When 3,100 teachers in Los Angeles were laid off last year, most of the pink slips were issued to newer educators. In fact, seniority-based layoffs have been a regular practice of public schools throughout the country. But a new court agreement between the L.A. Board of Education and legal groups including the American Civil Liberties Union may change all that.
The L.A. Board of Education just approved a landmark court settlement that caps the number of dismissals based on seniority at nearly all schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District. The settlement is the end result of a lawsuit that was filed by several legals groups, including the ACLU, which accused the L.A.U.S.D of denying students equal access to public education.
The inequality has to do with the number of teachers that get fired in low-income schools versus the number that get fired in wealthier areas of the district. Since inexperienced educators are clustered in low income-schools, those campuses are hit hardest during tough economic times. For instance, the lawsuit alleged that the district dismissed up to two thirds of the teachers at three of city's worst performing middle schools.
On the other hand, schools located in wealthier areas include teachers that are protected by seniority. So when the district is facing massive budget cuts, these schools are less likely to lose a large portion of their educators because most of them have seniority.
ACLU staff attorney David Sapp told Business Week, "This [settlement] is the right thing for kids because it makes sure that you don't have some kids bearing the brunt of the layoffs at schools that are already struggling."
The proposal still needs to be approved by a judge in order to be implemented. If passed, other school districts across the country could follow suit.
The next academic year faces a $268 million budget gap, and as many as 3,300 jobs in the district are in jeopardy. But for the first time, experienced teachers will have to worry about their job security.
It's irresponsible for the district to layoff educators solely based on the amount of time they've been teaching. If the district is struggling financially and desperately needs to issue pink slips, an educator's performance should be taken into account. The method of teacher evaluations is up for debate. But district officials should be willing to have that debate so they don't fire enthusiastic, motivated, and effective teachers for lack of seniority.
Comments
I always figured budget cuts hit low income schools the hardest, I just never put it together with the connection to seniority protection in job cuts. I also never realized just how broad the ACLU's legal advocacy programs are, good on them!
I don't have a problem with seniority being ONE of the variables taken into account when doing these kinds of job cuts, but it should probably be in the context of individual schools, and needs to be weighted less than teacher performance. (and how to assess that, is definitely a ripe topic for debate) I think teacher performance should be overwhelmingly the most important factor to consider during job cuts, but I'm willing to hear a dissenting opinion on that.
First of all, I think Education should be priority numero uno!, and there shouldn't be no cut's at all in Educational system. The hierarchichal(hierarchy) system has always been mankinds way, but performance should always be the number one consideration in any field when it does come to cutting time that is. "A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link"..............ancient chinese proverb!
I'm a student one my way to becoming an elementary school teacher. I'm a year away from earning my multi-subject teaching credential. I've worked in classrooms with many kinds of teachers. New ones, old ones, special ed. and have what I consider to be an significant amount of experience with students from different backgrounds ethnically, culturally, socioeconomically, and exceptionally. I tend to side more with experienced teachers on this one. I know there are shit tenured teachers. I've seen them and have had to work with them. I've also experienced a large number of great, tenured teachers. These experienced teachers need SOME kind of protection. They aren't protected because people think they are better teachers. They are protected because they are more expensive than a fresh outta the box, inexperience teacher. If that protection was dropped, what do you think that would do to the education system as a whole. I guarantee you it would no longer be about performance. It would be about pocketbooks.
I will give you, the bad ones need to be weeded out. But that can't simply be based on some test performance at the end of the year. Why can't we work on some portfolio based system? It would be much easier to see improvement in the students work. In my opinion, student improvement is a much greater sign of teacher performance than the state mandated tests. High expectations are needed of our students is what is needed in order for them to succeed. Teachers begin to lose those expectations because THE SYSTEM is broken. The teachers stop giving a shit, because they feel they can't do anything about it. The unfair thing about this world is that people who are unqualified to even make a judgment are the ones making the decisions. It's all politics with education. Rarely is it about the kids. I feel your passion for helping the students, and I love that. The newer teachers I saw in your video that you were talking about were in that beginning "fantasy phase" of teaching. It's beautiful. I'm going to go through it. That's not my term for it either. That is from a man named Harry Wong, an expert in classroom management. Even knowing about it, I am still going into it ready to fight for my kids. But I am going to need those experienced teachers around me, to help me help the kids. Wong says after that first year or so of the "fantasy phase" comes the "survival phase." This is where everything's about worksheets and drill and kill. He says some teachers never get out of this. These would be your shit teachers. But after this, we begin to find our rhythm and become truly exceptional teachers. This is a process. It sounds unfair to the students we are teaching during this time, but it is how it works. We need those experience teachers to help guide us through these phases. No teacher can make a career of teaching in the "fantasy" stage. It's exhausting. The passion is there for these kids, but not the energy. The teachers who can't manage this are the ones who become the shit teachers.
I work with a large number of people who want to become teachers. It is an easy decision to make not only because of the impact we will have on our kids, but the impact it will have on our own lives as well. Most teachers and future teachers I know are family oriented people. We love kids. Those of us with family's and who want to some day have families need to know that our families are going to be ok.
I am feeling you with your passion against shit teachers. But protecting experienced and good teachers needs to be a strong part of this conversation. I don't feel it's being given half the consideration it needs. These kinds of attitudes are exactly what brought along NCLB and dropping bilingual education. They've been implemented. Ask any teacher if the goal is going to be met. Then ask what we've lost in this attempt to catch up with the rest of the world academically. Like I said. It's all political.
I think unfair of them to do that.How can a new teacher gain any experience or ''seniority'' if everywhere they try to teach at keeps firing them?
I agree that seniority should be important. Without seniority consideration it wouldn't be last hired first fired, the highest paid teachers would be let go first every time. But if a more senior teacher is unwilling to move to another school then that's a different story.
