From the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to local school board positions, several conservatives are currently leading or have already won key races on the education front in the 2022 General Election.
As of press time, Republican candidate for Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), Tom Horne, had increased his lead in his challenge of incumbent Kathy Hoffman. Horne previously served as SPI from 2003 to 2011, prior to successfully running for the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. If the results hold up, Horne says his focus as SPI will be on improving student performance and eradicating Critical Race Theory-based curriculum from Arizona’s public schools.
Tom Horne is winning the Superintendent's race because Moms and Dads are taking the education of their children back! He will empower parents! 🎉 @electtomhorne pic.twitter.com/zOxUkajDyv
In the Peoria Unified School District race, Heather Rooks won a hard-fought and challenging race. Her efforts to expose the Social Emotional Learning-based policies and practices in the district eventually led her to request an injunction against an activist parent. As reported by the Arizona Daily Independent, Rooks, a mother of four school-aged children, obtained the injunction based on threats from Democrat activist, Josh Gray.
Two other conservative candidates, Amy Carney and Carine Werner, secured seats on the Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) Governing Board. Their victories serve as a powerful repudiation of out-going Governing Board Member Jann-Michael Greenburg. Greenburg was sued by parents who accused him of trying to silence them after they exposed his secret Google Drive dossier on them. As AZ Free Newsreported in April, that dossier included a trove of political opposition research on parents, who opposed the district’s adoption of Social Emotional Learning and Critical Race Theory.
In the race for Flowing Wells School District Governing Board—an area known for being blue—conservative Brianna Hernandez Hamilton is currently holding on to one of two open spots. A mother of three very young children, Hernandez Hamilton ran with the slogan: “Parents + Teachers = Quality Education.”
Kurt Rohrs, a long-time education activist and frequent contributor to AZ Free News, won a spot on the Chandler Unified School District Governing Board. Rohrs, like Horne, focused on improving student performance and eliminating the divisive Critical Race Theory from the district’s curriculum. Many see Rohrs’ presence on the board as an opportunity to restore calm to the district which had become the center of controversy thanks to out-going board member Lindsay Love.
In the race for Dysart Unified School District Governing Board, conservative Dawn Densmore was retained by voters. As current president of the board, Densmore successfully led the fight to end the district’s relationship with the Arizona School Board Association (ASBA). Jennifer Drake also won a seat on the board.
Sandra Christensen is set to win a seat on the Paradise Valley Unified School District Governing Board. Libby Settle and Madicyn Reid are in the lead for spots in Fountain Hills. Paul Carver should take a win in Deer Valley. Jackie Ulmer appears to have been successful in Cave Creek as well as Rachel Walden in Mesa and Chad Thompson in Gilbert. In the Higley Unified School District, conservative Anna Van Hoek also won a seat on the board.
In a tweet from earlier this week, former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos summed up what many parents have been feeling over the past few years – left out. In response to the National Education Association’s claim that teachers “know better than anyone” what students need in the classroom, DeVos responded, “You misspelled parents.”
Teachers union infuriates parents with 'astonishing' tweet: 'Trying to gaslight Americans' https://t.co/nNHJwfP6VQ
Right now, there’s a growing conflict between whether our schools should be focused primarily on academic instruction or social instruction.
Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), stated recently that teachers must assume the role of “Social Justice Warriors” in classrooms across the country. The National Education Association (NEA), another very large teachers’ union, urged the U.S. Justice Department to label concerned parents as “Domestic Terrorists” in an attempt to silence their objections. It’s clear that these teachers’ unions simply want to dismiss parents as being unworthy of advocating for their own children.
But parents need to be involved in the education of their children now more than ever.
Just look at what’s going on with Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Kathy Hoffman. She was recently sued for advertising links to chat rooms where minors discuss sex and gender with adults present and without parents necessarily knowing.
Then, there’s Chandler Education Association Union President Katie Nash, who is on video at a Chandler Unified School District Board (CUSD) meeting actively promoting the teaching of White Supremacy Theory, the 1619 Project, and “Anti-Racism” programs typically derived from Critical Race Theory (CRT).
