NJEA’s Late and Inadequate Response to Increased School Violence Shows Its Priorities Are Elsewhere

Namely, aiding Sean Spiller political ambitions, not teachers’ well-being.

In the January 2025 NJEA Review (the monthly magazine for teachers), there are no fewer than three, separate pieces advocating for Spiller for governor — all with handy QR codes linking to Spiller’s campaign website. Back on p. 40, there’s a piece about the post-pandemic increase in school violence, an issue of obvious importance to teachers.  The contrast is telling: teachers’ well-being takes a clear back-seat to Spiller’s political ambitions.

At least the NJEA has finally admitted that there is a serious violence problem in New Jersey schools – two years after the problem became evident. In addition to the learning loss suffered by students as a result of the extended, pandemic-related school closures in many of New Jersey’s largest districts, Sunlight has documented the statewide, post-pandemic increase in student misbehavior and in-school violence (here, here, and here) that has stretched and stressed teachers.  We have criticized the NJEA for its silence on this important issue, which negatively impacts the day-to-day lives of educators and students.  We even showed how the problem was negatively impacting the recruitment of new teachers.  The NJEA has finally acknowledged that there is a problem, but, once again, the NJEA’s response is inadequate and unlikely to reduce misbehavior and violence in schools.

In the p. 40 article, Dorothy Wigamore of the New Jersey Work Environment Council (NJWEC) makes clear: “Many forms of violence in New Jersey schools … seem to be getting worse.”  Her NJWEC colleague describes the plight of teachers worried about injuries and having to call the police:

They’re not getting the support they need. Educators are worried about being blamed for ‘attacking’ students when it’s the other way around and thinking about the need for witnesses and documenting incidents [for police reports].

Wigamore makes clear that this is not some imaginary crisis: it’s real.  She cites the most recent DOE annual report that shows that incidents of harassment, intimidation, or bullying (HIB) were “the highest levels recorded since counting began in 2017.”  The numbers for 2023 are “staggering:” 7,672 confirmed and 19,138 reported HIB incidents.

Even top NJEA staff (belatedly) admit there’s a big problem.  Aileen O’Driscoll, director of the NJEA’s legal department, stated: “The mental and emotional health consequences of the pandemic are greater than anybody probably realizes for these kids, and adults, too.”  She adds:

We’re also gathering, and hearing more about, our members’ typical experience in the classroom, around the physicality of students and the difficulty in getting proper supports that the students and teachers need. [Emphasis added.]

The article goes on to describe how the existing, DOE-run system for dealing with these problems is failing.  New laws were passed in 2022 requiring districts to establish threat assessment teams, but there’s confusion about exactly how these laws should be implemented at the school level.  In this environment, districts and local unions are finding it “difficult” to prevent misbehavior and violence.  The numbers above indicate that the current system isn’t working.

The bottom line: even the NJEA admits that student misbehavior and violence are a serious problem and that teachers and students need more support in order to deal with it.  So what is the NJEA — New Jersey’s largest and most powerful teachers union — doing about this urgent problem?  Not much.

More than two years after the laws were passed, an associate director in the NJEA’s legal office has “started doing workshops” about the laws and how they impact teachers.  The NJEA legal team is also planning to “collaborate with” and “learn from” teachers unions in other states.  Talk about too little, too late!

The article reports that teachers are talking about “broken jaws,” but bizarrely recommends that local unions use a “restorative justice framework,” which requires:

… a cultural shift away from punitive, zero-tolerance policies to more holistic, communal forms of understanding and assigning consequences.

The article recommends that locals should get training, survey teachers, coordinate with other teams, encourage and support members filing incident reports, and learn about restorative justice practices.  And very last, if necessary, file complaints to the police.  How calling in the police squares with a “restorative justice” approach is left unaddressed.  To say this is all confusing and contradictory is an understatement.  This is not a sufficient response.

Once again, we note that the NJEA knows very well how to mobilize to meet such a threat to its members. When the NJEA was confronted with a similar upsurge in student violence in 2010, it launched a statewide campaign “10 steps to reduce violence.”  This was a full-fledged NJEA campaign that called for political-style organizing by NJEA locals because it could not be left to the school district or DOE. Locals were to ally with parents, community organizations, religious and civil rights leaders, and local politicians to support their campaigns. The media could help the locals shame the district into helping control the problem.

Where is the NJEA’s resolve on behalf of its members now?

Using teachers’ regular dues to aid Sean Spiller’s political ambitions.