The problem with looking to performance instead of seniority is, as you say is up to debate, shall the verdict of whether or not the teacher shall be issued a pink slip depend upon the students that is currently being tutored by that teacher write short "reviews" stating whether or not they want the teacher to get kicked or not. (Or just positive or negative remarks on that person.).
That would probably be the most effective, but utterly naive resolution to this problem. Because which student would 1: Jeopardize their teacher career. 2: In Jeopardizing their teacher career, their jeopardizing their own education. So all teachers would probably be praised like the lord himself by the students.
But would the alternative of having persons employed at the L.A.U.S.D going to classes and evaluating teacher their performance be much better? Probably not, because foremost it would probably cost a lot sending out people to different public schools (And logically you don't want to spend if you're already having economical problems.) and it would take a lot of time doing so.
Wouldn't one, controversial it might be, solution to the problem be that if you have to dismiss a certain number of teachers from an amount of public schools under the "control" of L.A.U.S.D that let's say for example that if you have 10 schools, with 50 employees each and you have to dismiss 10 people from their service as teachers you dismiss an equal amount of teachers from an equal amount of schools. In this scenario it would lead to every school getting one less teacher, leaving them with 49 instead of 50 employees. A positive effect from this would at least guarantee that less fortunate schools, with often inexperienced teachers and a general poorer quality would not have to fire a larger amount of teachers (Which they would certainly be in need of.) than those with a higher quality. But of course, there are always two sides of a coin.
The negative effect would of course be that if one schools consisted exclusively of (Which is very unlikely) inexperienced, unmotivated and uncharismatic teachers and one solely consisted of teachers which would possess the exact opposite virtues and attributes then the previous school it would be a great loss of talent. Just this specific scenario would probably never occur in real life, but depending on the size of the amount of the teachers and the amount that has to be dismissed it can lead to similar scenarios than that one just mentioned.
One other solution could be used on both the previous system of firing teachers (Sorry if I miss use the term "firing", I'm a sixteen year old guy from Sweden.) and the one that probably will come into effect that will look to a teachers performance instead of his or her seniority. This solution is depending on if L.A.U.S.D is the main employer of the teachers in the L.A.U.S.D public school section. But let's get to the point, that if one school that is in great need of education because of bad results from students and the teachers at that school shows poor performance (Or because of their seniority.) and thus has to be dismissed. If a school where the students performs well in school, showing great results etc. and the teachers as well shows great performance (or get to stay because of their seniority.) teachers from the well performing could be moved to the school with poorer quality and not only giving them a chance to be educated, but educated properly.
If someone would have some viewpoints or commentaries on my own solutions, please share them.
Did not figure Ana to so anti-union. Seniority is a hall mark of most contracts.
It is unfair to do a witch hunt on the teachers, yelling out "The schools are broken, students don't learn!" Anyone who claims to find a quick fix for the problems in education is a liar or a dilettante. Parental involvement is a crucial component in a child's education. No teacher is able to substitute the missing link students have at home--either no parents, one parent working his/her behind off to make a living, two parents working their behinds off to make a living, or two parents who are simply selfish and are not getting involved in their child's life. The school has assumed the role of the community-the church, the policeman, the parent, the feeder, the psychologist/psychiatrist, the babysitter, the entertainer --you name it. With class size increasing, the teacher turns into a babysitter. Fire the teachers and get the new ones? Where do you find the "good ones?" Former engineers, lawyers, those-who lost their jobs in other industries? Good luck... Now the core of the problem-- unfortunately, many try to tie education to business-- stop doing that! How can you evaluate me, my efforts, when I save the child from committing suicide? How do you evaluate me when I inspire the third generation gang member to go to college? How do you judge my success? People-- stop arguing about the teachers, and move to create one educational system for the country --at least for the state. Those countries who have a uniform system have produced incredible results. I know, you will say the uniform system may lack creativity, etc. It is not perfect, but it has produced better quality. Create 1 textbook per subject per grade level, focus on training the teachers (not bashing them), and you will see the results. Creating a chaos in the non perfect educational system by eliminating seniority rules is not the cornerstone for success, it can ruin a non perfect system and will substitute it with... none! Avoid that, please. make sure a new system is created first --experiment it in a small scale, and then move on, otherwise the public will have to fund building thousands of new prisons.
Union-Shmunion, we need to wake up and smell the global education rankings. The US is falling behind in all subjects and performance evaluations are the way to go. I'm sure that for the tenured teacher, it wouldn't seem fair to have put in all those years only to get axed because of a bad evaluation. At the same time I think that we have to ask teachers to do the job that they're paid for: teaching. If they aren't effective, then maybe its time for a career change.
I'm talking a revamping of the whole system. No Child Left Behind has created a "teach to the test" atmosphere in all of the schools that my 11 year old has attended. As a result, she has no idea where New Hampshire is or what is the capital of New Hampshire, but she does okay on the assessments. (In contrast, I knew all of the states and their capitals by fourth grade.) She has had varying levels of "homework" since 1st grade, but it was all reading/writing or math; never science or any social science. I understand all of the "tough economic times" BS, but this country will continue to go downhill until we realize that educating our youth is probably the most important investment we can make.
Great blog, Ana. Keep 'em coming.
Good. Seniority is no reason to keep a job. Being a good teacher is.
I see both sides to this argument. But making it performance based will not change the ratio of teachers being laid off in the poorer schools. It should be School based not district based. If we need to lay off 50 teachers from 50 schools that means one from each school. Or by student population which may hit the more wealthy schools harder, but they may also at this point have more room to maneuver.
I grew up in the LA Schools and saw what happened when Teachers lost seniority when forced busing came about the level of caring dropped. So lets level the playing field here for the schools and the kids.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!