NCSA TODAY A PUBLICATION OF THE NEBRASKA COUNCIL OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS
Cliff Effect Preserving Public Education Finding Solutions
Nebraska Council of School Administrators
May/June 2010
www.NCSA.org
computer stations • student desks • task chairs • book shelves • café tables • classroom seating • auditorium seating • office desks
Call us today at 800-448-4726 or visit www.virco.com
™
- equipment for educators
©2010 Virco Inc.
REF# 10029
FEATURES
2 Historic Legislation to Change Kindergarten Enrollment Date
4 Cloudy Economic Forecast Still Has Glimmer of Hope 6
Has Your Evaluation Instrument Evolved with the Times or Are You Still Using Slate and Chalk? BY DR. KENT M C LELLEN
7
The Job of Elementary Principal
8
Career Academy Partnerships/Collaboration at Work
10
BY SARAH WILLIAMS
BY DR. RANDY A. NELSON
ESU 13窶天irtual High School: Nebraska Educational Virtual Academy (NEVA) BY DR. JEFFREY D. WEST
11
NAESP Outstanding New Principal of the Year
11
NCSA Welcomes New Finance and Membership Coordinator
12
NSASSP Announces 2009-2010 Award Winners
14
NAESP Announces Nebraska Distinguished Principal of the Year
15 15 16 17
NAESP Longevity Awards 2009-2010 NSASSP Longevity Awards 2009-2010 Green Light to Go Green BY DAVE RAYMOND and DENNY VAN HORN
Educators Health Alliance (EHA) Update BY DR. MIKE DULANEY and DR. DAN ERNST
NCSA EXECUTIVE BOARD 2009-2010 Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Matt Fisher Vice Chair . . . . . . . . . . . .Ryan Ruhl Past Chair . . . . . . . . . . John Osgood NASA Representatives President . . . . . . . . . .Bill Mowinkel President-elect . . . . . . . .Jack Moles Past President . . . . . . . .Matt Fisher NASBO Representatives President . . . . . . . . . . .Rick Feauto President-elect . . . . .Robin Hoffman Past President . . . Sandy Rosenboom NAESP Representatives President . . . . . . . . .Sarah Williams President-elect . . . . . .Midge Mougey Past President . . . . . . . . . .Mary Yilk NASES Representatives President . . . . . . . . . . . .Jane Byers President-elect . . . . .Peggy Romshek Past President . . . . .Ellen Stokebrand NSASSP Representatives President . . . . . . . .Kenton McLellan President-elect . . . .Randy Schleuter Past President . . . . . . . . .Ryan Ruhl NARSA Representative President . . . . . . . . . . . .Ron Joekel NCSA STAFF Dr. Michael S. Dulaney Executive Director/Lobbyist Dr. Dan E. Ernst Associate Executive Director/Lobbyist Kelly Coash-Johnson Training and Development Director
18
NCSA Honors Longtime Advocate
Amy Poggenklass Finance and Membership Coordinator
19
School Community Partnership for Essential Finance Planning
Dr. Bill Kenagy NCSA Principal Liaison
20 CALENDAR OF EVENTS NCSA Mission The mission of the Nebraska Council of School Administrators (NCSA) is to be an effective leader for quality education and to enhance the professionalism of its members. NCSA Today is a benefit of membership in the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, 455 South 11th Street, Suite A, Lincoln, NE 68508. Telephone 402.476.8055 or 800.793.6272. Fax 402.476.7740. Annual membership dues are $325 (active members), $100 (associate members), or $30 (student members). NCSA Today is published quarterly. Send address changes to NCSA, Membership, 455 South 11th Street, Suite A, Lincoln, NE 68508. Copyright ﾂｩ2010 by NCSA. All rights reserved.
Angie Carman Executive Administrative Assistant Carol Young Administrative Assistant Sarah F. Sullivan NCSA Staff Correspondent The opinions expressed in NCSA Today or by its authors do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Nebraska Council of School Administrators. MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
1
STATEWIDE
The Cliff Year BY KEN FOSSEN, Associate Superintendent, Millard Public Schools
L
ast year at this time, 2011-12 seemed so distant. Today, those of us who are finishing our budgets for next year are beginning to come to the realization that 2011-12 (i.e., “The Cliff Year”) is just around the corner. Before we all have a panic attack, let’s back up a bit, take a deep breath, review how we got where we are, and examine some options available (both at the state and local levels) for meeting the Cliff Year challenges.
Fossen
Recent History As you will recall, at the end of 2008 and the start of 2009, the national economy began to unwind. It had previously been on a terror bolstered by subprime (and even fraudulent) loans. Real estate prices were escalating at dizzying rates. There was even a TV series based on the wealth that could be generated “flipping” houses (i.e., buying them, fixing them up a bit, and then reselling them for a handsome profit). Consumers were spending what they didn’t have and investors were investing in what they didn’t understand. Eventually, the house of cards began to fall. As the Obama administration took office in early 2009, it was staring into the face of what some believed would be “The Great Depression Part II.” The Administration and Congress quickly engaged in unprecedented actions to slow the economic free fall. Those actions included the appropriation of massive amounts of money to be distributed to states to assist with the funding of governmental programs – especially education.
(ARRA-SFSF). Most of this money was required to go to education. Rather than allocate the full amount (i.e., $234 million) in one year, Nebraska made the decision to spread it out over two fiscal years. Further, it decided to use the $234 million to replace its planned increases in state aid to schools. By supplanting the increases in state aid, the state was able to free up some funds to support other programs and services at the state level. The original “plan” for the use of ARRA-SFSF moneys was to freeze the state’s contribution to K-12 education at $839 million dollars (i.e., the amount distributed in state aid in 2008-09) for two years and then add $94 million of ARRA-SFSF money to it in 2009-10 and the remaining $140 million to it in 2010-11. In 2011-12, after the federal moneys were exhausted, the plan was for the state to appropriate the funds necessary to replace the federal moneys plus continue funding the existing state aid formula. This plan, however, didn’t last long when it became apparent that the state’s revenues were continuing to decline. In a special session in 2009, the legislature amended the state aid statutes to reduce the state’s appropriation for state aid to $810 million dollars. Thus, in 2010-11, schools in the state received $29 million dollars less than was originally planned. Unfortunately, that’s not the end of the story. In the past few weeks, revised projections have been made regarding state revenues and expenses for the 2011-13 biennium (i.e., two years). The 2011-13 biennium includes the magic year (i.e., “The Cliff Year”) when the state will be faced with replacing the ARRA-SFSF funds. When the replacement of ARRA-SFSF funds is added to all of the other projected expenses at the state level, the projections for the 2011-13 biennium indicate a deficit of about $679 million (i.e., an average of about $340 million per year).
