Unions, Tests, Accountabilty, LIFO

I am reading a book by Terry Moe, “Special Interest” and part way through, I just had to blog about it. This kind of connects to my prior post,http://3rseduc.blogspot.com/2011/10/cheating-is-crime-you-will-be-punished.html

Should teachers be held accountable for student achievement? Of all union teachers surveyed, 40% support this notion and 60% oppose it. Of the rare breed of non-union teachers, 52% support this and 48% do not. So I got to thinking, well, what do I think?

I would have to abstain from answering in yes or no format. See, student achievement is part of teacher success, just like patient satisfaction and non-death rates is for doctors, for example. As much as I hate to make a business comparison to schools and children, they are a teacher’s client and product so there should be some accountability.

A similar question on the survey was, “use tests to measure achievement?” with a support/do not support response. Of all union teachers, 19% support it and 81% oppose it, and of non-union teachers, 29% support ad 71% oppose. The author argues that student achievement, especially via test scores, does, and should, matter. Teachers should be held accountable.

I say…kind of. I argue that standardized tests only test a certain amount and kind of knowledge. Tests have some validity, but the current weight given on just one test is ludicrous. I feel that the tests do not assess critical thinking, creativity, innovation… most 21st century skills, and those skills that colleges and employers look for and find lacking in today’s youth. Therefore, a blended model seems ideal, one that includes test scores (because yes, it is important to know if Billy knows how to add, how to spell, and certain common knowledge facts like what are the Bill of Rights, why does the sun rise, etc), and other “assessments”. By that I mean portfolios, projects, essays, presentations- things you would see and use outside of school. Yes, adults take assessments in the workplace but they do more than that. And skills and intellect are more than just a test.

Also, we need to look at skills growth over time. An argument I hear teachers use, which I agree with, is that it is unfair to judge a teacher by his or her students. What I at least mean by this is, let’s say you are Teacher X and PVE, Prison View Elementary. Your children are all on free lunch, half are learning English, and they are on average, 2 grades below grade level. Due to poverty, mobility is high and so you end the school year with only 1/5 of the students you started with. Ok let’s also look at Teacher Y at PME, Prestigious Millionaire Elementary. Your students take IB courses, have private tutors, no one has free lunch, all speak other languages but that is due to private lessons to learn a language aside from English and…you get the point. Testing season comes and goes and X’s students at PVE are skewed so that 85% are basic and below. Y’s students at PME are skewed so that 85% are proficient and above. So with the logic of testing and teacher accountability in place, X is fired and Y gets a bonus. Is that fair?

But on the flip side, can teachers solely blame society’s ails on student performance? I am the first to notice demographics, a culture that does not value education, etc. It is my nature as a sociologist and data person. These are indeed HUGE factors in performance. We do need to work in changing our culture to value education, we need poverty to dwindle, blab la bla. I agree. BUT a teacher should have SOME accountability. First, she/he should be held accountable via test scores (and my blended model of other “assessments”). But it should not be via raw scores or percent proficient, but rather, growth. If Teacher X has 5 students who all scored 25% correct at the end of last year, and then under her guidance and teaching, scores 55% this year, shouldn’t there be some praise? Instead of our current and proposed models, saying “hey, X, those 5 kids are still “basic” and not the NCLB necessary proficient, bad-soundung buzz, fail, you are fired” they should praise growth. And Teacher Y, whose 5 students which scores 59%, basic, last year, and under her guidance scored….hmm… 60%, yay, proficient this year, should not be rewarded for “more proficiency” when the growth was only 1%, statistically invalid.

Culture, life at home, etc is certainly a large factor in educational attainment. A teacher cannot perform miracles on 100% of students. But then I think of Shanti Bhavan in India, which takes the Untouchables- kids way worse off than our worst at risk students, and educates them and guess what? They do great in school and become professors, engineers, doctors. Above all odds. Because of a teacher. But this cannot be quite replicated in America. Why? If our kids fail school, they will just go sell drugs or go on welfare. They will still have a home (perhaps a rented trailer, but it is a home nevertheless), food via EBT (you can get filet mignon and éclairs!), a tv, a cell phone, clothes….so why get an education, work your butt off, to buy the same lifestyle? In India, for these untouchables, without an education they face true dire poverty, starvation, death. So that is a motivator. However, I do argue the case that if Shanti Bhavan can do what they do, we, us American educators, can do something. We need to be held somewhat accountable because hello, we’re educators, educating. If we can’t at least help some kids succeed, why the &&%$ are we in the classroom?

