“The teachers unions clearly are not looking out for students’ best interests,” said Kathleen Reilly, attorney with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, one of the law firms representing the Newark parents pro bono. “With education budget deficits in the tens of millions of dollars, the court urgently needs to hear these parents’ concerns about laws that require schools to keep ineffective teachers while letting effective ones go. If students’ educational rights are valued, these laws cannot stand.”

In their answer to the lawsuit, defendants from the Newark Public Schools overwhelmingly conceded that the LIFO law harms students, acknowledging that enforcement of LIFO in Newark will remove quality teachers, which leads to lower test scores, lower high school graduation rates, lower college attendance rates, and sharply reduced lifetime earnings. They also admit that the current practice of keeping ineffective teachers on the district payroll, including those in a pool of “educators without placement sites” (EWPS) is harmful and unsustainable, and that the EWPS pool would be wholly unnecessary were it not for LIFO.

To learn more about the parent-led lawsuit to end LIFO in New Jersey, please go to edjustice.org/nj. All legal filings related to HG v. Harrington are available online here.

Filed Under: Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE: Minnesota Parents Appeal Dismissal of Teacher Tenure Lawsuit

March 23, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 23, 2017
Contacts:
Partnership for Educational Justice: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061
Students for Education Reform Minnesota: Kate Sattler, kate@makingwavescommunications.com
@Part4EduJustice, @SFERMinn

 

MINNESOTA PARENTS APPEAL DISMISSAL OF LAWSUIT CHALLENGING EXCESSIVE TEACHER JOB PROTECTIONS

The lawsuit asserts that laws governing teacher tenure requirements, dismissal procedures, and quality-blind layoffs violate students’ right to an adequate education
 
Click to read the full appeal

St. Paul, MN—Four mothers today appealed a district court’s dismissal of Forslund v. Minnesota, which challenges state education laws providing ironclad job security to chronically ineffective teachers. The lawsuit asserts that laws governing teacher tenure requirements, dismissal procedures, and quality-blind layoff statutes, violate students’ rights by allowing ineffective teachers to remain in classrooms long after they have demonstrated themselves to be ineffective. Minnesota’s State Constitution and Supreme Court case law guarantee that all children in the state have a fundamental right to an adequate public education. The mothers’ lawsuit was first filed in April 2016. Oral argument before the Minnesota Court of Appeals, if granted, is anticipated for this spring or early summer.

“This lawsuit is about our children. And when your child is suffering, as a parent you can’t back down,” said Roxanne Draughn, mother of two from St. Paul and a plaintiff in Forslund v. Minnesota.
In their appeal, the plaintiffs point to state standards that require effective teaching as a necessary component to an adequate education. They urge the courts to use these pre-existing guidelines to evaluate the constitutionality of teacher employment laws that provide ironclad job security to chronically ineffective teachers even when, by the state’s own definition, such teachers are unable to meet effectiveness standards.

This is a marked difference between Forslund v. Minnesota and Cruz-Guzman v. Minnesota, an education lawsuit that was dismissed by the Court of Appeals earlier this month because the court was unwilling to define the “qualitative standard” to evaluate the educational adequacy claims at issue. Additionally, the Cruz-Guzman plaintiffs challenged general policies and practices, while the Forslund plaintiffs are challenging specific laws that protect the employment of ineffective teachers.
“It is the courts’ role to ensure that laws do not violate constitutional rights,” said Jesse Stewart, attorney with Fishman Haygood, the lead firm representing the Forslund plaintiffs.

A full copy of the Minnesota parents’ appeal, along with all other legal filings related to the case, is available for download here.

About Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ)
Founded in 2014, PEJ is a nonprofit organization pursuing impact litigation that empowers families and communities to advocate for great public schools through the courts. PEJ is currently working with parents and students in Minnesota, New York, and New Jersey in support of legal challenges to unjust teacher employment statutes in those states. In all three states, PEJ has connected families with pro bono legal representation and is providing parents with ongoing legal, advocacy, and communications support.

About Students for Education Reform Minnesota (SFER-Minn)
SFER-Minn organizes students and families to fight for educational justice in their communities. Their members identify issues that are driving inequities in the education they receive, share their stories, and push for lasting policy change on campus, in the community, at the Capitol, and – when necessary, in the courts – to ensure every child in Minnesota receives an equitable education. Other current SFER-Minn efforts include addressing Minnesota’s broken remedial education system, promoting statewide standards and oversight for how police work in schools, and monitoring local school board performance.