State Aid Nebraska received millions of federal dollars through the State Fiscal Stabilization Funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Property Taxes Although a lot of the Cliff Year focus is on state aid, consideration must also be given to the changes in property values in the state in order to get a good feel for the net impact the Cliff Year might have on schools. As we all know, property taxes comprise the largest single revenue source for the funding of Nebraska schools. Therefore, any significant changes in property values will have (continued on page 3)
2
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
STATEWIDE a corresponding impact (either positive or negative) on the programs and services offered by the school districts. The latest information indicates that the total value of existing properties statewide increased by 3.3%. over the past year. This increase, however, was not uniform. Existing residential and recreational property declined by 0.4% while existing commercial property and agricultural land increased by 1.8% and 11.9% respectively. This disparity of valuation changes for different real estate classes produced a similar disparity in the total property value changes at the county level. For Douglas County, the total existing property values decreased by 0.4% while in Logan County they increased by 25%. Thus, when property taxes are considered in the analysis of the Cliff Year impact, some school districts may fare better than others. As Senator Greg Adams put it, “Some [districts] will weather this well. For others, it will be far more stressful.” Expenditures When it comes to budgeting, there are two sides to the ledger – revenues and expenditures. To be fair, we need to examine our expenditures as critically as we examine our revenues. Every district is subject to the normal cost increases associated with inflation, but inflation has been relatively mild for the past few years. At this time last year, the CPI was actually below zero. Today, however, it is back on the positive side and is running at a somewhat mild 2.4%. While general inflations has been relatively low, school budgets have been increasing at a significantly faster pace. Why? Schools are service organizations that have about 80% of their budgets tied to employee salaries and benefits. While inflation actually turned negative for a while, the cost of salaries and benefits did not. At present, it appears that the midpoint for 201011 salary and benefit increases (via collective bargaining with employees) will be around 4.2%. Many superintendents have expressed that of this 4.2% only about a percent and a half is actively bargained at the table. The remaining amount is related to the movement of staff on the existing salary schedules and to the increases in health insurance premiums. Options With the Cliff Year presenting potential reductions in state aid, with stagnant property values for many districts, and with increasing expenditures for all districts, something has to give in order for school district’s to balance their budgets. Here are some possible options (both state and local) that have been suggested: 1. Eliminate the State’s Property Tax Credit: The state transfers to the counties about $115 million each year as property tax credits for property owners. If this credit were eliminated, the state deficit for the biennium would be reduced by about $230 million.
2. Reduce Incentives Under LB 775: In 1987, the Legislature enacted LB 775 which provides income tax credits, sales tax refunds, and property tax exemptions to companies that make investments that meet certain requirements. “At the time the bill was passed, the legislative fiscal office estimated that the cost to the state budget (in tax refunds and credits) would start at $3 million, rise by several thousand per year and level off by the late 1990’s, presumably at something less than $10 million per year. The actual budget costs rose to ten times that amount, over $100 million in 2000 and in 2001.” The special benefits to businesses under LB 775 continue today despite frequent calls for reform or repeal. Reducing these benefits could have a significant impact on the state’s projected budget deficit. 3. Reduce Medicaid Fraud, Waste, and Abuse: In recent testimony before a U.S. House Judiciary Subcommittee, Nebraska Assistant Attorney General D. Mark Collins commented, “Although most taxpayer dollars go directly toward providing essential medical care for the intended beneficiaries of the [Medicaid] program, a tremendous amount of money is lost to fraud, waste and abuse.” He went on to state, “The [Fraud] Units have seen wave after wave of fraud sweeping through nursing homes and hospitals, clinics and pharmacies, podiatrists, labs, home health care providers and durable medical equipment vendors and, more recently, pharmaceutical companies. Each surge has brought its own special brand of profiteer in search of the next MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
3
STATEWIDE The Cliff Year… (continued from page 3)
5.
6.
7.
8.
4
great loophole in the Medicaid program.” Any reduction in fraud, waste, and abuse in the Nebraska Medicaid program would help address the budget deficit facing the state. 4. Reduce State Aid to Schools: The current state projections assume that the state aid formula will remain in effect as it is currently written. This means that the budget projections include not only the replacement of the ARRASFSF funds but also the annual increases in state aid inherent in the statutory formula. Thus, the state could revise (again) the formula and bring about whatever reduction in state aid the Legislature determined appropriate under the circumstances. Reduce the State’s Cash Reserve Fund: The state maintains a cash reserve fund a/k/a “the rainy day fund.” If this fund were eliminated entirely, the state deficit for the biennium would be reduced by $321 million. It should be noted that, unlike the Property Tax Credit, this fund would present a one-time “shot” to the state finances. In future years, the state would have no rainy day funds available. Increase the State Sales Tax Rate: In order to increase revenue at the state level, the state sales tax rate could be increased. Increasing taxes, as we all know, is not popular with anyone. Increase the State Income Tax Rates: Increasing the state’s income tax rate would also be an option for increasing state revenues. Like any other tax, it would not be enthusiastically endorsed by anyone. Reduce Local Programs/Services: At the local level, programs and services could be reduced or eliminated to mitigate expenditures. Since about 80% of local budgets are tied to employee salaries and benefits, any significant reductions would inevitably lead to a reduction in the number of employees. It should, however, be noted that some reductions might result NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
in a decrease in future state aid to the district (e.g., transportation, special education, class sizes in grades K-3, etc.), therefore, every proposed reduction should be evaluated based upon its “net” impact on the district’s finances. 9. Reduce Local Salaries/Benefits: During the Cliff Year, job security could become a more important issue for employees than wages and benefits. If so, the pressure on salary and benefits could mitigate. In the end, however, the issue will be one of comparability with employee compensation provided in other districts – at least for employees in collective bargaining units subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission of Industrial Relations. 10. Reduce Other Local Expenditures: School districts will also need to examine ways to mitigate some of their non-personnel-related expenditures. In smaller communities this may present some significant political issues if savings can be realized by purchasing goods and services from vendors who do not reside within the local community. 11. Increase Local Property Tax Levies: Raising taxes is unpopular at any level of government. Nonetheless, increasing the local property tax levy is one option available to school districts – it least those that are operating on a levy that is below the statutory levy limit. 12. Reduce Local Cash Reserves: School districts may want to consider reducing their cash reserves during the Cliff Year. Since all districts need a cash reserve to meet their cash flow needs until property tax receipts arrive, this option will work best for districts that have more cash reserve than is needed for cash flow purposes. For school districts with very limited cash reserves, this option is still available. However, these districts will need to make arrangements for tax anticipation notes or lines of credit to cover their cash flow needs when the payroll is due but tax receipts have not arrived. Of course, the interest related to this borrowing will increase the district’s expenditures for the year. Conclusion There are some significant financial challenges ahead of us as we prepare for the Cliff Year. Although these challenges may seem overwhelming at times, they are not. There are options, including those noted above, available to get us through this difficult period of time. We’ve done it before. We can do it again. Finally, one of the more difficult challenges of the Cliff Year will fall on school administrators. They will be the ones responsible for implementing the final policy decisions in such a manner as to mitigate any negative impact on the educational opportunities for our young people. They, too, have done it before. They’ll do it again.