What does any of this have to do with academic instruction? Nothing.
But it’s being pushed in our schools, and while it can be tempting to blame teachers for this, we need to be careful. Most teachers should be considered as dedicated and trustworthy professionals. Instead, this is a failure of union leadership and their minions who have lost interest in academic education in favor of a growing obsession with political power. What has been the result? Declining academic scores across the country.
Of course, all of this is in direct contradiction with Arizona statute, which clearly defines these social activities as fundamental rights reserved to parents to be directed by them in the home. But these teachers’ unions don’t seem to care. They’d rather do whatever it takes to usurp these parental rights—even if it means lower academic scores.
Is Academic Proficiency Now a Secondary Consideration?
As social instruction grows, academic proficiency suffers. Consider a recent CUSD presentation of a “Portrait of a Learner” program, which described several social aspirations for students, yet somehow omitted any reference to academic proficiency. Shouldn’t we expect academics to be the primary focus of something that involves “Learning”? Either that, or you would think it would at least push students toward developing practical job skills training.
This continued lack of focus on academic proficiency is resulting in a continued decline in student test scores across the state. There does not seem to be any comprehensive plan to recover from this.
The most recent shiny new program is called the Whole Child Concept. But it appears to do nothing more than broaden the scope of the Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) programs already embedded in school curriculum.
Parent Flight
One of the unintended consequences of this movement to focus on social instruction is “Parent Flight” to other educational alternatives such as charter schools, private schools, and homeschooling. The recent expansion of the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program in Arizona now allows for parents to choose from these alternatives over unsatisfactory district schools.
But as you might expect, teachers’ unions and their political arm, RedforEd, vigorously oppose this legislative expansion, claiming that it defunds schools. But what they won’t tell you is that it clearly does not defund a student’s educational opportunities. Equally important, it enhances a parent’s choice as to where they believe their children would receive the best education.
The program has been so popular that parents already overwhelmed the website in an effort to get out of undesirable district schools. Yet somehow it does not seem to occur to opponents of ESAs that, if they had district schools that were satisfactory to parents, then those parents probably would not even consider moving their kids to another competing educational alternative.
Quasi-Religious Woke Doctrine?
Perhaps what’s most frustrating about the growing social instruction in our schools is that, for years, our nation has been gradually removing religious (mostly Christian) influences from our public schools. In fact, it feels like the First Amendment right to “Freedom of Religion,” which was fundamental to the first European immigrants to this continent, has gradually been reinterpreted by the Left to mean “Freedom from Religion.”
But you can’t help but notice how certain aspects of woke doctrine seem to have become “articles of faith” that cannot be questioned by anyone without facing severe social backlash. It’s clear that Christian doctrine has been suppressed in schools and replaced by Secular Humanism, the belief that humanity is capable of morality and self-fulfillment without belief in God, and the more extreme Cultural Marxism, the Neo-Marxist movement seeking to apply critical theory to matters of family composition, gender, race, and cultural identity within Western society.
If teachers’ unions want to apply the “Freedom from Religion” doctrine in public schools, they should also apply a “Freedom from Extremist Political Doctrine” as well. It’s the only way to ensure our schools remain on neutral ground for political ideology, and it leaves social development at home with the child’s parents—where it should be.
Teacher Opt-Out?
Finally, along with our First Amendment rights comes a prohibition on “compelled speech,” which prevents a person from being forced, under threat or duress, to say things they don’t really believe in. But we hear regular reports of teachers being bullied and harassed by other “activist” colleagues to force them to go along with their extreme Leftist political doctrine. Many teachers simply comply because they are concerned about having to work in a hostile environment or having their livelihoods threatened.
This implies that there is some sort of informal “political test” for teachers in our schools. It is often enforced by aggressive colleagues who are usually associated with a teachers’ union. The apparent message is: “comply and be welcome, or dissent and be ostracized.” It is no wonder teachers are under such workplace stress because of these implied threats.
