Showing posts with label seniority. Show all posts
Showing posts with label seniority. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Larry Sand updates us on the ACLU lawsuit against LAUSD regarding seniority

Larry Sand updates us on the ACLU lawsuit regarding the "Last In, First Out" rules for laying off teachers in Los Angeles Unified School District.

The new solution to the problem?  More administrators.  What a mess.  Sorry, kids.

Teacher seniority might well survive the Vergara decision.
Larry Sand
City Journal
July 25, 2014

[Vergara lawsuit:]

Last month’s decision by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge to strike down California’s teacher tenure, seniority, and dismissal statutes may be a great victory for children, though much depends on the outcome of any appeal. This week, Attorney General Kamala Harris filed a 22-page request with Judge Rolf M. Treu asking for further clarification of his decision in Vergara v. California. Harris’s filing, coming on the heels of a similar request from the California Teachers Association, could be the prelude to an appeal. But assuming such appeals fail, the question is what would replace the laws that Vergara voided. A roadmap may already be in place to preserve teacher seniority, based on another pending legal settlement in Los Angeles.

[Sadly, California has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory regarding ACLU lawsuit: Reed v. the State of California:]

In April, the Los Angeles Unified School District and the United Teachers of Los Angeles reached an agreement on a lower-profile case that had worked its way through the courts for four years. In 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union sued L.A. Unified and the local union over mass layoffs stemming from state budget cuts. The ACLU focused in particular on three low-performing schools in South L.A., where more than half of the teachers received pink slips. The lawsuit noted that, district-wide, less than 20 percent of teachers met the same fate. Alleging that seniority-based layoffs had taken a disproportionate toll on poor and minority schools, the ACLU won a settlement protecting students in up to 45 schools from the ruinous effects of the “last in/first out” (LIFO) process.

The union appealed, claiming the settlement would undermine teachers’ rights. In 2012, a state appeals court agreed, sending the lawsuit back to the superior court.

After 20 months of wrangling, the parties agreed to another settlement. As EdSource’s John Fensterwald explained, “The deal in the Reed v. the State of California lawsuit will provide about $25 million annually for three years for additional administrators, mentor teachers and teacher training in 37 middle and high schools where there had been low student performance and high turnover of inexperienced teachers.” But the LIFO problem—the meat and potatoes of the original ACLU lawsuit—remains unaddressed. And the settlement says nothing about how administrators may keep the best teachers when (not if) layoffs become necessary again. The union-enforced LIFO system regularly denies thousands of children a decent education.

Nevertheless, all parties seem to view the Reed settlement as satisfactory. L.A. Unified schools superintendent John Deasy said that it would ensure that kids in the greatest peril benefit the most. “These are invaluable investments . . . which will make a difference in transforming these schools and bring justice to our youth,” he gushed. But Deasy wouldn’t elaborate on how children will prosper from the “investments,” when teachers-of-the-year are laid off and less talented and occasionally inept colleagues are protected—all while the district spends more money on bureaucracy.

Meantime, UTLA attorney Jesus E. Quinonez insisted that “any attempts to extinguish the rights of teachers—here, the right to a neutral and fair hearing process—will not serve the needs of kids or lead to justice in our schools.” That’s outrageous. With LIFO in place, no one gets a hearing of any kind. Administrators ignore variations of teacher effectiveness in making their decisions. LIFO discriminates not only against children, but also against good and great teachers. Yet Dale Larson, an attorney with Morrison & Foerster, which partnered with the ACLU in the lawsuit, asserted: “By providing resources to attract and retain teachers in the 37 low-performing, high-turnover middle and high schools, the settlement renders the legal question raised in Reed academic.” Hardly: the agreement never mentions the words “seniority” or “last in/first out.”

What boosters of the Reed settlement can’t explain is how adding administrators to underperforming schools would help retain good teachers...


Read more: LIFO Lite?

Saturday, May 03, 2014

SDUSD trustee Richard Barrera does a turnaround: he no longer wants to hold teachers accountable


SDUSD trustee Richard Barrera

Updated--see bottom of post

San Diego's liberals seem to be far more obedient to the California Teachers Association than Los Angeles liberals, and students suffer for it. Here's a bit of the history of that subject. Shame on Richard Barrera for abandoning his principles, apparently in exchange for campaign contributions and a cushy job.

THE PROBLEM ISN'T TENURE--IT'S THE LACK OF EFFECTIVE TEACHER EVALUATIONS

I don't object to tenure. I object to the intransigence of the teachers union in the face of calls for education reform.

Getting rid of tenure will do no good at all, and would likely do harm, if teacher evaluations continue to be as worthless as they are now.

WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE PERFORMANCE OF PRINCIPALS BEFORE WE PUT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM IN THEIR HANDS

If we get rid of tenure we'll just have to worry more about the already-existing problem of principals protecting their own careers by making alliances with mediocre but popular and politically-strong teachers. I get the feeling that David Welch, mogul of Student Matters, honestly doesn't know that many principals are former teachers who switched to the front office when they realized that they don't have what it takes to make it in the classroom.

I get the feeling that Voice of San Diego's education reporter Mario Koran doesn't know this, either.

HAS VOICE OF SAN DIEGO SABOTAGED THE DEBATE ON TENURE AND TEACHER EVALUATIONS?


Emily Alpert Reyes

Voice of San Diego muzzled and then fired its education reporter, Emily Alpert (now Reyes), who knew what was going on in schools. The reason for this seems to be related to the politics and big bucks of VOSD's big donor trio Buzz Woolley, Irwin Jacobs and Rod Dammeyer who are deeply involved in charter schools and anti-union politics.


Voice of San Diego founder Buzz Woolley

Just before she was fired, Emily Alpert was one of the few people in San Diego doing serious research on teacher layoffs based on seniority. She dared to bring up the topic of teacher evaluations. If VOSD donor trio Buzz Woolley, Irwin Jacobs and Rod Dammeyer were really interested in improving education for all children they would have fallen all over themselves to keep Emily in San Diego. (Emily now works for the Los Angeles Times, but she's not writing about education.)


Irwin Jacobs, Voice of San Diego's major donor

My belief is that Buzz Woolley, Irwin Jacobs and Rod Dammeyer want to improve education for just enough students so that they can run their businesses with American employees--and they want those students in charter schools. They think they can have a flourishing society while the middle and working classes sink lower and lower.


Rod Dammeyer, charter schools advocate and political donor

Note: Buzz, Irwin and Rod also tried to remake the San Diego Unified School Board with appointed members who would undermine the elected members. They seems to think we'd do better without democracy.

IS THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION TRYING TO SELF-DESTRUCT?

You might think that the teachers union could manage to do a better job of acting in the interest of all citizens than Buzz, Irwin and Rod have done.

Sadly, this does not seem to be the case.

I believe that schools can be fixed without getting rid of tenure (I have described one such plan HERE), but schools can't be fixed as long as the California Teachers Association stands in the way.

Something clearly needs to be done, but Richard Barrera doesn't seem to want to address the problem of rampant mediocrity among teachers. It's actually a bigger problem than the incompetence of about 10% teachers. I wouldn't use evaluations to fire teachers; evaluations are needed to help teachers become highly competent.

Sadly, Barrera will likely continue to toe the line for the people who control the California Teachers Association, so reform is looking unlikely. CTA doesn't want teachers to be held accountable; it wants to continue the politically-convenient system of principal evaluations.

The current system is such a joke that principals rarely even bother to observe teachers.

See all posts re teacher evaluations.

Teachers need to have a union. But why can't it be better than this one? Couldn't it be one without people like Tim O'Neill? (See comment at the end of this post.)


VOICE OF SAN DIEGO STORY ON RICHARD BARRERA'S TESTIMONY AT VERGARA TRIAL

Teachers Call Upon San Diego School Trustee to Help Save Seniority Rules
By: Mario Koran
Voice of San Diego
May 2, 2014

In 2010, when San Diego Unified was in the throes of a budget crisis and staring down a round of layoffs, school board trustee Richard Barrera told U-T San Diego, “Pink-slipping disproportionately affects poorer schools – absolutely.”

Now, that argument is the basis of Vergara v. California, a case that could blow up deeply rooted protections for California teachers. Barrera, who is now the leader of the San Diego Imperial Counties Labor Council, which includes the teachers union, changed his tune when he testified in the case.

Teachers see the policies that force the youngest teachers to bear the brunt of layoffs as the fairest possible, he argued. Replacing it with a system that requires administrators to make value judgments would erode trust as teachers vied for their spots, he said.

Along with attorneys from the state and the California Teachers Association, Barrera pointed to San Diego Unified as proof that a district can succeed because of the current policies – not in spite of it.

The case is the product of Students Matter, a group founded by Silicon Valley business mogul David F. Welch, a group of California students and a heavyweight cast of attorneys. They initiated the suit and claim the teacher protections violate students’ constitutional rights to equal access to quality education.

California law makes it nearly impossible to dismiss a bad teacher once he or she has received tenure, they argue, and last-hired-first-fired layoff policies disproportionately impact schools in high-poverty areas because they’re more likely to have less experienced teachers. Layoffs at these schools, then, create more turnover and worsen the experience for students.

But Barrera said that because San Diego Unified has had a good relationship with its teachers union, it’s been able to avoid mass layoffs in the first place.