ECONO MY
Making Effective Decisions in Tough Economic times BY DR. KEN NELSON, University of Nebraska at Kearney
(Educators trained to lead the School/Community Partnership for Essential Finance Planning Process)
S
Nelson
chool leaders across the nation have been faced with difficult choices because of lack of funding for their districts. Many of these decisions have been made without a well-developed plan and in many cases these decisions have proven to not be in the best interests of the students attending their schools. The problem of funding shortfalls for schools is becoming more and more ominous. A recent edition of the AASA School Business Brief contained numerous headlines describing the current economic situation for schools. It would appear that the problem of inadequate school funding may be on the horizon for some Nebraska school districts. Many school finance leaders have expressed a concern of a possible “perfect storm” occurring in Nebraska causing what others have termed the “cliff effect.” Factors considered are the possible decline in sales and income tax, loss of stimulus funds and the potential reduction of state aid in the upcoming years. The possibility of Nebraska school officials being faced with significant cuts appears to becoming more of a reality. School superintendents and board members have endlessly pondered the appropriateness of involving community members in pivotal decisions that may have a significant impact on the future of their school districts. When and on what issues should patron input be sought? Or is it easier to take a “let’s decide and then defend approach.” Although some school leaders pay “lip service” to the merits of community involvement, few actually have identified what it means in their district and more importantly how would this involvement be structured. In an effort to address the issue of community involvement, the Nebraska Council of School Administrators (NCSA) and the Nebraska Association of School Boards (NASB) invited educational leaders to attend a training session for facilitators that would be available to work with Nebraska school districts to address school district financial considerations. The workshop was structured to train participants to facilitate the steps involved in the School Community Partnership for Essential Finance Planning. The workshop was facilitated by Marge
Beatty, Educational Service Unit Administrator, ESU 16, and was held on May 11, 2010. The School/Community Partnership for Essential Finance Planning Process The “Financial Planning” process has been developed and implemented by Marge Beatty, in an effort to support area schools in their financial planning. Ms. Beatty agreed to facilitate the community discussions and to assist the groups in setting goals and making recommendations. The process involves several group meetings. The districts involved in this process ranged in size from 160 to 2,000 students. The requests for her services have grown beyond what would be expected, therefore she has partnered with NCSA and NASB to facilitate training of individuals to work with schools. The Essential Financial Planning process is designed to train and develop community leaders to have knowledge of school district programs, services, offerings and finances. The process approaches a potential budget crisis from a positive, pro-active, and community-focused standpoint. Successful school leaders and board members understand that making major decisions without involving parents, teachers, and other community leaders can create controversy and threaten funding support. The process is aimed at helping school personnel and community members to determine what they are not willing to give up and also to develop a process to identify areas that may not be essential to the district. The focus of the process is to create a committee(s) made up of board members, teachers and community members to meet and analyze the challenges that the school faces and to gather information to make recommendations to the Board of Education on how to address the projected budget shortfall. The local Board of Education remains responsible for final financial decisions for the district. These meetings will focus on the purpose of the process, understanding the current environments, reviewing mandated and comparative course offerings, understanding
MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
5
AF FIL IATE LEA DERSHIP
How big does the elephant have to get?
Financial Distress andTeacher Compensation BY RICK FEAUTO, Business Manager-South Sioux City Community Schools “…a man who continues putting off some unpleasant business from day to day, yet knows it must be done, hates to set about it, wishes it over and is continually haunted with the thoughts of its necessity.” Thomas Paine
S
Feauto
6
NCSA TODAY
chool days. Reading, writing and arithmetic. What are your memories of your school days? Prom? Football games? Friends? Graduation Day? We all have memories of those thirteen years of our lives that seemed to last forever but, in hindsight, went by so fast. We remember the friends and the friendships we forged. We remember the good, the bad and the ugly. We also remember the adults that we saw every day, our teachers. Mr. Hoverstein, my fifth-grade teacher. Mr. Hirshman, my algebra teacher. Mr. Burchard, my wrestling coach. Mr. Ackerman, my Intermediate Accounting professor. I remember them all quite clearly. They didn’t just teach me, they educated me. They challenged and inspired me. They molded me. How can you put a price tag on what a teacher means to a student? One word of encouragement, one wink, one pat on the back could have a profound effect on a sometimes fragile psyche of a young student. Priceless. Their effect can truly be priceless. Many people believe teachers deserve better compensation. Rock stars make millions. Ball players and CEO’s too. Why not teachers? Maybe not millions, but why do teachers’ salaries seem to be lagging. I’ve worked for South Sioux City Schools for 23 years now and been involved with the negotiation’s process the entire time. I’ve heard the argument from both sides. I have a daughter who just began her teaching career in Chicago, in the shadow of Wrigley Field (okay, it’s about five blocks away). I wish the best for her and wish she could bring home a bigger paycheck. But I know that it’s quite a balancing act for board members to pay a fair and competitive wage, while preserving their responsibility to the taxpayers they serve. But how much control do local boards really have on the outcome of negotiations with their teaching staff? We live in a country that currently has an unemployment rate stretching to reach 10% and an underemploy-
MAY/JUNE 2010
ment rate that may exceed 20%. We have a federal government that is staring down the barrel of a $3.8 trillion annual budget deficit. Our military is active in numerous overseas missions, as threats to national security continue to grow. These are all serious national challenges, but what will affect school districts across the country the most is the loss of the State Fiscal Stabilization Funds in 2011. In the state of Nebraska, school districts may be facing a time when annual revenues decline by 20% or more in the not-too-distant future due to the loss of SFS Funds. At the same time, it seems as though teacher salary increases are on auto-pilot. If revenues are declining and a school district’s biggest individual expenditure is increasing, put simply, it has a problem. If salaries continue to grow by 4% or 5% and revenues can’t keep pace, what are the options? Unfortunately for many districts, the only options may be to reduce the number of personnel employed and in some cases, dismantle programs that are considered to be surplus in a time of economic distress. So why the perception that teacher salaries are on auto-pilot? The answer lies in the way teacher’s compensation packages are negotiated in Nebraska. When the negotiation efforts fail to come to an agreement, the local association and the local school board must take their case to the Commission of Industrial Relations (CIR) and a concept that the CIR has not allowed to enter into their decision making process is a district’s ability to pay. Simply put, if the CIR feels the compensation package that a district offers to its teachers in inadequate, it will force them to increase that package without regard to whether or not the district has the financial ability to pay that amount. Many districts will be on the brink of financial collapse in the next few years. A large settlement for teacher compensation may push them over the edge. A temporary change of position on the ability to pay may be reasonable alternative. If our crystal ball showing decreased revenues and increased expenditures is correct and a problem that Nebraska schools are most likely going to be facing, what is an equitable solution? In attacking this dilemma, the (continued on page 9)
AF FIL IATE LEA DERSHIP
How big does the elephant have to get?