However, there is a recent report of one brave, principled teacher, who, in looking over the daily SEL lesson, simply said, “we are not going to do this today” and put the controversial assignment aside. So, if parents have the right to “opt-out” their children from the presentation of controversial subject matter, that same rule needs to be extended to teachers who do not believe in these social lessons or deem them inappropriate for the children in their class. It’s time to give these teachers an “opt-out” choice as well.
In conclusion, here are a few ways we can start to clean up our public schools:
Return the primary focus of schools to academic instruction rather than social instruction.
Reduce the influence of the politically biased teachers’ unions.
Protect parents’ rights to direct the social upbringing of their children.
Prohibit political and social ideologies from being established in schools.
Protect teachers from being compelled to present controversial materials that they do not believe in.
Kurt Rohrs is a candidate for the Chandler Unified School District Governing Board. You can find out more about his campaign here.
A lot of rhetoric is continually thrown around in discussions about teacher’s salaries in Arizona. So just what are the relevant facts?
Here we examine current teachers’ average salaries and starting salaries nationwide, in Arizona, and in the Chandler Unified School District (CUSD). This data is also compared to relative academic performance in those jurisdictions. This study is restricted to district school data for clarity. Charter and private schools were not included.
Average Annual Teacher Base Salaries
Arizona embarked on a “20 by 20” program in 2018 that aimed to provide funding to school districts in order to raise teacher salaries by 20% over a three year period. This resulted in an average teacher salary in Arizona of $57,465 in the 2020-21 fiscal year compared to the U.S average of $65,090. More state funding was recently provided by the State of Arizona. Chandler Unified, in particular, then provided another 7% increase in teachers’ salaries for the current 2022-23 school year. This is projected to result in an estimated average annual salary of over $68,000 for CUSD teachers.
Chandler Unified (2022-23)$68,000 proj. (calculated after recent 7% raise)
Does It Pay for College Students to Go into Teaching?
According to the National Education Association (NEA), the national average annual starting salary for a new teacher in the 2020-21 school year was $41,770 compared to that in Arizona of $40,554 (about 3% less).
Currently, the starting salary for a new teacher in CUSD is $52,715. When you compare that to the reported average salary of a new Arizona State University graduate in all degree programs of $54,400, it’s about 3.2% less. But presumably the starting salaries for high demand technical degrees would more likely pay better than teaching degrees.
Teachers in neighboring California were paid an average of $84,531 in the 2019-20 fiscal year, far more than the $56,234 that their counterparts in Arizona were paid in the same period. The well-funded CUSD paid their teachers an average of $62,723 that year.
The latest scores from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a program run by the U.S. Department of Education, shows that Arizona students score as good or better in key academic proficiency measures as compared to California. Arizona students also scored only slightly below national averages. This appears to indicate that there is little correlation between teacher pay and student academic performance. A comprehensive update should be available soon, but preliminary reports indicate that academic scores have deteriorated significantly from this last report.
Arizona’s largest school districts also show little correlation between teacher pay and academic proficiency. There appears to be a wide range of district academic proficiency scores as compared to a much smaller range in district average teacher salaries.
One way to look at the state’s demographic effect is to look at salary data by the state’s fifteen counties. Arizona has one large metropolitan county, Maricopa, some smaller metropolitan counties, Pinal and Yuma, and several rural counties. Except for a few outliers, average salaries in each county seem to be mostly grouped around the state average of $57,465. This would indicate that, except for some special circumstances, teacher salaries are not greatly affected by where teachers live and work in the state.