In the grip of the budget crises, about 1,100 teachers were issued pink-slips in 2011, and all but 200 of those were rescinded, he said. And when 1,500 teachers were laid off in 2012, everyone was invited back.

Josh Lipshutz, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told VOSD he found this part of Barrera’s testimony bizarre. “Look, nobody wants layoffs. But layoffs are reality,” Lipshutz said.v “We’re not arguing that teachers should be laid off. But in speaking with administrators we heard over and over that everybody knows who the worst teachers are. All we’re saying is that in a layoff environment, why would you not want to include those teachers?” he said.

And avoiding layoffs in dark budget times also comes at a very real cost.

At this week’s school board meeting, trustee and fiscal wonk Scott Barnett castigated the rest of the school board for promising teachers pay raises that it couldn’t afford and selling off real estate to make up the difference.

Even though the district got money from Prop. 30, a voter-approved statewide measure meant to stave off drastic cuts to schools, San Diego Unified is facing a $100 million budget shortfall.

“Guess what? The proposed hole is bigger next year than this year because of this board’s inability to have any semblance of control,” Barnett said.

Holding Up San Diego as a Model

Barrera said that the idea that layoffs disproportionately impact poor schools doesn’t capture reality.

He said Central Elementary in City Heights, the school that Superintendent Cindy Marten once ran, is a good example of how a school can create a culture where teachers want to stick around.

Barrera said a school like Central is possible because teachers share strategies for what works in the classroom. In other words, if a district were to try to measure which teachers were better, teachers might be afraid to share what works with a competitive colleague.

“If we replace the seniority system – one which most people tend to see as fair – with one that teachers see as unfair or arbitrary, we’re going to dramatically hurt trust between teachers and their principals,” he said.

Still, schools like Jackson Elementary in City Heights, now Fay Elementary, might say the problem is a little bit more serious. During the budget crises, high-poverty schools like Fay – which had less experienced teachers – were hit hardest by last-in-first-out layoff policies.

In 2008, 24 out of its 26 teachers received layoff notices. Most of those ended up being rescinded, but in 2011, when 25 out of 27 teachers got pink slips – it was deja vu all over again.

“The reality is,” Lipshutz said, “that once the pink slips go out, the damage is already done.”

Teachers will often look for positions in more stable districts, and “it’s very discouraging to be treated as a number, to be told that you don’t have value beside your hire-date,” he said.

Barrera doesn’t disagree. “That’s all the more reason that we need to do what we can to avoid pink slips and layoffs,” he said. “Pink slips are disruptive, yes, but what’s more disruptive is laying off teachers and having huge class sizes.”

So What’s a Good Teacher?

Barrera said the major hole with the Vergara plaintiffs’ case is that they never clarified what, exactly, makes a teacher ineffective. In fact, the defense led with that point in its closing brief.

Of course, rebooting the criteria to measure teacher performance depends on whether the plaintiffs can persuade the judge that measures like test scores can be considered.

Plaintiffs leaned on Harvard researcher Thomas J. Kane, who said black and Latino students in Los Angeles Unified were more likely than their white and Asian peers to be taught by the worst teachers.

Kane reached his conclusion by looking at teacher effectiveness through a value-added formula, which measures improvements in student test scores over time.

To be sure, value-added formulas aren’t universally accepted. Critics like education historian Diane Ravitch have railed against them for years. Another said they resulted in “mathematical intimidation” from school administrators.

One problem, Barrera said, is that the scores appear objective, but fail to account for poverty, or other factors that influence learning. He said he isn’t opposed to all changes to the evaluation system, but they should begin a conversation about the real goal: quality teaching.

“From a policy level, you think we’d start with questions about what’s working and how we could do more of that, instead of trying to force these blunt instruments in through the court system,” Barrera said.

Lipshutz said poverty was a theme woven throughout the trial.

“To us, that’s a red-herring. We don’t dispute that poverty is a factor in student learning,” he said. “The question to us is whether the laws that are in place are harming students and preventing them from getting the best education they possibly could. And we showed very clearly that the answer is yes.”

COMMENTS

Here's a comment I found intriguing (for personal reasons):


Tim O'Neill, former executive director for CTA affiliates in Chula Vista

Tim ONeill (cvtimo)

The Vergara lawsuit claims that seniority based layoffs negatively discriminate against children of color. A valid critical commentary or report would show how this claim holds water in ANY school district in San Diego County over the past several years when schools have been hit by budget cuts of 25% or more.

The fact of the matter is that there have been none. All the union-haters should consider this in their world view and perhaps question the motives of the plaintiffs in this case.