Filed Under: Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE: In Court Filing, Newark Public School District Concedes LIFO Hurts Students

March 23, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 23, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061
@Part4EduJustice

In Latest Court Filing, Newark Public School District and Superintendent Christopher Cerf Concede “Last In, First Out” Teacher Layoff Law Hurts Students

Trenton, New Jersey — The Newark Public School (NPS) district and NPS Superintendent Christopher Cerf, defendants in HG v. Harrington, yesterday submitted an answer to the lawsuit filed in November 2016 by six Newark mothers challenging the constitutionality of New Jersey’s quality-blind “last in, first out” (LIFO) teacher layoff law. Newark’s answer includes admissions that overwhelmingly concede the allegations put forward by the plaintiffs. This filing is significant for two reasons: 1) the district admits that New Jersey’s LIFO law causes harm to students and 2) these admissions undermine the credibility of motions to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the teachers’ unions, who intervened as defendants in the case in December 2016.

Newark’s court filing is attached to this email. In the filing, the district defends strides it has made to better serve students, and also makes the following selected admissions:

  • NPS admits that laying off teachers without any consideration of their quality prohibits children from being educated in the constitutionally mandated manner (paragraph 14)
  • NPS admits that enforcement of LIFO in Newark will remove quality teachers, which leads to lower test scores, lower high school grad rates, lower college attendance rates, and sharply reduced lifetime earnings (paragraph 104)
  • NPS admits that its current practice of keeping ineffective teachers on the district payroll, including those in a pool of “educators without placement schools” (EWPS), is harmful and unsustainable (paragraphs 80-81) and that the EWPS pool would be wholly unnecessary were it not for LIFO (paragraph 89)
  • NPS admits that LIFO undermines its ability to attract and retain effective teachers (paragraphs 96-103)
  • NPS notes that the statutes governing termination proceedings for tenured teachers do not address the impact of quality-blind layoffs on students through the retention of low-performing teachers in times of budget cuts (paragraph 93)

In response to Newark’s answer, Partnership for Educational Justice Executive Director Ralia Polechronis said:

“Instead of battling over procedural issues, NPS has taken a stand in favor of students’ best interests. The district admits that NJ’s LIFO law ‘protects the interests of adults over the rights of the children of Newark’ and forces the district into an impossible dilemma: either divert increasingly limited resources to avoid layoffs or deny high-performing teachers to 8,000 students per year. These admissions are a giant step forward for the HG plaintiffs to prove their constitutional claims in a court of law.”
This is the first case of its kind in which all original defendants submitted an answer to the lawsuit, rather than moving to dismiss the case, signaling that these cases can and should be heard by a court of law. Earlier this month, the New Jersey Department of Education and New Jersey’s Acting Education Commissioner Kimberly Harrington submitted an answer to the parents’ complaint. All legal filings related to HG v. Harrington are available online here, including the answers filed by Newark and the State, and motions to dismiss the case filed by national and local teachers’ unions.

Click to download the plaintiffs’ complaint.

To learn more about the parent-led lawsuit to end LIFO in New Jersey, please go to edjustice.org/nj.

Filed Under: Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE: PEJ Releases Video Explaining New Jersey’s Unjust “Last In, First Out” Quality-blind Teacher Layoff Law

March 8, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 8, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061
@Part4EduJustice

PEJ Releases Video Explaining New Jersey’s Unjust “Last In, First Out” Quality-blind Teacher Layoff Law

Click here to view the video

Newark, NJ—A short video that explains New Jersey’s “last in, first out” (LIFO) teacher layoff law was released on social media today by Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ), the nonprofit supporting six Newark parents and their pro bono legal team in a legal challenge to the constitutionality of this statute. In the lawsuit filed on November 1, 2016, the parents assert that New Jersey’s LIFO law violates students’ right to an education by unjustly requiring school districts to ignore teacher quality and retain ineffective teachers while laying off effective teachers, despite substantial research establishing that teacher quality is the most important in-school factor affecting student learning.

