Menu
Emery assailed on tenure, teacher evaluations, retirement fund
Sen. Ed Emery was peppered with concerns from members of the Vernon County Retired Educators, a chapter of the Missouri Retired Teachers Association and Public School Personnel, during Friday morning's legislative update that served as the main portion of the agenda for the group's monthly meeting.
Emery and Rep. Patricia Pike provided opening remarks and then fielded questions from the audience.
Given his support for Amendment 3, which he touched on later during his comments, and the opposition from local school boards to that amendment, Emery acknowledged he was speaking before an audience that didn't agree with his stance.
Amendment 3 was defeated both in the county and statewide by over 76 percent of the vote.
Leading up the vote, school boards said it would result in the loss of local control of education decisions, mandate how to evaluate teachers and prevent school boards from hiring, promoting, compensating and dismissing teachers in accordance with their local board policies.
Additionally, they said Amendment 3 would require more standardized testing for students, which school districts and taxpayers would be forced to pay for.
Emery began by saying he learned more from those who disagreed than agreed with his stances and thanked everyone for their comments.
He alluded to his time as a student at Nevada High School and singled out his former band teacher, who was in attendance.
Emery opened by touching on the latest incident in Ferguson, Mo., where civil unrest continues following the shooting death of an 18-year-old in August of last year. Two police officers were shot during a protest rally last week.
The senator said that there was a belief that the school district had failed in this situation. He said it was an example "of why public education is important." (There,) they don't have what we have on our side of the state," in terms of the opportunity for a quality public education.
Later in the meeting, during the question portion, several audience members brought up his comments regarding Ferguson and the school system there.
Emery was asked how much investigation he had done into the success of schools when they are in poverty-stricken areas and how much that impacts the level of learning.
"I understand what that does to our students," said the questioner. "Students are less prepared when they start."
Another noted that if educators are being held accountable, parents should also be held accountable.
"We do need to look at the breakdown in the home," said Emery.
"We want the most successful approach for our students, whether they are in poverty or not.
"For many of us, moving from the path of destruction to success was made possible by one teacher who made the difference."
During his opening remarks, Emery said during a meeting he had attended with school administrators, and in other education discussions he had held in the district, "students aren't being mentioned, just the institution," which he said was concerning.
"We have to ask what we can do to make sure students have better opportunities.
"During a number of these meetings, the reference is always more money and time.
"I'm frustrated that we are not talking about how we can ensure student achievement. We have to focus on student success.
"The solution to that is to look at what other states are doing to improve. When you look at that, Missouri stays level or declines. Other states are improving.
"I think it's important to try to find those perspectives on what we can do in trying to give students and parents a choice."
Emery said one possible solution would be the creation of a "virtual school of choice.
"It's a new approach, one that would go down to the school building level. The goal would be to keep the student as close to home as possible, with the first choice of staying in their own district.
"It would be a K-12 type of school. There may be a building, there may not be. It's not a virtual course.
"It's been very successful for kids who don't fit in well. I think it addresses the focus of trying to give every student the opportunity to learn.
"A virtual school can be set up anywhere, even out of state, but it would have to hire Missouri certified teachers. It would be done via the Internet, but the requirements that you have now would still be there."
Touching on charter schools, Emery said it made sense for public schools to have fewer restrictions as well, much like charter schools.
"I favor less mandates. But in the past, I've asked for a list of everything that doesn't lead to student success. I didn't get any suggestions.
"I do think we need to take what's successful in charter schools and allow public schools to do that."
Senate Bill 493 includes language on charter schools, among other areas of education.
Emery said the Senate has tried to accommodate the governor's problems with the private school option, the lack of a tuition formula and the "transportation hardship" language that's in the bill.
"So we removed the transportation and tried to address the tuition."
Emery also talked about the effort to revise the education funding formula and the proposed changes to the current legislation.
That came about in 2005 and created a designation of "hold harmless" districts in which state funding can't fall below the levels established that year. Emery noted though, that the pro rating percentage could drop that amount.
The proposed changes to the current formula would result in another redistribution of money, said Emery.