Maura Larkins comment:

Tim,
Are you calling Richard Barrera a "union-hater" for saying, "“Pink-slipping disproportionately affects poorer schools – absolutely”?

I don't think the charge would fit, since he is the CEO of the San Diego Imperial Counties Labor Council.

Also, the ACLU sued the Los Angeles Unified School District based on the devastating impact of teacher layoffs on poorer schools. Are you calling the Los Angeles ACLU "union-haters"?

Maybe you should stop with the name-calling and try to come up with a solution to the problem.

[Maura Larkins note: I suspect this "Tim O'Neill" may be the same Tim O'Neill who worked for the California Teachers Association until 2010, and who violated the Chula Vista Educators bylaws by refusing to allow me to make an ethics complaint to the CVE Representative Council.

See a copy HERE of his letter to me in which he states that Gina Boyd herself denied my request to appear before the Rep Council to make an ethics complaint about Gina Boyd!

The Tim O'Neill who was the executive director of Chula Vista Educators worked hard to make sure that politics ruled in the district. That Tim O'Neill aided and abetted multiple violations of labor law and the teachers contract to ensure the re-election of CVE President Gina Boyd. But he himself lost his job and was apparently sent to work anonymously (until now, it appears) in the CTA offices in Mission Valley.]


COMMENT FROM JIM JONES:

Tim,
Either seniority protects the best teachers, and also keeps them out of the worst cesspool schools, which are minority schools, or seniority doesn't matter, it can't go both ways.
It's time for teachers to step up and put kids first, stop using them as pawns to feed public union greed.



Tim O'Neill, former executive director for CTA affiliates in Chula Vista

COMMENT FROM TIM O'NEILL:


"Using them to feed public union greed", huh? Please be a bit more specific in your retoric (sic).

Teaching assignments (school, grade level, subject assignments) are regulated in each school district collective bargaining agreement negotiated with the local teacher union in that district, not regulated by state law, which this lawsuit addresses.

The vast majority of these negotiated agreements places seniority as a subordinate criterion to many other factors such as subject matter credential, and most notably the opinion of the school principal. In other words, seniority, in most cases is NOT the determining factor with regard to a teacher's assignment.

It is true that some teaching assignments are more difficult than others. It may also be that vacancies occur more regularly at schools with such assignments, but for a variety of reasons. Some of the "best" teachers work at these schools; sometimes they don't. Are you suggesting that the "best" teachers be limited in their options as to where they would choose to work?


Maura Larkins response:

No, Tim, Mr. Jones is not suggesting that tenured teachers be limited as to where they work. He is simply suggesting that tenured teachers tend to use their seniority to get out of--and stay out of--schools in low income areas. In fact, I must say that I did notice during my years in Chula Vista Elementary School District that teachers with high seniority tended to snap up the job openings at schools in high-income areas.

I think that the success of children should not be subordinated to any goal at all that the teachers union might have.

It doesn't matter what the reason is that CTA has refused to allow any real progress in evaluating teachers--whatever it is, it's not a good enough reason. The fact is that the current system of principal evaluations is a joke, and it's part of the reason so many kids are failing to get decent educations.


Principal Charlie Padilla retired
in the middle of the school year

I had a principal who came in fresh to the school, not knowing that I had been given all the lowest-achieving students in my grade level because I was also given the English-learners and it seemed to make sense. I was perfectly happy with the situation.

The new principal must have looked at the students' tests before sending them in to be scored, because he wrote on my evaluation that I had low student test scores--before the results came back! My students were progressing at top speed, particularly in their critical thinking, but they were starting the year from far behind the kids in the other classes at my grade level.

In fact, when the scores came back, they showed that my students had made one, two, three or even four years progress when they were with me.

That principal was highly regarded because he was highly political. But, strangely, he eventually retired from the district in the middle of the school year. He got another job, so obviously he wasn't interesting in actually retiring. It sometimes takes a while to figure out how bad some principals are. This would be less of a problem if principals weren't in charge of evaluations.

I once heard former CTA Executive Director Carolyn Doggett pointing out to CTA affiliate presidents that if they didn't improve education, they would become irrelevant. CTA would be wise to come up with an evaluation plan pronto. What's your plan for teacher evaluations, Tim?

COMMENT FROM francesca

@Maura Larkins If you taught in the Chula Vista School District, then you are probably more realistic about the idea of using test scores to evaluate teachers. When children have not mastered English, their test scores don't really reflect what they have learned or know.

Maura, Do you have an objective way to measure whether teachers are doing an effective job?


Maura Larkins COMMENT:

Thanks for asking, Francesca! I think observations are the single most important source of effective evaluations, and they should be done frequently by people from outside the school district (to avoid school politics).

