B y Kristin
Students Matter, a national non-profit organization whose mission is to sponsor litigation that will improve education, will go to trial on January 27th in what will be a groundbreaking lawsuit. Vergara vs. California is about educational inequity – that current dismissal, tenure, and evaluation systems cause "devastating consequences" for students who live in poverty. The focus is on teacher quality and how current firing, RIF, and tenure systems work to keep ineffective teachers in classrooms, disproportionately in classrooms of high-poverty schools.
The plaintiffs in the case are nine public school children, ranging in age from eight to seventeen. If Vergara wins, enormous change could happen. Teacher quality and how to measure it is a hot topic here in Washington State, too. The vague anecdotes fly back and forth – a terrible teacher shuffled from school to school and reading the paper at her desk, a brilliant teacher whose politics earned her the wrath of her principal and who was unfairly dismissed. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
I know teacher quality is an issue – one of the many that affect our students. A school day that is too short, mandated curriculum that is too irrelevant, and class sizes that are too big, particularly when full of high-needs students who live in poverty, are other important factors in the quality of a child's education. But there's no reason not to take a good, critical look at teacher quality simply because the other problems aren't fixed.
There is no reason we can't improve our current system of "last in, first out." It's a horrible, outdated and mindless way to decide who stays and who goes. There is no reason we can't improve our current system of forcing a displaced teacher into a spot that's not a good fit instead of expecting that teacher to seek and be chosen for a job. There's no reason we, as members of education associations, can't put together better plans and present them as partners in the discussion instead of taking a defensive and entrenched position. The Tacoma Education Association got creative and worked with the district to design a displacement agreement that makes more sense – schools establish criteria, and teachers score themselved based on what is important to them in an effort to find a good match for both schools and displaced staff. It can be done.
If we're not willing, as education associations, to actively participate in improving outdated and ineffective systems, someone will fight to do it without us.
Theodore Olson, the Plaintiffs' attorney in the case, was asked why Students Matter was going to court instead of seeking change through the legislature. He said lawmakers have "completely failed" to make progress on the issue, and "…when the popular will does not respond to the Constitutional rights of the minority, that’s when we turn to the courts."
Trial begins on January 27th.
No, Joe, that’s not right. You put a lot of effort into misstating what I said.
I’m glad you read the piece and are commenting, but I can’t have a conversation with you if you angrily put inaccurate words into my mouth. It’s more meaningful if you reasonably explain your position on LIFO, then we can discuss it.
Thanks.
Well said in your blog. As, nowadays in many countries there are poor education system like in Thailand in order to improve that system we may lend a hand to contribute some funds in http://www.rockethub.com/projects/35955-be-in-education project.
Thanks, Tom. I’m old too! I am not offended by the term, but I will try to remember that it feels belittling to my fellow experienced colleagues. I don’t see it as creating tension between valued youth and discarded elders, because so many teachers without seniority are older and on their second career.
I totally agree that our New evaluation system should continue to improve teacher quality overall. I have already seen it do so. My point in all of this, and it’s always been my point, is that teachers need to be self critical of the systems that protect us. We need to drive change and design procedures and policy or non-educators will.
Kristin I sincerely apologize for the tone. You’re right; I was disrespectful.
That said, I vehemently disagree that LIFO accurately describes our system. I does dictate which teachers are moved, or in rare cases, layed off, but it belies the fact that under our new evaluation system, all teachers will be qualified or gone. Is it perfect yet? No. Is it better than last year? Absolutely.
As you’re well aware, LIFO is shorthand, and it’s used to imply that young, enthusiastic teachers are routinely displaced by old, grumpy deadwood. To teachers like me, who are older, yet still enthusiastic and more effective each year, the term LIFO is a disrespectful slap in the face, and it was to that that I was reacting to, not you.
Also Tom, please keep your tone respectful. I know it’s a really sensitive topic and one people are sick of discussing, but telling me I’m using a term to tweak the establishment (????) or the unions is not okay. It’s not about firing shots at some imaginary enemy, and I’m not okay with you insinuating that that’s what I was doing. I’m interested in teachers being willing to be the leaders in deciding what happens to us, and ending this stance that what we have is the best we can do.