County
Enrolled
Schools
Teacher Avg Pay
Apache
9,968
38
$67,000
Cochise
15,654
69
$51,789
Coconino
13,955
52
$42,278
Gila
6,528
25
$56,408
Graham
6,393
30
$60,257
Greenlee
1,833
4
$29,896
La Paz
2,334
12
$56,556
Maricopa
566,646
891
$58,974
Mohave
18,101
52
$56,209
Navajo
16,320
81
$56,978
Pima
14,992
281
$55,800
Pinal
38,180
100
$52,437
Santa Cruz
9,499
21
$51,689
Yavapai
19,190
80
$53,522
Yuma
33,900
70
$53,860
State
873,518
1,808
$57,465
Some Conclusions
Arizona average teacher salaries are below the national average. However, that average is significantly affected by much higher salaries in Massachusetts, New York, and California.
Arizona academic proficiency scores are only slightly below national averages. Scores appear to be pulled down by poor performance particularly in the Mesa, Tucson, and Phoenix Union Districts.
Student academic proficiency scores are not greatly affected by teacher salaries.
Teacher starting salaries in Arizona are only slightly below the national average.
Teaching graduates from ASU hired into the Chandler Unified School District would start at salaries only slightly below the average starting salary of all graduates of ASU programs.
Average teacher salaries do not seem to be greatly affected by where teachers live and work in the state.
Hopefully this research will help answer some questions and dispel some of the myths surrounding the teacher pay issues here in Arizona. The data sources are provided so individuals can do their own analyses and reach conclusions based on published facts.
Kurt Rohrs is a candidate for the Chandler Unified School District Governing Board. You can find out more about his campaign here.
A proposed ballot initiative for this November seeks to implement a sprawling 25-page overhaul of elections processes, accruing over $7.6 million so far from the national network of Democratic dark money. Namely, the Arizonans for Free and Fair Elections initiative would eliminate voter ID and proof of citizenship for voter registration, allow same-day voter registration, bar election audits like the one authorized by the state senate for the 2020 election, raise small business taxes to increase political campaign funding, and restore private funding in election administration.
Additionally, the ballot initiative would also require universal vote centers, extend in-person early voting through the day before Election Day; require a court order to rule someone too incapacitated to vote; implement automatic voter registration for driver’s license and state ID recipients, as well as of-age high schoolers; allow curbside voting; allow “nontraditional residential addresses” such as mile markers or “geographic or other identifying features” when registering to vote; restore the permanent early voting list; restore inactive voters to active status; permit “signature-only” voter registration; allow third parties to register voters; and reduce contribution limits.
The ballot initiative is the effort of a Democratic coalition of major players in state and national politics filtered through the Arizona Democracy Resource Center (ADRC) as “ADRC Action.” Although the initiative appears to be a local effort at first glance, there are glimpses into the source of its millions in funds: the massive, national Democratic network of dark money. Arizonans for Free and Fair Elections actually sources back to a national donor network called “Way to Win,” which launched as a direct response to former President Donald Trump’s 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton. They asserted that their over $110 million funneled to states in 2019 flipped Arizona and George blue in the 2020 presidential election.
Way to Win’s major funding comes from the likes of globalist billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations and his family, Stryker Corporation heiress Patricia Stryker, and the prominent dark money D.C. consulting firm Arabella Advisors’ Sixteen Thirty (1630) Fund.
The Soros family has invested personally in Arizona’s elections as well. To date, the family has invested $10,000 in former Maricopa County Recorder and secretary of state candidate Adrian Fontes’ campaign, $10,000 to Democratic attorney general candidate Kris Mayes’ campaign, and $10,600 to Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ gubernatorial campaign.
According to the latest campaign finance filings, ADRC Action has accumulated well over $7.6 million from in-kind contributions, over $5.5 million of which were from ADRC itself, and expended only $50,000. The second-largest donation came from the Tides Foundation-backed One Arizona, which donated $925,000.
Activate 48 donated $600,000 — they partner with Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), who donated $500,000 themselves and receives support from the Arabella Advisors 1630 Fund and the National Education Association (NEA); Mi Familia Vota; secretary of state candidate Reginald Bolding’s scandal-ridden, dark money-linked Our Voice Our Vote; and Chispa Arizona. The Education Foundation of America also donated $50,000.