Walt Cochran with the Vernon County Retired Educators, distributed a handout, the "MRTA Issues of Importance," that stated the public school foundation formula is "currently underfunded by at least $650 million. This is particularly troublesome for rural schools and inner city schools because a high percentage of their funding comes from the state."
Emery said the proposed changes would result in differing impacts for schools.
"In my district, it's about 50-50 on which school systems would win additional money and which would lose.
"There are a number of districts in the state, particularly in the urban areas, where they are mostly locally funded."
Emery added that DESE, the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, had created policies without legislative oversight.
"This new bill would have DESE abide by the original agreement."
Emery said such changes to the educational formula would be difficult to achieve.
"It's hard to get anything changed. A lot of it is going to depend on the estimated cost."
Another bill that focuses on education, Senate Bill 219, wasn't out of committee but Emery said he believed it to be a good bill that would result in a "decrease in liability and keep teachers teaching longer, with fewer opting to retire. I see no reason not to support it."
The bill repeals a July 1, 2014, termination date so that retiring teachers with 31 or more years of creditable service will receive a retirement allowance with a 2.55 multiplier.
Moving on to other legislation, Emery spoke on Senate Bill 94, along with House Bills 484 and 485, that tackle retirement.
The legislation puts state legislators into the 401k retirement plan, while another would establish a hybrid retirement plan that requires all new members of the plan to participate in a defined contribution plan for state employees and elected officials.
The MRTA handout called such measures a "slippery slope" that would eventually lead to educators being put into a 401k.
That concern and the members' distrust of the legislature not to touch the teacher retirement plan were echoed by several in attendance.
Emery said he was in favor of the changes for lawmakers, nothing that currently, lawmakers essentially have a vested retirement-for-life plan. He said he would prefer the employee contribution during the time of service, with no more obligation from the state.
Those who spoke up were adamant that they didn't want changes made to the teacher retirement plan.
One said, "Retirement is the only thing we get in Missouri."
Emery then moved to Senate Bill 27, which would later draw most of the questions and concern from the audience.
Emery said that the bill would eliminate tenure for new hires.
The MRTA sheet that was circulated at the meeting states it would "reduce local control of school districts by requiring educator evaluations and salaries to be based on student performance.
"SB 27 requires school report cards and eliminates tenure," it said.
During the question period, one educator compared Senate Bill 27 to Amendment 3, which, as the MRTA release noted, was defeated overwhelmingly by the vote of the people Nov. 4.
Emery disagreed, noting this bill was different from the amendment.
Further, he said the defeat of Amendment 3 wasn't because of the tenure portion.
"This came from looking at other states that have been effective in their scores," Emery said during his opening remarks.
"Reducing tenure has always had a positive impact and has never been a negative.
"I've talked to people who voted against Amendment 3. It wasn't because of tenure.
"Talk to your non-teacher neighbors."
Another audience member stated, "You're punishing us, trying to get rid of tenure."
"I don't view it as punishment," he responded.
Another audience member said that, "tenure doesn't protect the bad teachers. But it does protect us at the top of the salary scale."
The senator pointed to a survey of his constituents that was mailed out in which he said 75 percent of the 2,300 responses said they believed teachers should be evaluated on performance and not tenure.
One questioner disagreed, saying she felt Emery was not representing his constituents on this issue, especially those in southwestern Missouri.
Emery responded by saying he "represented the entire state," and had to look at the best interests of all, including and going beyond the district.
That prompted another question regarding contributions, with the questioner saying that "obligates you to do what they want you to do."
"I have accepted funds from a number of organizations," said Emery. "My largest supporters have never asked me to do anything."
Another audience member said that, "basing teacher evaluation on student performance penalizes the teacher who deals with a poorly performing class."
"The legislation seeks to target performance," said Emery.
"It rates not only the teachers but the building so there is accountability for the administration and for the superintendents.
"It's part of what works in a business model vs. an education model."
Citing again the importance of student performance, Emery said he would prefer a better option to statewide testing.
"I think we need to look at alternatives to that. You can have the effect of testing all the time and teaching so little."
Ultimately, Emery said, he expected more discussion on Senate Bill 27.
"That bill won't move this year."