Ability to Pay and the CIR BY JAMES B. GESSFORD, Perry, Guthery, Haase & Gessford, P.C., L.L.O. “I am in total disagreement with the holding that a school district's ability to pay is not an issue which can be raised before the [CIR]. In my judgment the school district's ability to pay is of vital concern and its consideration of the issue is inherent in the act itself.” Nebraska City Ed. Asso. v. School Dist., 201 Neb. 303, 306 (Neb. 1978) (Spencer, J., dissenting)
Gessford
S
ince the 1920’s our Nebraska Constitution has included a provision allowing the legislature to establish an “Industrial Commission.” Neb. Const. art. XIV, sec. 9 (1920). In the late 1940’s, the legislature passed such a law and we now have Sections 48-801 to 48-838, R.R.S., known as the “Industrial Relations Act” (“Act”). In that Act, the legislature created the Commission of Industrial Relations, commonly referred to as the “CIR.” The purpose of the CIR was to resolve “industrial disputes” to assure the “continuous, uninterrupted and proper functioning” of governmental operations and services since it also prohibited public sector strikes, lockouts, or other means of hindering, delaying, limiting, or suspending the continuity of governmental service. Section 48-802, R.R.S. The Commission is composed of five Commissioners appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Legislature. They are appointed for a term of six years and are appointed, based on their experience and knowledge in legal, financial, labor and industrial matters. The Commission offices, by statute, are located in the State Office Building at 301 Centennial Mall South, Lincoln, Nebraska. For more information about each Commissioner, and the CIR itself, go to the CIR’s website at http://www.ncir.ne.gov/. In terms of the legalize surrounding the concept of ‘ability to pay,’ the statute which lies at the core of the issue is Section 48-818, R.R.S. That statute allows the CIR to hear labor disputes and enter orders that “establish or alter the scale of wages, hours of labor, or conditions of employment ….” Beginning in the early 1970’s, the CIR ruled that it was not proper “under present law” to consider ‘ability to pay’ in setting teacher compensa-
tion. Fremont Educ. Assoc. v. School Dist., 1 CIR 50-1, 14 (1972) and Nehawka Educ. Assoc. v. School Dist., 2 CIR 65-1 (1973). In 1978, the CIR’s interpretation of Section 48-818 was reviewed on appeal by our Supreme Court in the case of Nebraska City Ed. Asso. v. School Dist., 201 Neb. 303 (Neb. 1978). In that case, the school district before the CIR had presented (a) testimony concerning the tax consequences of any proposed salary increases, and (b) introduced a compilation of financial information about itself and seven other comparable school districts, showing valuation per pupil and general levies. The CIR refused to consider such evidence. A majority of our Supreme Court agreed and upheld the CIR’s ruling stating: Had the Legislature wanted the [CIR under Section 48-818] to consider factors such as "ability to pay," when setting wage rates and conditions of employment it would have specifically provided therefor. We cannot rewrite the statute under the guise of interpretation. As we observed in School Dist. of Seward Education Assn. v. School Dist. of Seward, 188 Neb. 772, 199 N.W.2d 752 (1972), “‘* * * defendant is making his contentions in the wrong forum. They might appropriately be addressed to the Nebraska Legislature * * *.’” Id. at 201 Neb. 306. The lone dissenter in Nebraska City Ed. Asso., was the honorable Judge Spencer J. It seems Judge Spencer was very familiar with the elephant in the room, especially, as it relates to our current times of financial distress. For in addition to his authoritative assertions quoted at the beginning of this article, the balance of Judge Spencer’s dissent read in relevant part as follows: … The power to tax is the power to destroy. The [CIR] by this decision is given the power to require taxation beyond the ability of the district to pay. It can even ignore maximum levy limits if any such exist. We have held the Legislature may destroy a school district. We now hold the [CIR] has that legislative authority. To brush off the contention that because section 48818, R. R. S. 1943, makes no mention or reference to the MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
7
PRO GRAM SP OTL IGHT
Jack Hallstrom Friend of Education Award The NSASSP Jack Hallstrom Friend of Education Award honors individuals committed to education – who over a life-time of service, have made significant contributions to schools at the local level, or to advance organizational leadership at the district, state or national levels. Some of the folks so honored thus far include: Kent Mann, Grand Island Principal; Larry King, owner, Awards Unlimited; Jack Martin, photographer; Jerry Sellentin, retired Executive Director, NCSA; Bob Whitehouse, former Bryan principal; Fritz Stanek, 38 years in education, Omaha Public Schools and Barry Stark, NASSP National President.
Nelson
This year’s recipient Gaylord “Doc” Moller is an individual with over 50 years experience in the field of education (over half of those years as the principal of Central High School from 1968 – 1995), the longest tenure in Central history. Bob Whitehouse states “Doc is one of the most even-tempered, patient, and professional individuals you will ever meet. He generally stands in the background and lets others take credit for that which he is usually responsible. Doc has helped countless administrators in the business. If there was ever one single administrator whom you might pattern yourself after – I’d suggest it be Doc Moller.” Doc continues to be, work in the field of observations and evaluations. He has spent countless hours with student teachers, as well as regular staff, counselors, department heads, Assistant Principals, and building principals. He has a keen eye and a wealth of knowledge to back up suggestions and recommendations. He has
8
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
mentored student teachers and administrators at every level. This recognition will go alongside the NCSA Distinguished Service Award Doc received in 2005. This selection truly exemplified the motto: Honor the past to inspire the future. Jack Hallstrom along with Bob Whitehouse, UNL Region presented the award established in his name to Doc Moller at the NSASSP Region II Principals meeting on April 14, 2010.
PRO GRAM SP OTL IGHT BookReview by Ron Joekel The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice are Undermining Education Author: Diane Ravitch ISBN 978-0-465-01491-0 Basic Books-a member of the Perseus Book Group, (2010).
This is the book America is talking about and a must read for educators. It isn’t often that a high profile influential figure renounces previously held beliefs. But this is precisely what Diane Ravitch has done. Ravitch a respected educational historian and former Assistant Secretary of Education has changed her mind. Once a proponent of testing, accountability, choice, and rigorous national standards, she now presents a case for how testing, accountability, choice and markets have been “hijacked” by privatizers, particularly the charter school movement. She is fearful of the embracing of charter schools and testing by President Obama and his secretary of education Arne Duncan. In her opinion, strong backing from government and rich foundations has led to the sucking the best students and most committed parents both from public systems and good parochial schools, and killing both! Diane Ravitch begins her book with what amounts to an apology of her evolved thinking on the subject of public education in America. As a respected education historian who also has a deep background in the Bush/Clinton/Bush era of school reform, she freely confesses that many of the reforms she had enthusiastically supported in the 1980’s and 1990’s—“testing, accountability, choice, and markets”—are simply not working. As she develops the book, Ravitch combines historical perspective with the results of numerous foundation studies and statistics to argue her case that American public education has gone seriously off-track since roughly the time of the first Bush Presidency in 1989. She faults both Democrats and Republicans for this situation with their political posturing around quick fixes and infatuation with corporate business models and free market thinking as the answer to America’s educational issues. As a result, the ideal of a liberal education, encompassing not just multiple subject areas but also such traits as curiosity, passion, persistence, risktaking, self-learning, empathy, and tolerance had been replaced by “measurables,” especially test scores in math and reading/English. The book follows a chronological path on reform beginning with the Nation at Risk study in 1983. A chapter devoted to New York City’s District 2 and the rise of “Balanced Literacy” as the answer to reform education followed. Other reform movements are reported in chapters titled, Lessons from San Diego, and The New York City business model for education implemented under Mayor Michael Bloomberg. A chapter on No Child Left Behind and one on Choice provide good solid data on how they became part of the core for reform. In the latter third of the book, Ms. Ravitch addresses three other, important points of contention: • The problems introduced by devotion to quantifiable accountability as the only measure of school success. • The definition of “great teachers” and how they are measured under current systems, and • The role of publicly unanswerable major foundations (Walton, Gates and Broad) and how they are almost single handedly dictating the path of public education reform.