Dennis Schamp and Scripps Dad and I had a somewhat detailed discussion recently on what should be observed; you can see our discussion at the bottom of this April 28 VOSD story:

The Case That Could Blow Up Teacher Tenure

The two main things we discussed as needing to be observed are:
1) What is the teacher doing?
2) What are the students doing?

Non-professionals could be used to make superficial observations. It would be up to professionals to evaluate the data and follow up with their own observations.

Scripps Dad says he's been involved in a good teacher evaluation program.

Also, student test scores would only be helpful after a number of years of gathering data about a teacher's performance, and even then, research shows that these scores are reliable indicators only for the top 10% and bottom 10% of teachers. The other 80% of teachers tend to get extremely variable results.

I do not think evaluations should be used to determine employment.

Instead, I think they should be used to identify the most highly effective teachers and to help average and below-average teachers.

I believe that the most highly effective teachers should then be given responsibility as master teachers to direct the less effective teachers and to give supplemental lessons to students, and to give training to their fellow teachers. This would be cheaper and more effective than bringing in ridiculously expensive outside vendors to do training.

I would expect master teachers to be paid like doctors and lawyers.


Donald Kimball

One source of teacher evaluations could be 4th grade teachers evaluating the 3rd grade teachers. The teachers in the next grade up get to experience the students from the lower grade, and can identify the better and worse teachers. Graduating seniors in high school could also evaluate their 10th, 11th, and 12th grade teachers. By that time, the graduating seniors have a good sense of the good teachers and poor teachers. Parent classroom volunteers can also provide teacher evaluations. In fact, Facebook groups organized around their specific schools have detailed recollections of the very best and very worst teachers.


Paul M Bowers

Indeed, the next-level teacher can be very helpful when determining if the previous teacher properly prepared his/her students.

I'm not a big fan of using social media for evaluating anyone. People get into a very nasty mob mentality and people are far more likely to post negative things than positive. And do so in a public place- things get adversarial quickly and the employee has no defense.


Maura Larkins

The goal is to get an objective evaluation. How could you keep personal feelings, good or bad, out of this? People would be inclined to give good evaluations to those who support their agendas, and punish those who disagree with them. They'd be likely to give good evaluations to ineffective teachers who are their friends, and bad evaluations to good teachers who don't fit in to their social hierarchy. Humans are very social creatures. Politics needs to be left out of something this important.


Paul M Bowers

...I'd like to see employees retained, promoted or dismissed on the quality of their work...

Maura Larkins

Paul Bowers, I like your idea of promoting teachers based on the quality of their work, but I bet you wouldn't like my idea about what position they should be promoted to.

I'd like to see the most effective teachers stay in the classroom--but have responsibility for several classrooms.

Each of those classrooms would also have a regular teacher who might be a young person on the way up, or an older person with many positive skills who doesn't quite fit the master teacher category.

There would be separate salary scales for master and regular teachers. The former would be paid like doctors and lawyers, while the latter would have their salaries capped at a somewhat lower level than the current system provides. The money saved on three or four regular teacher salaries would pay for the master teacher.

Also, the master teachers would provide professional development, saving schools the obscene amounts of money currently paid to vendors peddling the latest fad.

I think a lot of political and personal misery could be avoided by simply reducing the responsibilities of ineffective teachers and giving them a master teacher rather than dismissing them. Some ineffective teachers are very sweet and kind to kids. And others are very connected to the teachers union. Either way, trying to get rid of them would likely be disastrous
.


UPDATE MAY 5, 2014:

DO UNION LEADERS WANT TO KEEP THE EVALUATION PROCESS POLITICAL SO THEY CAN CONTROL TEACHERS BETTER?


You might be wondering why Tim O'Neill would lead Chula Vista Educators into aiding and abetting a string of illegal actions. Was it merely to protect CVE president Gina Boyd from the ire of the "Castle Park Family" as she was facing a union election? Perhaps not.

I just discovered a startling connection while perusing Facebook. The principal I mentioned above was Charlie Padilla. Here's a post about his middle-of-the-year retirement from CVESD. He turns out to be a personal friend of Tim O'Neill!


COINCIDENCE?
Charlie Padilla on the left, Tim O'Neill on the right.
Does this photo from Charlie Padilla's public Facebook
page of three couples out together for dinner on April 27,
2014 help explain why Tim O'Neill might be motivated to aid
and abet a string of illegal actions and violations of contract?


Tim O'Neill wouldn't allow the CVE board of directors to hear my complaint about him and Gina Boyd. CTA is a very top-down organization, run by administrators like Tim O'Neill--and CTA lawyers--rather than elected union officials.