Tom, I think you and I are in agreement. And LIFO is absolutely an appropriate term for our procedure when there are layoffs. It’s shorthand, sure, but it is what happens. And I don’t think it’s the best way to decide who stays or who goes. My post is not cheering on Students Matter, or hoping Vergara wins, it’s intended to urge teachers to improve current personnel policy before someone else does.
I agree with you that few teachers, if given a choice, would choose a high poverty school unless there are some additional resources and added benefits. You’re right, it is too hard, and for all the money spent on education there is still not enough spent to meet the needs of children who live in poverty. All that being true, if Tacoma can successfully and collaboratively start revamping personnel procedures, the rest of us can, and should, too. Otherwise Student Matters will start looking for nine articulate and sympathetic sxhool kids in Washington, and someone will make the changes for us.
As my father used to say, “You can sue anyone for anything, but it doesn’t mean you’re gonna win.”
Frankly, this situation offers a better argument for tort reform than it does school reform.
And LIFO? Seriously, Kristin? You know as well as I do that last in, first out does not accurately describe teacher retention policy in this state. Teachers get hired, and as long as they meet certain criteria, they retain their jobs. Newer teachers (who must also meet that same criteria) are placed below experienced teachers on the seniority list, which is a good thing, since it encourages experience. Of course, LIFO is a lot more fun to say when you want to tweak the establishment. Or the Unions.
As David’s post explains, these people suing the districts have nothing in mind to replace that which they want to tear down. That’s a problem. The reasons why better (and usually more experienced) teachers don’t work at low-performing schools are obvious to anyone (like me) who works in a district with a mixture of high and low performing schools: the work is much more difficult, it tends to be less rewarding, and the pay is exactly the same. Teachers are hard-working people, but they are, after all, people.
Maren, I agree! But, I also think we need to redesign some of our current procedures.
David, I’m going to read your piece right now. I hope you keep writing about it from ground zero. I agree that if Vergara wins the consequences could be bad. The reason for that is the same as what we’re seeing in Washington regarding the sloppy, rushed student growth measurements the legislature is imposing in a frantic effort to maintain our nclb waiver. When non-educators dream up a system that is modeled on the private sector, it’s bad news for the complex, living and evolving thing that is public education. The relationship between a teacher and her work is closer to that of a doctor than a salesman. If you’re a doctor who works with the terminally ill, should you be fired if your patients die? Of course not. But ed-advocacy groups are fighting so hard to reform teacher evaluation and layoff policy because they cannot believe anyone can earn $70,000 a year, have a guaranteed job, and be not that good at what she does. They just aren’t willing to sit back and allow bad personnel policy because there might be a vindictive principal somewhere down the line. This is exactly why teachers need to be leading reform, because groups like Students Matter are tired of seeing bad personnel procedures on top of an already weak and struggling system. If we aren’t willing to do better than LIFO, or forced placement, or tenure by year three, then someone is going to do it for us, and to us, and they will design it based on what works in retail instead of what works in a classroom.
Ways to improve teacher quality?
-Fully fund professional development and collaboration time. The increase to 1080 instructional hours, without accompanying funding, means that school districts are looking at cutting professional development time and even parent conference time in order to meet the instructional hour requirement. Instructional time is important, but so are things like PD and collaboration!
http://sbe.wa.gov/documents/compliance/1080HoursFAQ.pdf
http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20131211/NEWS/312119984/0/SEARCH
-The increased National Board stipend for teachers in high needs schools encourages and helps retain high quality teachers in these schools.
-Our state’s TPEP evaluation system, with the accompanying instructional frameworks, shows promise as a growth model to help teachers improve.
-It has been six years since teachers receive a COLA. For a few of those years, teachers actually received a pay decrease in many districts because of the 1.9% cut and loss of LID days. Static pay and pay decreases are not the way to attract top quality professionals.
Finally, fully fund education! Improving our education system goes far beyond examining teacher quality. Public education in Washington state needs to be fully funded, and that needs to happen now.
Hi Kristin –
We’ll be watching this case closely here in California. I agree with you that our associations should be exploring opportunities to improve personnel practices. I think the plaintiffs in this case have problems proving that the they are suffering harm from the policies they seek to change, and more importantly I think they’re sadly indifferent regarding the potential consequences if they succeed.
I wrote about the case after listening to a presentation by Students Matter last spring:
http://accomplishedcaliforniateachers.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/education-policy-litigation/