New York:
One of the most revealing and alarming chapters for me was chapter ten, The Billionaire Boys Club. Foundations like the Annenberg, W.K. Kellogg, the Lily Endowment, and the David & Lucile Packard Foundation were familiar in educational circles through the 1990’s. They reviewed proposals submitted to them funding ones they felt held promise. By 2002 they had been supplanted by a new group of foundations where the focus became more direct as the new foundations decided what they wanted to accomplish, how they wanted to accomplish it, and which organizations were appropriate recipients of their funds. In 2002 for example, the top two philanthropies were the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Walton Family Foundation. These new titans of the foundation world were billionaire entrepreneurs and corporate leaders. They were joined by another billionaire, Eli Broad, who made his fortune in home building and the insurance industry. Gates, Walton, and Broad came to be called venture philanthropies, organizations that made targeted investments in education reform. These venture philanthropists treated their gifts as an investment that was expected to produce measurable results, or in business language, “a return on investment.” They funded new entrepreneurial organizations that shared their goals and they created new organizations to receive their funding when none existed that met their purposes. Over time they focused on supporting reform strategies that mirrored their own experience in acquiring huge fortunes, such as competition, choice, deregulation, incentives, and other market based approaches. These were not familiar concepts in the world of education where high value was placed on collaboration. The venture philanthropies used their funds assertively to promote their goals. As a result the Gates, Walton and Broad Foundations came to exercise vast influence over American education. These foundations set the policy agenda not only for school districts, but also for states and even the U.S. Department of Education! In the concluding chapter, Ravitch stated, “the policies we are following today are unlikely to improve our schools. Indeed, much of what policy makers now demand will very likely make the schools less effective and may further degrade the intellectual capacity of our citizenry. The schools will surely be failures if students graduate knowing how to choose the right option from four bubbles on a multiple-choice test, but unprepared to lead fulfilling lives, to be responsible citizens and to make good choices for themselves, their families, and our society.” (Page 224) What does Ms. Ravitch believe are the fundamentals of a good education? On page 224 she lists the essential ingredients of a successful education system: • A strong curriculum • Experienced teachers • Effective instruction • Willing students • Adequate resources • A community that values education MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
9
PRO GRAM SP OTL IGHT
Development of a Career & Technical Academy Site in Grand island Dr. Kent B. Mann, Principal Grand Island Senior High School A variety of influences and a somewhat unique set of needs have converged in Grand Island that now finds our district on the verge of opening an industrial-Technical Career Academy (ITCA). In compliment to these influences and needs, a collaborative and engaging dialogue with Central Community College, the Grand Island Chamber of Commerce Business and Education Committee, and key leaders in the Grand Island business community has guided the development of the Grand Island ITCA. One set of circumstances, a continuous and steady increase in the student enrollment at Grand Island Senior High and an urgent need for more instructional space, we find ourselves West in the final stages of planning and design for a satellite campus at Senior High will house our new ITCA. Early interactions with representatives of the business community in Grand Island attempted to address the need for qualified and prepared employees for the communities major manufacturing entities. While dual credit and certifications were already in place between Central Community College and Senior High, the “work force” that we were preparing in courses like Welding, Manufacturing and Drafting, Certified Nurse s Assistant, and Auto Parts and Management, the demand still exceeded the supply. Representatives articulated the need for future employees who had a requisite set of “industry” skills and competencies that could be specialized by any of the prospective employers in the Grand Island community. High demand existed for workers with welding skills, competencies in powder coating and painting, and metal fabrication skills. The existing working relationship between Central Community College and Senior High became a template for the initial design of expanded programs that would allow students to acquire training and certification in a broader set of skills and competencies that would posture them to the growing number of good paying jobs within the trade and manufacturing community in Grand Island. Much of our discussion and planning efforts focused on dual credit options, program certification, and a favored status in the job market for the graduates with the business community. A delegation of approximately 35 representatives from the high school, community college and the business community in Grand Island embarked on a fact finding mission to Phoenix, AZ where we toured two very unique career academies. The fact-finding group visited West-MEC, a career and technical education center where students prepare to become members of a highly trained and skilled workforce for the 21st century. The West-MEC program was a consortium of high schools, organized to offer 22 different courses, in the high school within a dual-credit type format (students in the course at the high school earn credits through West-MEC toward anacademy certificate or endorsement). The second site visit was at the Maricopa Community
10
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
College. Various campus locations offer a variety of career and technical programs of study. High School students have the opportunity to enroll and participate in dual-credit and early entry courses that transition into a certificate, endorsement, or degree programs within the community college system. In addition to the programs offered and the career options that were available, funding for the projects was of great interest to the fact finding group. Both programs received funding from the State of Arizona. Residents of the greater Phoenix area contribute through a tax formula that draws on a population of over 5 million people. Needless to say, even if a similar structure could be created in Nebraska or the Grand Island/Hall County area, the Nebraska population could not even come close to generating the funds that were available each year for the operation of the programs that were visited. In the fall of 2009, a large warehouse and office complex came onto the market. The Grand Island Board of Education successfully negotiated the purchase of the property in southeast Grand Island that includes 3 separate buildings, an office complex and a large compound area. The overall site includes 350,000 square feet of warehouse/production area space, an office area of approximately 3,000 square feet, and a compound of nearly 3 acres of green space. With the site acquired, plans for ITCA are moving forward to prepare to ready the site for occupancy. The plan for the ITCA will develop during the course of the 20102011 school year as follows: -Finalize the program curriculum. -Finalize the program staffing needs (reassign some existing staff and hire new staff). -Transition most of the existing courses in Woods, Metals, and Autos from Senior High to the new site. -Articulation of additional dual credit and/or certification courses with Central Community College. -Renovation of the existing office space to become instructional classrooms, meeting rooms and program administrative space. -Creation of instructional labs and project areas. -Installation of industry standard training equipment. When the ITCA does open, we hope to offer an increased number of specialized training and certification courses that will prepare students for the local jobs which exist in the Grand Island manufacturing community. The Grand island Public Schools recently acquired an Innovation Planning Grant in the amount of $80K that will be used for program development and implementation. When the ITCA opens, students will likely include a morning or afternoon experience at the ITCA site and be complimented with a schedule of core classes at the high school site to meet Grand Island Public School s graduation requirements. The Grand Island ITCA could possibly open in the fall of 2011.
RECOG NITIO N
Nebraska State Association of Secondary School Principals Announces 2010 Distinguished Principals of the Year
Poggenklass
The Nebraska State Association of Secondary School Principals is proud to recognize Dr. Robert Michl, Principal at Freeman High School in Adams and Mr. Lance Fuller, Principal at Sunrise Middle School in Kearney, as their Distinguished Principals of the Year.
Dr. Michl will receive his award at the Nebraska State Association of Secondary School Principals State Conference and with his selection will be eligible for consideration for the 2011 Metlife/NASSP National High School Principal of the Year.