Wayne Johnson

I have spoken out for years on the behind-the-scenes collusion between the teachers union and school administrators. They often spar in public, but Wayne Johnson (President of CTA from 1999-2003) instituted a policy in which CTA affiliates would play nicer with school districts in order to reach more deals behind closed doors. (Of course, Wayne was acting on the direction of the real policy-makers at CTA, the lawyers. The elected officials are just figureheads.)


Saturday, March 26, 2011

Summer school on the chopping block: is teacher quality the reason it doesn't seem to help kids?

See all posts on summer school.


We seem to be assuming that failure is inevitable for the legions of kids who end up dropping out. Why has no one questioned the QUALITY of summer school instruction? We do NOT give those coveted summer school positions to the best teachers, we give them to the most senior teachers. If the best teachers were given these jobs, maybe summer school would be an effective means of boosting student achievement.


Summer School Back on the Chopping Block
March 25, 2011
by Emily Alpert

Last year I wrote about how San Diego Unified was at risk of cutting back on summer school, weakening an already limited lifeline for kids who slide behind.

The school board ultimately voted to keep the program intact last year. But now summer school is on the chopping block again. Money earmarked for summer school went to plug budget holes; stimulus money that helped pay for summer school last year dried up.

Providing summer classes for students at risk of being held back in first, third and eighth grade, and all high schoolers who need to make up credits would cost $2.6 million. San Diego Unified has only $1.14 million to spend, so district staff recommends paring back on summer school for high schoolers short of their senior year.

That would mean that only an estimated 170 high schoolers would have a shot at summer school, compared to more than 5,800 high school students who took it last year. Here's what I wrote last year about the risks of cutting summer school for teens:

Roughly 12 percent of high schoolers relied on summer school to boost their grades last year. Freshmen in summer school saw the biggest gains, upping their average grades by half a letter grade. That's the difference between a D+ average and a C; the difference between staying on track to graduate or not.

Summer school isn't perfect. It's underused and inconsistent even when budgets are flush. Last year, our analysis found that the neediest kids are unlikely to enroll and become less and less likely to go every year. Summer jobs and family demands pull many failing students away. One in three students who went to summer school didn't improve their grades at all, we found:

But unless San Diego Unified comes up with a similar plan to offset the lost chance to turn things around for teens, trimming summer school may only exacerbate some of its existing weaknesses. It will only reach seniors at the last minute, instead of helping troubled freshmen set their report cards right. Delaying chances to make up classes for failing high schoolers will hurt kids who are already the most likely to drop out — and who need help fast to turn things around.

Studies from Chicago have found that freshman year failure is an extremely accurate predictor of whether a child will drop out, but if a student makes up classes by sophomore year, their odds of graduating improve. Cutting summer school gives failing freshman one less option. ... And while San Diego Unified may still offer summer school to struggling seniors, a single summer usually can't bail out kids with extremely low grades. Three out of four high schoolers with a D average who went to summer school last year left with their grades still at or below a D average and well below the C average needed to get a diploma...


COMMENTS
...

deBeck posted at 9:31 pm on Fri, Mar 25, 2011.
deBeck Posts: 368

Interestingly enough there is no LOCAL evidence that summer school raises student achievement (based on national tests) It does allow students who have failed to continue on in a process we can easily lable as social promotion. I include the makeup courses for CREDIT SHORT seniors when I say this. The data I obtained about this situation about a year ago showed that summer school students who were far below basic, were highly likely to pass summer school and very likely to move on to ANOTHER YEAR of being far below basic in the next grade. This was standard data from the School District's own records. A few kid benefit, but the data show that summer school, despite its popularity, is ineffective. Of course the teachers love summer jobs at pro rata pay. The cost effectiveness makes this cut a no brainer.



...Maura Larkins posted at 9:54 am on Sat, Mar 26, 2011.
Maura Larkins Posts: 70

We seem to be assuming that failure is inevitable for the legions of kids who end up dropping out. Why has no one questioned the QUALITY of summer school instruction? We do NOT give those coveted summer school positions to the best teachers, we give them to the most senior teachers. If the best teachers were given these jobs, maybe summer school would be an effective means of boosting student achievement.



...Frances O'Neill Zimmerman posted at 10:44 am on Sat, Mar 26, 2011.
Frances O'Neill Zimmerman Posts: 352

Once again, Mr. deBeck speaks the truth. Summer school does offer employment for teachers and administrators and possible enrichment for regular students -- or a way to "get ahead or or get some unpleasant (courses) over with quickly," as mentioned above. But for underperforming students who are at risk of not having enough credits to graduate? Nada. I once taught summer school and saw many such students in the seats, getting to know cute classmates of the opposite sex and not doing an ounce of work. Summer school is an expensive luxury for these hard times, probably best restricted this year to the 170 hard cases who may benefit from it.



