Can You Say Nepotism?

Let us start with a simple definition of the term.

nep·o·tism / ˈnepəˌtizəm/
noun
the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.

synonyms:favoritism, preferential treatment, the old boy network, looking after one's own, bias, partiality, partisanship

"hiring my daughter was not nepotism—it was just good business"

Now, lets look at Indiana's "nepotism law" effective July 1 2012.

Ind. Code § 4-15-7-1 : Indiana Code - Section 4-15-7-1: Nepotism

(a) No person being related to any member of any state board or commission, or to the head of any state office or department or institution, as father, mother, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, a husband or wife, son or daughter, son-in-law or daughter-in-law, niece or nephew, shall be eligible to any position in any such state board, commission, office, or department or institution, as the case may be, nor shall any such relative be entitled to receive any compensation for his or her services out of any appropriation provided by law.

(b) This section shall not apply if such person has been employed in the same position in such office or department or institution for at least twelve (12) consecutive months immediately preceding the appointment of his relative as a board member or head of such office, department, or institution.

(c) This section does not apply to the authority of the board of trustees of a state educational institution to employ any person the board considers necessary under IC 21-38-3-1.

(d) No persons related as father, mother, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, husband, wife, son, daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, niece, or nephew may be placed in a direct supervisory-subordinate relationship.

(Formerly: Acts 1941, c.16, s.1; Acts 1961, c.8, s.1.) As amended by Acts 1982, P.L.23, SEC.35; P.L.36-1995, SEC.1; P.L.2-2007, SEC.44; P.L.3-2008, SEC.8.

With this background information, let's take a look at the reappointment of Sarah O'Brien to the Indiana State Board of Education and her recent election as the board's Vice-Chair.  How does this appointment and Vice-Chair position relate to a possible violation of this "nepotism" law, along with a variety of potential ethics violations?  Mrs. O'Brien isn't just a 4th grade teacher from Avon who, as a Republican, was appointed to the SBOE and recently reappointed after legislative changes to the boards structure, she is also the daughter of Republican State Representative Bill Fine of Munster.  This is where the possible violation occurs.  Representative Fine is a Republican member of the House Education Committee who pushed the passage of legislation that changed the structure of the SBOE and co-authored key language that created the Vice-Chair position to share powers with the Elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, Glenda Ritz.

With the passage of this legislation, Governor Pence re-appointed O'Brien to the Board and set up her opportunity to be elected as Vice-Chair.   This selection was rumored before the SBOE met for their restructuring meeting.  The "election" of O'Brien appears to have been a done deal as part of Pence's plan when he made his recent appointments and refused to reappoint certain members who might have been more viable possibilities to be named Vice-Chair.

This may not be a clear violation of Indiana Law, but it appears to set up potential questions regarding "nepotism", board appointments, committee selections, and legislative ethics.

Indiana voters need to be vigilant in monitoring recent SBOE actions, the Governor's continued education agenda, and the co-mingling of legislators and appointed board members.  Raise questions, raise your voices, and demand transparency in all aspects of government activity.  Most importantly,  voters in Indiana need to get to the polls and vote to save our PUBLIC schools from the continued destruction and privatization planned by Pence and his wealthy corporate "reform" supporters.

Indiana's PUBLIC School Teachers "Snubbed" by Governor Pence?

Was there an intentional "snub" of Hoosier educators tonight?

Did any one notice the "snub" of 40 thousand plus educators tonight as ISTA appeared absent during Governor Pence's State of the State Address? Hoosier Voices for Public Education founder, Philip Arnold, did. He posed the following question to ISTA President, Teresa Meredith, after the address.

"Where was ISTA tonight, didn't the Governor invite the leaders of the mass majority of Indiana's educators?"

President Meredith replied, "I was not invited, however ISTA and its members are committed to making sure our voices are heard this session, on behalf of our colleagues and all of the students we serve every day."

With so much emphasis coming out early in the new session regarding teachers, attacks on PUBLIC schools, increased high-stakes testing, further expanding vouchers, funneling more tax payer monies to charters, and the attempts to dismantle the DOE by removing powers of elected Superintendent Glenda Ritz, shouldn't educators have been at the table? Shouldn’t the ones who are in the trenches daily have been represented in this process. Was this an intentional snub by the Governor to appease the Koch brothers, the tea party, and wealthy campaign contribtors to pad the coffers for the 2016 bid for the White House?