Dr. Robert Michl was selected to represent Nebraska as the High School Principal of the Year. Bob received his education from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (Bachelor of Arts, Master of Arts, Educational Specialist and Doctorate). Dr. Michl has served as a practicing school administrator for the past 9 years serving as Principal at Freeman High School since 2000. Prior to that, Bob was a classroom instructor and coach at Gretna High School. Dr. Michl is active in many professional organizations and community leadership positions such as the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, and the Nebraska State Association of Secondary School Principals, where he has served as an Executive Board member since 2008. He is also a member of the Gage County Safe Schools Advisory Committee, the First Lutheran Church, where he is a Sunday and Bible School teacher, and has served on the Omaha World Herald Academic All-State Selection Committee. Dr. Michl has several other honors, including the NSASSP Region I Principal of the Year and the Nebraska Coaches Association’s 25 Years of Service Award. Bob also serves as a delegate at the NSAA Representative Assembly. He has also been a presenter at several state and area events. Dr. Gary Hammack, Superintendent of the Freeman Public Schools, states: “Dr. Michl truly utilizes evaluation and instructional programs to improve teaching by providing clear and valuable feedback and expectations that aid and facilitate student learning. Student success is always his litmus test for school improvement.” Sandra Renken, Social Science instructor at Freeman High, says: “Dr. Michl possesses strong leadership skills and leads by example. One of his strongest qualities is that he is very approachable for his staff. He vies himself as our team leader and welcomes comments and suggestions from his staff, as well as from parents in order to make our school a great place to learn.” Mary Gramann, Assessment Coordinator states: “Dr. Michl has a keen vision for the school and works to carry through his goals. He has excellent communication and rapport with the students and staff. As a parent of Freeman students, I know that our school offers an excellent education for all students, thanks to the efforts of Dr. Michl”
Mr. Lance Fuller was selected to represent Nebraska as the Middle School Principal of the Year for the Nebraska State Association of Secondary School Principals. Lance received his education from the University of NebraskaKearney (Bachelor of Arts and K-6 endorsement) received his and Master of Arts in Educational Administration, from the University of Nebraska-Omaha Lance has been the principal at Sunrise Middle School since 2001. His previous educational experience includes teaching at Kearney High School (1993-1995) and at Mission Junior High and Bellevue East High School (1987-1993). While at Bellevue East, Mr. Fuller also served as the Dean of Students (1990-1993). Prior to his being named principal at Sunrise, he was the Assistant Principal at Kearney High School for six years (19952001). Mr. Fuller is active in many professional organizations such as the National Association of Secondary School Principals, the Nebraska Council of School Administrators and the Nebraska State Association of Secondary School Principals, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, the National Middle School Association, and the Nebraska Association for Middle Level Education. He is the Chairman of the Kearney Public School District Safety Committee, a member of the KPS Bond Issue Facility Planning Committee, an alternate member of the Nebraska Council on Teacher Education Committee, and is the Co-Chair of the Nebraska Middle Level Academy Planning Committee. Mr. Fuller has been the presenter for numerous university classes and conferences. Mr. Fuller has been honored as the Region IV Middle School Principal of the Year in 2004 and 2009. Dr. Brian Maher, Superintendent of the Kearney Public Schools, states: “Mr. Fuller is student-centered, quick witted, very savvy and has a passion for his school district and his school building. His character, ability to relate to people and ability to think on his feet provide him with the skills to work through those very difficult situations that all school principals face – and he does it with class and grace.” Mary Alice Konz, High Ability Learner Language Arts instructor says: “Each of us at Sunrise has a terrific ally in Lance Fuller. He makes us feel valued and challenges us to grow as professionals. MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
11
RECOGNITIO N
Rule 10:What’s New and What Might be on the Horizon? By: Freida Lange, Approval and Accreditation, Nebraska Department of Education All two hundred fifty-three Nebraska public school districts are required to be accredited by following the regulations in Rule 10, a rule which was originally initiated to provide equitable educational opportunities for K-12 students across the state of Nebraska. While Rule 10 provides the rules and regulations for the operation of the schools, the requirements are generally minimal when compared to the opportunities that Nebraska districts offer to students. The standard practice at the Nebraska Department of Education has been to review Rule 10 every five years. This practice changed over the years to one of continuous review to accommodate factors such as Nebraska legislation, Federal legislation, NeSA, State Board of Education policy adoption, State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (SFSF) requirements, and school needs. As of this writing, the effective date of the most recent Rule 10 is January 19, 2010, which replaced the June 24, 2007 Rule 10. However, don’t plan on that version lasting for very long. Another draft of Rule 10 just went to hearing on April 13, 2010. What do schools need to know about Rule 10 in its present form, what is new in the most recent hearing draft, and what directions is the rule likely to take in the future? The following may give us an idea of where Rule 10 is and where it is headed. New and Revised Items in the January 19, 2010, Rule 10 • Revision for Clarity: “Foreign,” is changed to “World” language and “Vocational,” is changed to “Career Education.” (Sections 002.05, 004.03 and 004.04B5) • Graduation Requirements: By 2014-15, school systems must adopt graduation requirements specifying that students successfully complete forty credit hours of language arts and thirty credit hours each of mathematics, science, and social studies in order to graduate. (003.05-003.05A4) • School systems may adopt a local policy that will allow high school credit to be awarded to students enrolled in middle grades if the course content and requirements are equivalent to a course offered in the high school. (003.05B) • The ‘old’ Career and Technical Education course descriptions have been replaced with the ‘new’ Career Field definitions. (004.04B6-004.04B6j) • The assessment sections are aligned with the Quality Education Accountability Act (Statute 79-760) requirements, sun-setting the requirement for districts to submit local assessment plans and student success in reading on local CRTs. (005.01A, 005.01B, and 005.02) • The word “systems,” is changed to “districts” to align with Statute 79-760. (005.03-005.03B) • Teachers holding a content area endorsement at the secondary level may teach grade six in that content area if they acquire six credit hours per year toward the elementary or middle grades endorsement or participate annually in staff development in accordance with a local mission and plan for education 12
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
of middle grade students. (007.02A2) • School districts, by July 1, 2010, are required by statute to develop and adopt a policy to address incidents of dating violence involving students at school. (011.01E) • Sunset the current mathematics content standards, June 30, 2010, and add the new mathematics standards as Appendix B. (Appendices A and B) • Updates assessment schedule to align with Statute 79760. (Appendix E) The April 13, 2010, Rule 10 Hearing Draft contains only two items found in Sections 007.04B and 007.05D. School systems have been able to assign certificated staff without appropriate endorsements to both Media/Technology and Guidance positions if the assigned staff member acquires at least six credit hours each year toward an appropriate endorsement. In the existing Rule 10, these options will sunset on September 1, 2010. Historically, this sunset date has been changed and extended in various drafts of Rule 10. The proposed revision drops the date entirely. Even though the date is dropped, schools will need to report in their annual assurance statement the use of this option and the progress toward endorsement of the person who is in this position. All hearing testimony, both written and oral, was supportive for the elimination of the dates. Future Revisions of Rule 10 promise to include, at minimum, two areas of discussion: • (004.02C and 004.03C) The number of contests allowed for seventh and eighth grade athletic competition is likely to change in number. • (005.05 and 005.05B) Student performance ratings for reporting accountability will be established as the assessments in reading, mathematics, and science are fully implemented. Additional changes on the horizon include the following: • As new standards are adopted for science, they will be added to the appendices. • For the state to comply with Federal Legislation, Rule 10 will address the need to develop and adopt policy regarding seclusion and restraints. • To qualify for federal funds, evaluation procedures for all certificated employees will be required. Therefore, inclusion of staff evaluations for administrators will be added to Rule 10. The evaluations will need to include the performance level for the certificated personnel, and teacher evaluations will likely include a student performance component. • With new graduation requirements, some adjustments in Rule 10 may need to be made to accommodate increased use of web-based courses to meet these requirements. • With state assessments in reading and mathematics, rather than STARS, becoming the basis for determining school performance, Rule 10 will need to reflect how it determines low-per(continued on page 13)
RECOGNITIO N NSASSP Award Winners (continued from page 12) forming schools and what processes NDE will implement to assist these schools. Rule 10 continues to evolve, but not without the input of those it affects. We encourage you to share ideas and concerns regarding potential revisions and changing needs of Nebraska schools. Together we can maintain a rule that truly supports the educational needs of Nebraska students.