Maura Larkins:

A really good teacher can get underperforming students interested in learning. It's not in our interest as a society to allow a huge and growing percentage of our children to choose failure. It's our responsibility to see that all those who are able to learn get an education, and we shouldn't shift this responsibility to our expanding population of disconnected children.

Maura Larkins:

To John De Beck: I want to make clear that there is, of course, significant overlap between the most senior teachers and the best teachers. Experience is extremely beneficial to teachers who are in a learning mode. I hope I didn't make you feel insulted as a teacher who has taught summer school. I trust you agree that summer school teachers, just like the teachers who avoid layoffs, are chosen based on seniority.

Sunday, March 13, 2011

Possible Layoffs Would Hit Schools With Poor Students Hardest


Possible Layoffs Would Hit Schools With Poor Students Hardest
March 9, 2011
by Emily Alpert

Seventeen schools in San Diego Unified would lose more than one-fourth of their teaching staff if the school board votes for layoffs this week, according to a memo from its deputy superintendent. The hardest hit school would be Baker Elementary, which would lose 44 percent of its educators.

Under state law, the newest teachers are generally the first to lose their jobs. It's commonly known as "last hired, first fired." That means schools with lots of new teachers get hit harder when layoffs strike, as we recently explained with NBC San Diego. Most of the hardest hit schools have high percentages of disadvantaged kids.

To put these numbers in perspective, the average San Diego Unified elementary school has 64 percent of students eligible for free or reduced price lunches; middle schools average 60 percent eligible.

The new numbers back up an old worry: That layoffs have a disproportionate impact on the neediest schools. The biggest school district in the state, Los Angeles Unified, recently struck a legal settlement with the Public Counsel Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California to protect disadvantaged schools from teacher layoffs.

That means more senior teachers in other schools will end up losing their jobs instead. Los Angeles fought the settlement. Unions have generally argued that seniority is the fairest way to make the painful choice of which teachers should lose their jobs.

The same issue exists in San Diego Unified, but so far, there is no public plan to address it. The lawsuit in Los Angeles sets a legal precedent that someone could use to press the same case in San Diego, but the ruling only applies to Los Angeles. While state law says schools must pay attention to seniority when they lay off teachers, there is some wiggle room in the law to include other factors.

For instance, school districts can skip over employees in scarce or highly needed positions, sparing them from layoffs. San Diego Unified currently plans to skip employees in a few selected science and special education positions, such as physics teachers or educators who work with severely disabled students. I'm waiting for a call back to find out if there is any plan to spare struggling schools.

Friday, July 16, 2010

LBUSD Process For Firing Teachers Stands Up In Court

Long Beach USD achieved a small victory for using criteria beyond seniority to fire teachers.

LBUSD Process For Firing Teachers Stands Up In Court
by Ryan ZumMallen
Long Beach News
07.08.10
After seven days of hearings, a judge ruled today in favor of the Long Beach Unified School District and denied the Teachers Association of Long Beach's assertion that the district did not follow rules while laying off employees.

The local Board of Education is going through its final list of layoffs on July 12.

The judge agreed that the district was within its rights to determine layoffs through its seniority system, its exemption of teachers with training in college readiness programs from the seniority system,

Monday, May 17, 2010

Judge to LAUSD: No Layoffs at Gompers, Liechty and Markam This Year

This is terrific news for those of us who are concerned that poor teachers remain ensconced in school while good teachers are laid off.

Judge to LAUSD: No Layoffs at Gompers, Liechty and Markam This Year
May 12, 2010

School Districts Have Flexibility in Making Layoffs in Order to Provide Equal Education to All, Ruling Says

Saying that the state’s education code allows school districts flexibility in laying off teachers in order to comply with constitutional requirements to provide equal education to all students, a Superior Court judge granted an injunction today that prevents the Los Angeles Unified School District from laying off teachers at Gompers, Liechty and Markham middle schools this year. The three schools, which primarily serve low-income students and students of color, saw their teaching corps disproportionately decimated by a round of budget-driven layoffs last year, causing their education efforts to fall below the state constitutional guarantee that all students will receive a basic education consistent with prevailing statewide standards.

“Today's landmark decision carries on the ideals of Brown v. Board of Education that no child may be deprived of the right to learn,” said Mark Rosenbaum, chief counsel for the ACLU of Southern California.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Bravo for the ACLU and Arnold Schwarzeneger for working to keep the best teachers

Wow--at last we have bipartisanship in California to get rid of the worst teachers. My respect for the ACLU has skyrocketed. They're not afraid to challenge the California Teachers Association!