The video supports the plaintiff parents in their fight to end an illogical law that puts their children at risk of losing the thorough and efficient education guaranteed to them by the state constitution. By explaining the LIFO policy mandated by this law, the video also informs other New Jersey parents about the negative impact of LIFO and encourages them to follow the progress of the lawsuit. The video appears on PEJ’s website and will also be promoted on PEJ’s social media channels – Youtube and Facebook – as well as select local news platforms. The full script of the video is included at the end of this press release.

State funding for local school districts in the 2017-18 school year remains somewhat uncertain after Governor Christie’s budget address last week. But, in the 2017-18 state aid summary budget released by the State Education Department last Thursday, district allocations are projected to be flat with current funding rates. In Newark, this will result in a $60 million deficit for the public schools. Under the LIFO law, this financial situation forces the district to make a difficult decision: either lay off dozens or hundreds of teachers, many of whom are effective; or, retain ineffective teachers and make cuts to other educational expenditures. Newark Public Schools employ more than half of the state’s ineffective teachers, according to the most recent data released by the state education department. Other school districts around New Jersey are also facing significant funding deficits.

“Most parents I know have no idea about this law and how it hurts our kids,” said Wendy Soto, mother of two Newark Public School students and plaintiff in HG v. Harrington, the parent-led lawsuit challenging the state’s teacher layoff statute. “As a mother, I’m outraged that our children will be forced into classrooms with ineffective teachers while effective teachers are let go. I hope parents pay attention and join the fight to keep our best teachers in schools, especially with budget cuts on the horizon.”

“Especially as districts face significant funding deficits, it’s important that public school parents understand how the current teacher layoff law violates students’ right to a quality education,” said Ralia Polechronis, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice. “Research is clear that teachers are the most critical in-school factor affecting student learning. Because of New Jersey’s LIFO law, districts like Newark, with a significant number of ineffective teachers, are forced to retain these ineffective teachers, and either lay off their more qualified colleagues or cut important educational programming. In the current funding climate, it’s more important than ever that New Jersey’s unconstitutional teacher layoff law is repealed.”

The video released by PEJ today highlights academic research showing that students with high-quality, effective teachers are more likely to graduate from high school, attend college, have higher paying jobs, and higher lifetime earnings than their peers who have ineffective teachers, even for just one year.

Newark ranked in the bottom third of twenty-five urban school districts investigated in a report released last year by the Fordham Institute looking into how difficult it is for ineffective veteran teachers to be removed. Newark Public Schools received only three out of a possible ten points awarded for degree of difficulty removing a veteran teacher who has been identified as ineffective, with ten indicating that it is easy to remove an ineffective teacher and zero indicating that it is very difficult.

To better understand the effect that LIFO layoffs would have on Newark’s overall teacher quality, Newark Public Schools ran the numbers in 2014 on a hypothetical teacher layoff scenario. Under the quality-blind LIFO layoff mandate, 85 percent of the teachers laid off would have been rated effective or highly effective, and only 4 percent of the teachers laid off would have been rated ineffective. Under a performance-based system, only 35 percent of teachers laid off would have been rated effective and no teachers rated highly effective would lose their jobs.

Since at least 2012, the Newark Public School district has avoided laying off effective teachers by paying millions of dollars per year to cover the salaries of ineffective – but more senior – teachers even when no school would agree to their placement in the school. This costly work-around, which cost the district $10 million dollars in 2016-17, has diverted valuable resources from educational programming and other expenses that could improve the education of Newark students.

Full script of the video released today:

Parents, did you know that some New Jersey school districts are facing a terrible budget crisis that will force them to lay off teachers?

Did you also know that state law mandates teachers must be laid off based only on seniority? The law is called Last In, First Out. It prohibits school districts from considering how good—or bad—teachers are.

This law is bad for students and unfair to some of New Jersey’s most qualified teachers.

In Newark, 85 percent of teachers who stand to lose their jobs have been rated “effective” and “highly-effective” by their principals. That’s hundreds of our best teachers being taken away from our children.

But, if schools were allowed to consider how well a teacher teaches, they could keep their best educators in classrooms with students.

We have the power to change this.

With great teachers, students learn more, are more likely to graduate high school, attend college, and earn a higher salary.

