News

Educators: Ending 'tenure' no magic bullet

Atherton entrepreneur behind lawsuit challenging teacher tenure and seniority rules.

A court decision last week to throw out state teacher tenure rules may lead people to think that this is the solution for providing quality education for all students, a shortsighted view in the opinion of local educators.

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge on June 10 decided that tenure rules, which allow teachers to get lifetime job protection after just 18 months, were unconstitutional because they allow ineffective teachers to stay in the system, thereby depriving equal access to a quality public education for all students.

"I think some people believe that if you get rid of tenure, you've solved the problem and quality (of education) will go up," said Deborah Stipek, dean of the school of education at Stanford University. The problems are elsewhere, she said, in teachers' lack of social status and paychecks that don't reflect their value to the community. Society needs to invest in the best and brightest, train them well and provide on-the-job support, she said.

"Tenure is a red herring," Woodside High School English teacher Tony Mueller said in an email. "Rather than going after labor unions and worker's rights, 'reformers' should confront the real problems with our education system: gross inequity in funding based on geography, the drastic cuts in social spending for the poor, the obscenely small amount of money spent per pupil in California, the constant attack on teachers from those intent on privatizing the system, and inherent American anti-intellectualism that is suspicious of science, poetry, foreign languages, and history."

The lawsuit

Nine public school students represented by Students Matter, a nonprofit with a mail-drop in Menlo Park and founded by Atherton resident and Silicon Valley entrepreneur David Welch, sued the state and the state Department of Education in May 2012, alleging "outdated state laws that prevent the recruitment, support and retention of effective teachers."

The statutes in question -- on tenure, dismissal and last-in-first-out teacher-layoff policies -- were declared unconstitutional in a June 10 decision by Judge Rolf M. Treu of Los Angeles County Superior Court. Judge Treu suspended the decision pending an appeal by the state.

The lawsuit asserted that teachers play a crucial role in the lifetime achievements of their students, and that ineffective teachers can have a dramatically negative impact. Lawyers for the students claimed that such teachers are "disproportionately situated in schools serving predominantly low-income and minority students," which has adverse effects on the quality of their education, Judge Treu wrote in summarizing his decision.

Testimony at the trial included a study asserting that a typical classroom of students collectively loses $1.4 million in lifetime earnings when taught by an ineffective teacher for one year, the judge noted. A witness testifying for the state said that up to 3 percent of California's 275,000 public school teachers, about 8,250 teachers, are "grossly" ineffective. "The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience," Judge Treu wrote.

He compared the students' plight to the separate-but-equal schools for African-American students, a practice struck down by Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.

Educators respond

The ruling is "certainly a dramatic decision," and tenure is symbolic on both sides of the issue, Ms. Stipek of Stanford said. "I think most teachers oppose getting rid of tenure because they don't believe or have not experienced that other strategies for judging the quality of their work are fair," she said.

Two evaluation tools are now available: assessment by the principal and measurement of the achievement of students taught by the teacher. For the first to be useful, Ms. Stipek said, principals need to know effective teaching when they see it. "Some do, many don't," she said, and training is uncommon.

As for measuring student achievement, if students arrive in the fall prepared for the work ahead of them, assessing their progress can be uncomplicated. Students not adequately prepared can still learn a great deal and make "huge progress," but it won't show up in a by-the-numbers evaluation of the teacher, Ms. Stipek said.

Progress is being made on effective evaluation techniques, but teachers have no faith that current methods are fair and unbiased, she said. Job security -- tenure -- is a fall-back position, she said, adding that she is very sympathetic to administrators whose hands are tied by union rules when trying to reassign teachers.

Woodside High teacher Tony Mueller said that some of the "world's best education systems have highly-unionized teachers with even better job security than in California." The lawsuit, he said, is "an attack on unions, workers, and teachers with the intent of breaking unions and privatizing public education."

Students Matter did not respond to interview requests for this story.

Woodside High English teacher Sue Rhodehouse said in an email that she has seen ineffective teachers removed, often speedily. "The current system just ensures due process," she said. "This is a challenging job. Those years that I am given a difficult assignment, I am eager to take up the task because I know that I am guaranteed due process should the need arise. Without this process ... I would question my career choice and discourage others from entering the field."

Teaching as a profession loses 50 percent of its new teachers within five years, said Fred Glass of the California Federation of Teachers. The current system protects academic freedom, he said. "One thing that makes teaching attractive is that somebody has your back," he said. "If you raise a controversial issue such as religion or politics, you won't be fired."

Related stories:Simitian: Tenure ruling 'fairly reasoned' | ■ Legal team hammers on tenure rules, and wins

Comments

 +   Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jun 18, 2014 at 4:05 pm

In reading this article, the tag line misses the point. No one is talking "magic bullet". On the other hand no is refuting the 3% ineffective teachers, and, no one is offering how to improve these teachers. The union "card": They want to break the union and pay is played everytime there is an effort to make inroads to improve an imept system of delivering uneven education. Most other unions at least have a union hall where ineffective workers can go to collect unemployment. In our schools, teachers get shuffled off to another school ot become expensive homework center supervisors. In California there is plenty of "due process" without tenure. Tenure is the tip of the iceberg of the whole contract that teachers feel that they need to provide them cover. Also, if 50% of teachers are leaving, I doubt that teachers will be let go in mass. There should be plenty of opportunities for any competent teacher. This is suicide for any district to let valuable teachers leave for greener pastures. Pay will not improve ineffective teacher, but better training would be a better place to look. Why doesn't the union help in this area?

I am not against a teachers union, it is needed. And, most teachers do a wonderful job. But, there are always a few in any occupation that don't want to pull their fair share or just can't do the job.

Let's remember that comparing our union teachers to other countries is absurd. The systems are not the same, otherwise lets get some of their union teachers over here.

This is not a union vs charter school battle. It is about getting a great education by competent teachers in a great country. Lets fix the problem and not the blame. We are talking about a small percentage that are spoiling the whole. In the article one can infer that we don't have the brightest and the best. Schools are often struggling to find good teachers to hire. This is a problem that tenure can't fix. Tenure is not a problem for good teachers as they are valued, but is a nightmare for administrators when they make a poor hire.

I agree with Ms Stipek, tenure fixes nothing but protects ineffective teachers. We need more good quality teachers, and this can only be accomplished with reforms in training and development for all parties. Administrators are not above incompetence either and don't always get management training that is needed to deal with personel.

I am hopeful for change for the better!!


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Grab a Bowl of Heaven soon in Mountain View
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 2,790 views

Don't fund the rape culture at my alma mater
By Jessica T | 33 comments | 2,083 views

Quick Check List for UC Applications
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 1,917 views

Palo Alto and Bay Area Election Facts and Thoughts on the Implications
By Steve Levy | 15 comments | 1,418 views

“I live near Sunset”
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 698 views