It is time Hoosiers raise their voices as they did in 2012 and prove the value of our PUBLIC schools by standing up and being counted once again. It is time to call legislators non-stop and demand our teachers, their representatives, and those who support our PUBLIC school children be invited back to the table and given a role in making realistic efforts to see our children into a successful future.

 

Vic’s Statehouse Notes #180 – July 8, 2014

Dear Friends,

The banned metrics of measuring student growth by comparisons with peers are back again. Despite a law getting rid of them, the State Board will vote on a resolution tomorrow to use them another year.

HEA 1427 was passed by the Indiana General Assembly in 2013 saying that the A-F system in Indiana “may not be based on a measurement of student performance or growth compared with peers.” This culminated a three year effort to fix the flawed A-F system by rejecting the use of bell curve statistics in assessing student growth and by measuring the growth of students against fixed criteria.

Now, a resolution brought by State Board member Brad Oliver is on the July 9th State Board agenda which, among other topics, would use peer comparisons to measure growth again in 2014-15.

It is as if the General Assembly didn’t pass HEA 1427 at all. How can the State Board continue to ignore the law?

I urge you to contact State Board members before their July 9th meeting to say that the “Resolution Regarding ESEA Waiver Compliance” is wrong on growth and should be withdrawn.

Evading the Law 

I and others have been campaigning against the unfairness of judging growth through comparisons to statewide peers since 2011. I rejoiced when the Indiana General Assembly passed the following language in 2013 in HEA 1427, Section 5:

“Not later than November 15, 2013, the state board shall establish new categories or designations of school performance under the requirements of this chapter to replace 511 IAC 6.2-6. The new standards of assessing school performance:
(1) must be based on a measurement of individual student academic performance and growth to proficiency; and
(2) may not be based on a measurement of student performance or growth compared with peers.
511 IAC 6.2-6 is void on the effective date of the emergency or final rules adopted under this section.”

I thought the law would actually be implemented, but state board members have resisted. State Board Secretary Dan Elsener has stated many times in meetings his support of the current system that the General Assembly tried to void. Now the Oliver resolution breathes more life into the flawed growth measure using the following language: (this is but a small part of the resolution with many controversial points)

“WHEREAS, Dr. Damian Betebenner, an associate at The National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment in Dover, New Hampshire, who advised Indiana on the creation of the Indiana Growth Model, and who is under contract with the SBOE to advise on modifications to the state’s A-F school accountability system, has found that growth may be calculated utilizing data from the2014-2015 ISTEP+ assessment using an equi-percentile concordance analysis that will be both valid and reliable.
Per SBOE regulation, 511 IAC 6.2-6 shall be followed for the A-F School Accountability System for federal and state accountability purposes;Growth in 2014-15 shall be calculated according to the methodology recommended by Dr. Damian Betebenner and approved by the SBOE;”Dr. Betebenner has described in a report that his recommendation is based on Student Growth Percentiles, the same methodology Dr. Bennett put in the A-F system that the General Assembly tried to void due to the peer comparisons used.

Dr. Betebenner devised the system that the General Assembly rejected. Of course he is going to say that it is just fine.

This resolution shows that the State Board has made no progress in getting Indiana to criterion-referenced comparisons for growth as the General Assembly asked for and as we all should ask for.

Send a Message

I urge you to send a message today to State Board members with a copy to your legislators. The message is that the “Resolution Regarding ESEA Waiver Compliance” has not been vetted and should be withdrawn. It tries to reverse the General Assembly’s action in HEA 1427 to remove peer comparisons from Indiana’s growth model.

The entire proposed resolution with all of its controversies can be seen on this link:

http://in.gov/sboe/files/2014-07-09_Resolution_-_ESEA_Waiver.pdf

It is astonishing that the State Board is ignoring the call for fair comparisons in Indiana’s growth model. The growth of every student should be measured based on fixed criterion measures, not on Student Growth Percentiles or any other metric where growth can vary based on how peers across the state perform. 

Your messages make a big difference. Thanks for participating! Please keep up your steadfast support of fair metrics to judge the performance of public schools! 

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to support public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The new ICPE membership year began July 1, 2014 and extends through June 30, 2015. We need your membership to help pay the bills for ICPE lobbying efforts. It is time for all of our supporters to renew for the new membership year. I urge you to go to our website today to renew your membership. Thank you!

We must raise additional funds for the 2015 session. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.