New Jersey’s education law should protect students first. Support the families fighting to keep great teachers in public schools. Our children deserve the best.

 

About Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ)

Founded in 2014, Partnership for Educational Justice is a nonprofit organization pursuing impact litigation that empowers families and communities to advocate for great public schools through the courts. In addition to supporting teacher layoff litigation in New Jersey, PEJ is currently working with parents and students in New York and Minnesota in support of legal challenges to unjust teacher employment statutes in those states.

Filed Under: Press Releases

Statement from Partnership for Educational Justice on the New Jersey Supreme Court’s denial of State motion to re-open Abbott v. Burke

January 31, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 31, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061
Statement from Partnership for Educational Justice on the New Jersey Supreme Court’s denial of State motion to re-open Abbott v. Burke

The New Jersey Supreme Court today denied the State’s September 2016 motion to re-open the decades-old school funding lawsuit, Abbott v. Burke. As part of their broad motion, the State had asked the court to grant the State Commissioner of Education – a political appointee – the authority to waive enforcement of the State’s “last in, first out” (LIFO) teacher layoff law, among other education laws and negotiated policies.

In response to the State’s motion, six Newark parents also filed a motion with the Supreme Court against the State’s legal tactics to address LIFO. These same parents instead are fighting the LIFO statute on its own in the trial court. Their case, HG v. Harrington, asserts that New Jersey’s quality-blind LIFO law violates students’ constitutional right to a “thorough and efficient” education by allowing ineffective teachers to remain in classrooms while effective teachers are let go. The plaintiff families have asked the court to declare LIFO unconstitutional and render it unenforceable in Newark and similar districts.

The Supreme Court’s denial of the State’s motion today means that the lawsuit filed in November by six Newark parents is the only case pending to address New Jersey’s outdated LIFO statute.

The following is a statement by Ralia Polechronis, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice:

“This ruling is a big win for New Jersey parents and schoolchildren. The Supreme Court has echoed the position of a group of Newark parents, who argued to this court that the state’s unjust quality-blind teacher layoff law must be evaluated on its own, and not in connection with a decades-old school funding lawsuit. Concerned about looming school budget cuts, these same parents – the plaintiffs in HG v. Harrington – will continue their fight in the state’s trial court to invalidate the “last in, first out” law that prevents the retention of Newark’s best teachers during funding crises. These brave parents are leading the charge for students’ rights in New Jersey, and they will not back down until the harmful impact of this law is revealed and deemed unconstitutional.”
To learn more about HG v. Harrington, the parent-led lawsuit challenging New Jersey’s “last in, first out” teacher layoff law, please go to edjustice.org/nj. To read all legal filings related to HG v. Harrington, click here.

 

Filed Under: Press Releases

Statement from Partnership for Educational Justice in Response to State Motion to Stay HG v. Harrington

January 27, 2017

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 27, 2017
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061

Statement from Partnership for Educational Justice in response to State motion to stay HG v. Harrington
Partnership for Educational Justice Executive Director Ralia Polechronis released the following statement in response to motions filed yesterday evening by the New Jersey Commissioner of Education and the New Jersey Board of Education to stay HG v. Harrington, a lawsuit filed by six Newark parents challenging the constitutionality of New Jersey’s quality-blind teacher layoff law.
“The State claims to be working on behalf of New Jersey parents, but has opposed Newark parents’ request to be heard in a Supreme Court case about education funding and policy, and now the state wants to delay parents’ challenge to New Jersey’s quality-blind teacher layoff law. These brave parents only want what all parents want for their children — a quality education as guaranteed by the state constitution. With substantial school budget cuts looming, there is no time to waste. These parents are not backing down, and they will fight until their children’s rights are upheld.”
– Ralia Polechronis, Executive Director, Partnership for Educational Justice

Filed Under: Press Releases

PRESS RELEASE: New Jersey State Department of Education Data Reveals That More Than Half of the State’s Ineffective Teachers are Concentrated in Newark

December 20, 2016

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 20, 2016
Contact: Melody Meyer, melody@edjustice.org or 646.770.7061
@Part4EduJustice

New Jersey State Department of Education Data Reveals That More Than Half of the State’s Ineffective Teachers are Concentrated in Newark

