Unions help keep bad teachers employed

March 20, 5:45 PMEducation in the News ExaminerEricha Parks

Previous Next

Comment Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Education in the News Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

IGoogle images

At a time when our education funding is limited and precious, and pink slips have been served to teachers in response to the budget shortfalls, why are school districts prevented from laying off under-performing teachers?

Many talented and qualified teachers will be leaving their teaching posts at the end of the year as a result of this last round of layoffs on March 13. On the flip side, many unmotivated and poorly performing teachers will remain. This debate has many questioning the force behind this practice and what action can be taken.

Why is it nearly impossible to fire a low performing teacher? Particularly now, when money is so limited, tough decisions about who stays or goes should be heavily weighed. It looks promising that reform for education is being discussed, a bit too late in the case of California teachers. However, President Obama has weighed-in announcing earlier this month, "It is time to start rewarding good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones." 
 

Who makes the case for keeping teachers who are under-performing? The teachers’ union opposes merit pay citing that test scores would be a flawed formula to determine success in a classroom.

Certainly, most of us agree that test scores are not the measure by which teachers should be judged. It makes sense because students’ background and learning paces vary. But isn’t it possible to evaluate teacher success in a more traditional way? Even our president is wary of using test scores as a measure of teachers’ performance, he vowed to find a better way to track student progress in order to determine teacher accountability.

How much influence does the union have in the personnel matters of the public education system? In a word: plenty. It is difficult to imagine anybody wanting to create obstacles for the termination of a poorly performing teacher. However, the unions make costly restrictions for firing a tenured teacher and will support the offending teacher in legal actions. This has caused school districts to be overcome with legal fees and time-consuming procedures sometimes taking years to accomplish with appeals.

At stake for the unions: their own relevance. Teachers’ unions have to create a following for membership whereby promising security for its members who pay the dues. Teachers’ unions have such a hold on the legislature by virtue of their lobbying power and campaign contributions, that reform is nearly impossible. I tried to reach A.J. Duffy, president of UTLA the Los Angeles teachers’ union, to ask him what formula could be made to determine merit other than using test scores. Although I was authorized to pose the question for comment to UTLA’s Communications Department, Mr. Duffy has not returned my phone call.

The result of keeping contracted teachers employed is a practice of transferring an offending teacher within the school district if that teacher has poor performance at the preceding school site. According to Teachersunionexposed.com, this practice is called "the dance of the lemons" or "passing the trash."

Many well-meaning parents may make a formal complaint about a teacher’s performance or behavior to the school’s principal. We’ve always been taught to go through the chain of command. However, in this bizarre entanglement, the public needs to concede to this flawed system of seeking justice through the school’s hierarchy, as they are limited by the union contracts.

What is a parent to do if a poorly performing or behaving teacher is identified? Is it possible to make a complaint outside of your school district of an offending teacher, administrative staff or principal? Luckily, the answer is: Yes.

Prior to making a formal complaint under the California Education Code, the California Department of Education requests that you first talk to "your local district administration for information on their employee grievance process."

However, if you have exhausted other remedies, you are well within your right to contact the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing to file a complaint against the offending teacher’s credential. After an affidavit, under penalty of perjury, is filed with the agency, an investigation will commence. Education Code section 44242.5 states in part as follows: "Each allegation of an act or omission by an applicant for, or holder of, a credential for which he or she may be subject to an adverse action shall be presented to the Committee of Credentials."

What the California Commission of Teacher Credentialing is examining is "probable cause," the standard in which the amount of proof determines that a contract can be severed.

Section 44242.5 (e) (1) concludes that "if probable cause exists," ... the commission will render "appropriate adverse action." In short, the teacher will be terminated upon a determination that probable cause was proven.