(continued on page 14) MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
13
RECOGNITIO N
K-12 Special Olympics Get Into It By: Sally Ganem, First Lady and Former Elementary School Principal Raise your hand if you can use a new and fresh approach to youth engagement in your school! Raise your hand if you want your students to be accepting others and have resources to complement and enhance the existing curriculum. Be among the first to have access to the new K-12 Special Olympics Get Into It (GII) e-tools that will be available in August 2010. Special Olympics GII e-tools will consist of online resources that include lessons, activities, videos, athlete stories and supplemental materials. At the core of GII e-tools will be age-appropriate lessons designed to be taught in the context of class periods. Activities with ties to service-learning are completed in a classroom or community setting, as part of a club, an afterschool activity or a community-based event and include involvement with local Special Olympics Programs whenever possible. • Web-based interactivity for students and educators • Service-learning emphasis • State standards compatible • Fun! Until Special Olympics has developed an organizing framework for GII e-tools that, while simple and effective, is results oriented and advances community impact movement by focusing on students’ civic knowledge and skill development. Our call to action includes: a. Educate: Provide young people with school and communitybased opportunities and strategies to help them understand their potential and ways to serve as active agents for change in their local, national and global communities; b. Motivate: Energize young people to unleash their creative leadership potential to accept, respect and advocate with and for persons with intellectual disabilities, with inclusive sports serving as the experiential component; c. Activate: Stimulate new approaches for sharing experiences, engaging in community action and policy change. You are invited to attend a session at administrator days and learn how the curriculum is adaptable to our existing programs and curriculum
14
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
Until Administrator Days, where you will be invited to attend a session regarding the curriculum and materials available to school, feel free to download the current version of Special Olympics GII resources… www.specialolympics.org/getintoit For more information email sogetintoit@specialolympics.org. I look forward to seeing you at administrator days in Kearney,
RECOG NITIO N
NASES Distinguished Service Awarded to John Street The NASES Distinguished Service Award was presented to John Street, current Director of Student Services, Grand Island Public Schools and the Central Nebraska Support Services Program (CNSSP). Prior to his current assignment, John was a special education teacher in Chapman from 1977-1979. From 1979-1986 he was an educational consultant and program coordinator at Grand Island/CNSSP. In 1986 John became a supervisor of special education for Grand Island/CNSSP. He held that position until 2000 when he became the Director of Student Services. According to his colleagues, John Street is a true child/family advocate and educational leader. Always emphasizing straightforward fairness, honesty and integrity, John has devoted his professional and personal life to children with disabilities and their families. Ryan O’Grady, Special Education Supervisor, CNSSP/GIPS says: Over the past 30 years, John has been a key individual in making an impact on the lives of individuals with disabilities on a local, state, and regional level. In Central Nebraska alone, he has worked to ensure that students with disabilities have every opportunity to be successful during early intervention services, school age services, and transition into adult life. He has been instrumental in guiding CNSSP member districts in the RtI process and believing in the process. John has helped to develop many successful individuals that have had the fortune of working under him at CNSSP. John was presented this award at the annual Nebraska Association of Special Education Supervisors Spring Conference in North Platte on April 15th.
MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
15
ENVIRO NMENT
Meet Your Blue Cross Blue Shield Team BY DAVE RAYMOND and DENNY VAN HORN, TRANE Sue Warner Senior Regional Service Representative Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska
As Senior Regional Service Representative for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska, Sue Warner services Nebraska school accounts and county groups across the state. Sue has served in multiple capacities during her 20-year career with BCBSNE—including Customer Service and Marketing functions. While in Marketing, Sue has serviced both local and national small and large group accounts. Sue has been part of the EHA/NACO service team since 2004. Sue has attained a Nebraska Producers License, and has completed all of BCBSNE’s systems modification training, including Claims and Customer Service systems training. Tara Stevenson Regional Service Representative Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska
As Regional Service Representative for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska, Tara Stevenson services Nebraska school accounts and county groups across the state. Tara has served in multiple capacities during her 16-year career with BCBSNE—including Claims, Customer Service and Marketing functions. While in Marketing, Tara has serviced both smalland large-group national accounts. Tara moved to the EHA team in 2010. Tara has attained a Nebraska Producers License, and has completed all of BCBSNE’s systems modification training, including Claims and Customer Service systems training.
(continued on page 19) 16
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA REPORT
NCSA Announces New Affiliate President-Elects for 2010-2011 Year BY DR. MIKE DULANEY, Executive Director; and DR. DAN ERNST, Associate Executive Director
Dulaney
Recognition is an important component of the NCSA Strategic Plan adopted by the NCSA Executive Board. Recognition includes honoring members’ accomplishments, as well as highlighting noteworthy achievement. We are extremely pleased to honor those members that have been elected by their peers and colleagues to serve as their respective affiliate president-elects for the 20102011 year. We feel extremely fortunate to have highly qualified and worthy individuals that participated in each election and wish to say thanks for those individuals willing to run for leadership positions. To be elected by your peers is certainly noteworthy and now these newly elected individuals will have the opportunity to serve and lead school administrators across the state. In addition to their roles and responsibilities for their respective affiliates they also will begin as members of the Nebraska Council of School Administrators Executive Board, with official duties to begin on September 1, 2010. The new leaders will attend an orientation session prior to attending the June meeting as non-voting attendees.
Ernst
We wish to congratulate and welcome the following new President-Elects:
enue stream has served the association well for this period of time. We do not wish to see a diminishment of the important services and programs provided to members and it did indeed become necessary to impose a modest dues increase beginning for the 2010-11 membership year. The active membership dues are currently set at $325. The dues increase amounts to $10, thereby bringing the annual active dues to $335. State Association 2010-11 Dues Colorado (CASE) $285-$630 Iowa (SAI) $435 Kansas (USA/Kansas) 0.301% of salary Minnesota MASA (Supts) $775 MESPA (Elem Prin) $623 MASSP (Sec Prin) $533 Missouri MASA (Supts) 0.5% of salary MAESP (Elem Prin) $279 MASSP (Sec Prin) $150-$200 Nebraska (NCSA) $335 North Dakota (NDCEL) $360-$475 South Dakota (SASD) 0.55% of salary
NASES – Stuart Clark, Special Education Director, ESU #1 NASBO - Melanie Kreider, Business Manager, Gering Public Schools NAESP – David Kraus, Assistant Principal, Beatrice Middle School NSASSP – Mitchell Bartholomew, Principal, York High School NASA – Greg Barns, Superintendent, Seward Public Schools NCSA Dues for 2010-11 The NCSA has enjoyed a very stable financial picture for the better part of two decades. Our association dues remain relatively low in comparison to our counterpart organizations in surrounding states. Every effort is made to keep our expenses low while at the same time maintaining quality services to members. The current dues has been in place for the last three years and the revenue from this source coupled with a strong “non-dues” rev-
NOTES: North Dakota charges a set rate for active dues and then requires the member to pay affiliate dues, which all differ. For example, a North Dakota superintendent pays $435 for dues ($350 for active dues and $85 for affiliate dues). South Dakota, Missouri (MASA), and Kansas dues are calculated using a percentage of the administrator’s salary. As an example, using an annual salary of $80,000, South Dakota dues would be $440, Missouri (MASA) dues would be $400 and Kansas dues would be about $240. Missouri (MASSP) determines their dues by the administrator’s salary also. As an example, if the administrator earns $80,000 or less he/she would pay $150 and if he/she earns more than $80,000 he/she would pay $200. Colorado (CASE) uses a set schedule to determine dues based on the Administrator’s salary. For example a Colorado administrator who earns $80,000 would pay dues of $630.
MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
17
APPRECIATION
Administrators’ Days 2010 July 28-30 Holiday Inn – Kearney Keynote Speakers: Michael Fullan – Thursday AM Todd Whitaker – Thursday PM Ian Jukes – Friday AM
18
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
LEADERSHIP
MAY/JUNE 2010
NCSA TODAY
19
CALENDAR OF EVENTS MAY 7 14 19 28
NASES Region III NASES Region II NASA Region II NASES Region I
12:00 p.m. 9:00 a.m. TBD 9:30 a.m.
TJ’s Plattsmouth Central Office TBD Crete Central Office
Norfolk Plattsmouth TBD Crete
NAESP Executive Board NSASSP Executive Board Hal Urban Workshop Hal Urban Workshop NCSA Executive Board NCSA Golf Tournament
9:00 a.m. 6:00 p.m. 8:30 a.m. 8:30 a.m. 9:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m.
NCSA Lazlos GR Senior High Sandhills Conv. Center NCSA Wilderness Ridge
Lincoln Lincoln Grand Island North Platte Lincoln Lincoln
NCSA Executive Board NASES Executive Board NSASSP Executive Board NASA Executive Board Administrators’ Days
5:00 p.m. 11:30 a.m. 11:30 a.m. 5:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m.
Holiday Inn Holiday Inn Holiday Inn Holiday Inn Holiday Inn
Kearney Kearney Kearney Kearney Kearney
JUNE 2 2 2 3 3 23
JULY 27 28 28 28 28-30
NATIONAL CONVENTION DATES CASE – July 9-11, 2010 – San Francisco, CA ASBO – September 24-27, 2010 – Orlando, FL CASE – November 5-7, 2010 – San Diego, CA AASA – February 17-19, 2011 – Denver, CO NASSP – February 25-28, 2011 – San Francisco, CA NAESP – April 7-10, 2011 – Tampa, FL
Administrators’ Days 2010 July 28-30 — Holiday Inn — Kearney 20
NCSA TODAY
MAY/JUNE 2010
Gold Sponsorships Ameritas Al Eveland 5900 O St., 1st Floor Lincoln, NE 68510 402-467-6968 aeveland@ameritas.com www.ameritas.com
CDI Paul Copeland 130 South Town Centre Blvd. Markham, Ontario L6G 1B8 pcopeland@cdicomputers.com www.cdicomputers.com
DLR Group Pat Phelan, Whitney Wombacher 400 Essex Ct., Omaha, NE 68114 402-393-4100 pphelan@dlrgroup.com www.dlrgroup.com
Energy Education Karen Mullins 5950 Sherry Lane, Ste 900 Dallas, TX 940-235-7598 kmullins@energyed.com
Innovation in Education –Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Donna Droge 6140 SE 53rd 785-554-9510 donna.droge@hmhpub.com www.hmlt.hmco.com
Learning Together Julie Smith 5509 B W. Friendly Ave. Ste 201 Greensboro, NC 27409 866-921-0000 julie@learningtogether.com www.learningtogether.com
Horace Mann Cindy Dornbush 10612 Monroe Street, #4 Omaha, NE 68127 402-680-9382 cindy.dornbush@horacemann.com www.horacemann.com
D.A. Davidson & Co. Dan Smith 1111 N. 102nd Ct., Ste 300 Omaha, NE 68114 402-392-7986 dsmith@dadco.com www.davidsoncompanies.com/ficm
Kurt Engelman PO Box 11248 Eugene, OR 97440 541-485-1973 info@nifdi.org www.nifdi.org
NLAF Barry Ballou 455 S. 11th St. Lincoln, NE 68508 402-705-0350 balloub@pfm.com nlafpool.org www.nlafpool.org
SchoolFusion Carson Apps 999 18th St., Ste 2150 South Tower Denver, CO 80202 800-906-0911 carson@schoolfusion.com www.schoolfusion.com
National Insurance
Smart Technologies
Mike Boden 9202 W. Dodge Rd., Ste 302 Omaha, NE 68114 800-597-2341 mboden@nis-sif.com www.nis-sif.com
Chris Kidwell 20 South Clark St. Chicago, IL 60603 913-385-0806 chriskidwell@smarttech.com
Silver Sponsorships John Baylor Test Prep John Baylor P.O. Box 30792 Lincoln, NE 68503 402-475-7737 john@johnbaylortestprep.com www.jonbaylortestprep.com
National Institute For Direct Instruction
Jostens Don Bartholomew 309 S. 8th St. Broken Bow, NE 68822 308-872-5055 don.bartholomew@jostens.com Sports Express Joey Carder 425 Cedar St. Pleasant Dale, NE 68423 402-408-6741 info@sportsexpress.biz www.sportsexpress.biz
TRANE Danny Szegda 5720 S. 77th St. Ralston, NE 68127 402-935-9040 dave.raymond@trane.com www.trane.com/omaha
Virco, Inc. Matt Kirkland PO Box 6356 Lincoln, NE 68506 402-328-8031 matthewkirkland@virco.com www.virco.com
Wells Fargo Cristina Castro-Matukewicz 1919 Douglas Street Omaha, NE 68102 402-536-5710 cristina.v.castromatukewicz@ wellsfargo.com www.wellsfargo.com
Bronze Sponsorships ARCHI + ETC. LLC Stacy LaVigne 6500 Holdrege St., Ste 007 Lincoln, NE 68505 402-429-7150; fax: 402-464-6810 cjoy@archi-etc.com www.archi-etc.com
Nebraska Public Agency Investment Trust Becky Ferguson PO Box 82529, Lincoln, NE 68501 402-323-1334; fax: 402-323-1286 becky.ferguson@ubt.com www.npait.com
Awards Unlimited Larry King 1935 O St., Lincoln, NE 68510 402-474-0815 larryking@awardsunlimited.com www.awardsunlimited.com
RBC Capital Markets Nate Eckloff 1200 17th St., Ste. 2150 Denver, CO 80202 303-595-1206; fax 303-595-1220 nate.eckloff@rbccm.com www.rbccm.com
Cannon Moss Brygger & Associates, P.C. Bradley Kissler 2535 Carleton Ave., Ste A Grand Island, NE 68803 308-384-4444; fax: 308-384-0971 info.gi@cmbaarchitects.com www.cmbaarchitects.com
PRSRT STD. U. S. POSTAGE PAID LINCOLN, NE PERMIT NO. 951
Nebraska Council of School Administrators 455 So. 11th Street, Suite A • Lincoln, NE 68508-2105 RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED
Learn more about your Medical Expense Reimbursement Plan options
HSA (Health Savings Account) HRA (Health Reimbursement Arrangement) Our Medical Expense Reimbursement Plans have helped hundreds of school districts and educators save by: ‡
Encouraging participation in more affordable and sustainable plan design options
‡
Making the plan more affordable for employees to retire early
‡
Transitioning to a high deductible option for new hires
‡
Promoting “consumerism� in health care decisions
Your New EHA Medical Plan Options
+ Our HRA or HSA
________________ Savings for both District and Employee
&DOO XV WRGD\ WR ÀQG RXW PRUH
NIS has helped implement over 447 governmental/school district Medical Reimbursement plans in 7 states since 2002. Put our expertise to work for you. Give either of us a call or send an email WR ÀQG RXW PRUH
Mike Boden 6HQLRU 6DOHV 5HS PERGHQ#QLVEHQHĂ€WV FRP Steve Ott 5HJLRQDO 9LFH 3UHVLGHQW VRWW#QLVEHQHĂ€WV FRP
800.597.2341 ZZZ QLVEHQHĂ€WV FRP