Newark, NJ—Earlier this month, the New Jersey State Department of Education released state and district level educator evaluation data from the 2014-15 school year. The data revealed that Newark employs more ineffective teachers than any other district in the state and more than five times the number of ineffective teachers in Camden, the district with the second highest number. In the 2014-15 school year, 2.4 percent of New Jersey teachers taught in Newark, but in the same year:

  • More than half (53.3 percent) of the state’s ineffective teachers were in Newark
  • Less than one percent (0.9 percent) of the state’s highly-effective teachers were in Newark
  • Additionally, 12.4 percent of Newark’s teachers received a less-than-effective rating, which was nearly eight times the statewide average (1.6 percent)

New Jersey teacher evaluations 2014-15
Data from New Jersey State Department of Education (source link)

  Ineffective Partially effective Effective Highly effective Total
Newark 90 221 1,879 321 2,511
Statewide 169 1,490 68,845 36,038 106,542

Despite carrying far more than its fair share of ineffective teachers, most teachers in Newark were rated effective, and 321 Newark teachers were rated highly effective in 2014-15. Recognizing that some of these effective and highly-effective teachers are at risk of losing their jobs while Newark Public Schools continue to employ a disproportionate number of ineffective teachers, six Newark parents filed a lawsuit on November 1, 2016, challenging the constitutionality of New Jersey’s quality-blind teacher layoff law. Under the current statute, when budget reductions force school administrators to lay off teachers, they must do so based only on the date teachers started in the district, with the newest teachers losing their jobs first. In districts like Newark, this “last in, first out” (LIFO) law forces school districts to lay off some of their best teachers while keeping ineffective ones. Newark Public Schools currently face budget cuts that will reduce state funding to the district by nearly 69 percent.

“My children deserve a great education, and the best teachers possible,” said Noemi Vazquez, mother of three Newark Public School students and plaintiff in HG v. Harrington, the parent-led lawsuit challenging the state’s teacher layoff law. “The law should do everything it can to keep great teachers in our schools. Why would it protect ineffective teachers while forcing schools to lay off excellent teachers?”

“The teacher quality data released by the State shows precisely why a statewide mandate for quality-blind teacher layoffs is unfair to students in Newark, which carries a grossly disproportionate share of the state’s ineffective teachers,” said Ralia Polechronis, Executive Director of Partnership for Educational Justice, a nonprofit organization supporting the Newark parents’ lawsuit. “Research shows that teachers are the most critical in-school factor for student learning, and Newark students—as this newest state data reveals—desperately need to keep the highly-effective teachers already in the district.  The balance must shift for Newark students; it is their constitutional right. With serious school budget cuts looming over Newark, the ‘last in, first out’ teacher layoff law will force administrators to let effective teachers go while keeping ineffective teachers. This law hurts students, and it needs to change.”

“Students who need great teachers the most—those in high-poverty schools and districts—are the least likely to get them. It’s a national trend that’s as consistent as it is shameful. Unfortunately, New Jersey is no exception,” said Daniel Weisberg, CEO of TNTP, a national education nonprofit. “Newark deserves a lot of credit for evaluating teachers fairly and accurately, and for retaining 95% of their top teachers. But too many kids in Newark still don’t get to learn from the great teachers they deserve—and New Jersey’s one-size-fits-all, quality-blind teacher layoff rules are making the problem worse.”

Research studies have consistently established that teacher quality is the most important in-school factor affecting student learning. Students with high-quality, effective teachers are more likely to graduate from high school and attend college, more likely to have good jobs and higher lifetime earnings, and they are less likely to become teenage parents.

Newark ranked in the bottom third of twenty-five urban school districts investigated in a report released earlier this month by the Fordham Institute looking into how difficult it is for ineffective veteran teachers to be removed. Newark Public Schools received only three out of a possible ten points awarded for degree of difficulty removing a veteran teacher who has been identified as ineffective, with ten indicating that it is easy to remove an ineffective teacher and zero indicating that it is very difficult.

To better understand the effect that LIFO layoffs would have on Newark’s overall teacher quality, Newark Public Schools ran the numbers in 2014 on a hypothetical teacher layoff scenario. Under the quality-blind LIFO layoff mandate, 75 percent of the teachers laid off would have been rated effective or highly effective, and only 4 percent of the teachers laid off would have been rated ineffective. Under a performance-based system, only 35 percent of teachers laid off would have been rated effective and no teachers rated highly effective would lose their jobs.