All of the $50,000 expenditures went to counsel from Barton Mendez Soto, an election and employment law firm.
The firm’s co-founder, Jim Barton, has a number of high-profile and controversial clients under his belt, including the ballot initiative predecessor to Prop 208, the Arizona Democratic Party, and LUCHA. Barton was previously a partner at Torres Law Group: a firm whose partner is linked to a Democratic political action committee (PAC) that’s invested over $120,200 into a Republican state representative’s re-election campaign.
The Secretary of State’s office is processing the signatures. Arizonans For Free and Fair Elections will need over 237,600 valid signatures to qualify. They submitted over 475,000.
Coalition leadership includes ADRC Co-Executive Director Alison Marciniak, serving as the coalition’s chairwoman, and ADRC Communications Co-Director Joel Edman, serving as the coalition’s treasurer. Marciniak previously worked as a regional field director and organizer for the Arizona Democratic Party, as well as a field director and organizer for Central Arizonans for a Sustainable Economy (CASE): a nonprofit that advocates for immigration law and voting reforms. Edman clerked with the Arizona District Court and Arizona Supreme Court, as well as interned with the ACLU.
Another one of the coalition members, Eric Kramer, ran a similar ballot initiative last year. The initiative encompassed one of the goals of the coalition’s initiative by repealing HB2569: a bill signed into law last year which bars election officials from using private funds to run elections. HB2569 was prompted by the swell of funds provided by the likes of Mark Zuckerberg, who funneled $5 million to Arizona election officials. That initiative didn’t file signatures when the deadline rolled around.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona was ranked the worst state to live in based on its quality of life and inclusivity scoring by one of the biggest news outlets in the country. Its weaknesses that gave it the bottom ranking were air quality, health resources, inclusiveness, and crime — earning it a “Life, Health, & Inclusion Score” of 67 out of 325 possible points.
As CNBC explained, the metric focused mainly on social justice issues:
Combine an era of enhanced social consciousness with a growing worker shortage, and it explains why, now more than ever, companies are demanding that states offer a welcoming and inclusive environment for employees. We rate the states on livability factors like per capita crime rates and environmental quality. We look at inclusiveness in state laws, including protections against discrimination of all kinds, as well as voting rights. While the pandemic may be past the crisis stage, health care quality, outcomes, preparedness and public health spending remain in the spotlight. All are key drivers in this category.
Part of the inclusivity scoring likely came from GLSEN — a national organization pushing LGBTQ+ ideologies onto minors through schools and communities — as well as the Brennan Center for Justice, Lumina Foundation, and National Education Association. CNBC relied on them as a source.
However, Arizona did rank within the top 10 states for several other categories. The state ranked fourth in business friendliness, sixth in infrastructure, and seventh in workforce.
CNBC published the ranking last week as part of their overall data from their annual “America’s Top States for Business” listing. The rankings were based on six different scoring criteria, weighted based on how frequently states use them as a selling point for economic development marketing materials: workforce, 410 points (16 percent); infrastructure, 380 points (15 percent); cost of doing business, 345 points (14 percent); economy, 325 points, 13 percent); life, health, & inclusion, 325 points (13 percent); technology & innovation, 250 points (10 percent), business friendliness, 200 points (8 percent); education, 165 points (7 percent); access to capital, 50 points (2 percent), and cost of living, 50 points (2 percent).
The other 9 of the 10 worst states to live in based on the Life, Health, & Inclusion Score were, in order: Texas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Missouri, Louisiana, New Mexico, Indiana, Tennessee, and Nevada.
The outlet ranked the following as the top 10 states to live in based on their Life, Health, & Inclusion Score, in order: Vermont, Maine, Hawaii, North Dakota, Minnesota, Washington, Nebraska, Oregon, New Jersey, and Iowa.
With all factors considered, Arizona ranked 34th. The top ten states for business with all factors included were, in order: North Carolina, Washington, Virginia, Colorado, Texas, Tennessee, Nebraska, Utah, Minnesota, and Georgia.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.