Lawsuit: Layoffs hurt minority kids
John Fensterwald
The Educated Guess
Feb. 25, 2010

Regulations for teacher layoffs are a prime example of how interests of adults are put ahead of those of children, especially minority children. Now, that system, along with state budget cuts that set it in motion, will face a court challenge.

In a case with statewide implications, the ACLU of Southern California and other public interest and pro bono attorneys are suing the state and Los Angeles Unified, charging that teacher layoffs have savaged three low-performing, low-income middle schools. All three have been thrown into turmoil since between half and nearly three quarters of their teachers got layoff notices last year. Most eventually did lose their jobs because of rules that dictate that less experienced teachers must be the first to go, regardless of how good they are with students and how well they fit in the school.

The suit, filed Wednesday in Superior Court in Los Angeles, comes less than three weeks before school districts must formally notify teachers that they may be laid off next year. With Los Angeles Unified facing a $640 million deficit, thousands of teachers are expected to get layoff notices, including yet again, many remaining teachers at the three schools named in the lawsuit. The ACLU’s next likely step is to seek an injunction preventing disproportionate numbers of teachers from those schools from being let go...




Will we finally get effective and transparent teacher evaluations? I could forgive Arnold for a lot of his budget screw-ups if he accomplished this.

Bill would end layoffs by seniority
John Fensterwald
The Educated Guess

Proposals that Gov. Schwarzenegger made during his budget speech in January to weaken teacher tenure and seniority rights have finally taken bill form.

Republican Sen. Bob Huff introduced SB 955 on the governor’s behalf last week. Its chief provisions would be to give local school boards, instead of the Commission on Professional Competence, final say over firing teachers, and to enable districts to lay off teachers based on a district’s subject needs and teacher effectiveness, instead of by seniority.

The California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers will likely fight every piece of the bill. But a civil rights lawsuit filed by the ACLU and other public-interest attorneys against the state and Los Angeles Unified, challenging seniority-based layoffs, may improve chances of at least the seniority piece becoming law. That would be a major step forward.

The lawsuit, filed earlier this year on behalf of students at three low-performing middle schools, noted the constant churn of new teachers at these schools, where seniority rules make it next to impossible for principals to hire and keep teachers they want.

SB 955 would apply not only to layoffs; it would give principals more latitude in reassigning and transferring teachers. Passage of the bill would make it imperative that districts come up with more comprehensive and transparent teacher evaluations.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Student video asks why can't schools find a fair way to fairly evaluate teachers

How come bad teachers get to keep their jobs just because they've been around a long time, while bright, hardworking young teachers are laid off?

One reason is that there is currently no meaningful system to evaluate teachers.


Student's video puts school cuts on personal level

Los Angeles Times
Steve Lopez
June 26, 2009

David Vera took up an L.A. school board member's challenge, using images to portray the harm caused by slashed budgets. Education advocates hope his work gets a wide audience.

David Vera, 18, has his young heart set on becoming a film editor or an actor. So the challenge posted on the door of his film arts class at Monroe High School in the San Fernando Valley held obvious appeal.

...The challenge had come from Los Angeles Unified School Board member Tamar Galatzan...

His favorite teacher got a pink slip.

That would be Travis Aranaga, an ambitious young teacher in his third year and loving every minute of his job. Aranaga's parents were both teachers, and he always knew he wanted to follow them into the profession. He went and got two masters degrees and threw himself into the job at Monroe.

But none of that mattered. The school district based its job cuts on seniority alone, and Aranaga's neck was under the budget ax...

"That's a special student," said Barbara Avery, telling me Vera was a delight to have in class, and his French wasn't bad, either. "Every once in a while, you get a kid like that."

Avery agreed. "It's just horrible," she said. "Absolutely horrible."

There has to be a way for teachers, administrators, parents and students to fairly evaluate teachers, Avery said, so that when layoffs are necessary, experience is not the only consideration.

She expects to get some heat for advocating that sort of reform. She's Monroe's co-chapter chair of United Teachers Los Angeles, and the union has staunchly defended basing layoffs on seniority, not evaluations.

I should note that Avery and Aranaga hesitated before speaking their minds, something few of their colleagues are willing to do publicly.
But they felt it was important to do so, and Aranaga added that he felt "hung out to dry" by union leadership.

"I'm not saying old teachers are bad," said Aranaga, "but for every five good ones there's a bad one, and there's no way to get rid of those guys."

Avery said more than 20 Monroe teachers got layoff notices, and it appeared that roughly a third of them would actually lose their jobs.

"And some of those teachers are better than I could ever hope to be," said Aranaga. "In their first year, they're better than I can be."


Here are the videos. The winners are labeled. David Vera's is at the bottom, Monroe High School #4.
.
.
.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lopez26-2009jun26,0,1202557.column?page=3&track=rss