Since at least 2012, the Newark Public School district has avoided laying off effective teachers by paying millions of dollars per year to cover the salaries of ineffective – but more senior – teachers even when no school would agree to their placement in the school. This costly work-around has diverted valuable resources from educational programming and other expenses that could improve the education of Newark students.

The six Newark parents who filed HG v. Harrington have also filed a motion with the New Jersey Supreme Court to intervene in Abbott v. Burke, a decades-old school funding lawsuit. The Newark parents’ Abbott motion, which is also supported by Partnership for Educational Justice, opposes the State of New Jersey’s request to remove the current court order for extra education funding to 31 high-need school districts, including Newark, paving the way for significant funding cuts to these same districts. The Newark parents also oppose the State’s proposal to the Supreme Court that the enforcement of New Jersey’s “last in, first out” teacher layoff law should be left to the discretion of the State Commissioner of Education, a political appointee.

About Partnership for Educational Justice (PEJ)

Founded by award-winning journalist Campbell Brown, Partnership for Educational Justice is a nonprofit organization pursuing impact litigation that empowers families and communities to advocate for great public schools through the courts. In addition to the parent-led lawsuit challenging New Jersey’s quality-blind teacher layoff law, PEJ is currently working with parents and students in New York and Minnesota in support of legal challenges to unjust teacher employment statutes in those states.

Filed Under: Press Releases

PEJ Statement on the State of New Jersey’s Opposition to Newark Parents’ Motion to Intervene in Abbott v. Burke

November 17, 2016

Earlier this week, the State of New Jersey opposed a motion filed by six Newark parents requesting participation in potential New Jersey Supreme Court proceedings related to the state’s “last in, first out” (LIFO) teacher layoff law. With support from Partnership for Educational Justice, the same parents earlier this month filed HG v. Harrington, challenging the constitutionality of the state’s LIFO law in Mercer County Superior Court.

In response to the State’s opposition, Partnership for Educational Justice Executive Director Ralia Polechronis today released the following statement:

“If New Jersey’s Supreme Court considers the state’s “last in, first out” quality-blind teacher layoff statute, the parents challenging the constitutionality of this law deserve a seat at the table. The State’s opposition to their participation is telling. Instead of welcoming Newark parents’ voices on the issue of LIFO, the State seeks to keep them out of a debate about a broken law that violates students’ rights by forcing school districts to either lay off effective teachers while keeping ineffective ones, or waste limited education funding to avoid laying off teachers who are successfully educating their students.

The brave parents behind HG v. Harrington are fighting so that their children can have a fair shot at a great public education. They oppose the State’s proposals to reduce education funding to Newark and other similar districts, and to leave the enforcement of an unconstitutional teacher layoff law to the discretion of a political appointee. If the New Jersey Supreme Court considers the LIFO issue raised by the State, it is unfair to the students whose future is at risk for the court to do so without the input of the HG v. Harrington plaintiff families.”

– Ralia Polechronis, Executive Director, Partnership for Educational Justice

 

Contact:

Melody Meyer

melody@edjustice.org | 646.770.7061

Filed Under: Press Releases

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Next Page »
  • About Us
    • Our Mission
    • Our History
    • FAQ
    • Contact Us
  • Teacher Quality Lawsuits
    • New York Lawsuit (Wright v. New York)
    • Minnesota Lawsuit (Forslund v. Minnesota)
    • New Jersey Lawsuit (HG v. Harrington)
    • Permanent Employment
    • Other Initiatives
  • Legal Filings
    • Wright v. New York Legal Filings
    • Forslund v. Minnesota Legal Filings
    • HG v. Harrington Legal Filings
    • DACA Amicus Brief Filings by PEJ
    • Partnerships
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • Blog
  • Action
    • Donate
    • Share your Story
    • Sign up for our Email List
    • Follow Us on Social Media
    • Read the Research on Teacher Quality

Copyright

© 2014 Partnership for Educational Justice

Disclaimer

Partnership for Educational Justice is recognized by the Internal Revenue Service as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Privacy Policy

Terms & Conditions