But of course teachers in general will never support accountability based on student performance of any kind. Why? Unions. Unions were initiated to protect against the rare cases of abuse, i.e. 14 hour days without a break, parents suing over use of “emotionally damaging” red correcting pens, etc. Worker’s rights laws now exist, in and out of unions, to protect from this. However, unions today have gone beyond that and into protecting jobs at all costs. A teacher can cheat or even worse, physically harm students and keep a job ,or at least remain either in the classroom, or on paid leave, for years until the union can justify ridding of them. So of course teachers want no accountability because that could be an eventual threat to their job security. But how can they be so selfish? To let job security trump a child’s education?

Also, no one seems to mention the disposables. The teachers that are pre-tenure. They pay union dues but have little to no protection. Due to LIFO, they are the first to be let go in a budget crisis. Maybe their test scores are equal or better compared to the neighboring classroom, but merely because of (lack of) seniority, they’re gone. They don’t have to molest children to be placed on paid administrative leave for two years. No. They don’t have to do anything, they could be a model teacher, and they’re let go without cause. But because they’re new and thus inexperienced, dumb, second class citizens, who cares? They aren’t the great ones, the master, tenured teachers. They haven’t worked their way up, so who cares about them? And if they get laid off, better them than me. A common mentality which I have actually heard teachers discuss is, “no I won’t cut my pay for the probationary staff to keep their jobs. I need my full income, and at least it is not me losing my job. Besides, they’re new teachers, so they’re not as good at teaching as I am. So I deserve to keep my job.”

The (non-existant) Teaching Job Market and the Push for Lies

Stated at http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2010/12/06/top-industries-hiring-in-2011/, Teachers are still needed, teacher shortage, crisis blah blah blah feed me more lies. Ok, to be more professional here, I'll provide an excerpt;

"While many districts have laid off teachers, opportunity remains in inner cities, says Ryan. Cities such as Memphis are hiring teachers ($45,914) with just a six-week bootcamp training. You need a bachelor's degree to qualify for such programs, she notes.

"You used to need to get a teaching certificate in most states," she says. "Now, you can find a teaching job without one."

Ok, sorry, my professionalism must go out the door as rage steps in. In what freaking world? I have applied to at least 50 jobs in my home state plus a handful in Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, Texas, Illinois to name a few. I have three education credentials, a Master's, and experience (and not just in say, 3rd grade, but all grades, all types of schools.) I have had ONE count it ONE interview and no job offers. I applied to a V. Principal/ A. Principal job and was told they had over 200 QUALIFIED applicants. That means a MA, Teaching credential, Admin Credential, 3-5 years teaching experience and at least one year Admin experience.

I am quite convinced the "powers that be" or at the very least, teaching colleges, are perpetuating this "teacher shortage crisis" so that more people enroll in their teacher colleges and thus the colleges profit. DO NOT BELIEVE THEIR LIES!

Ok, you may say, there are teaching shortages, I mean special ed is one, right? Wrong. Yes there are quite a few postings but the job market is tight there too. I have a friend with a credential for mild-moderate special ed and moderate to severe, plus a MA, and 8 years experience. She is well liked in her district. She was considering moving and applied to many many positions and had only one interview and no job offer.

I was reading the local newspaper, the letters to the editor part and encountered this,
"Take it from a former teacher laid off due to circumstances beyond my own control. The 99 weeks is pure agony...and on top of it was unable to find another teaching position due to the current status of our economy and school district problems.

I looked for work every day I was able, to no avail. "

Well, at least I am not alone here. I am actually thinking of contacting districts to ask them how many qualified applicants they get, especially for teaching because few have Admin. credentials but many have solely a teaching credential so, are the numbers in the thousands? I'm sure the districts won't tell me but I hope they do. I'd love to dispel this myth and uncover the truth of a very tough job market once and for all.

On a side note, my mother brought to light the fact that my speaking up about this, LIFO, etc can cost me jobs. Yes. But well behaved people rarely make the history books. We teachers have been silent far too long and someone must take the torch, sacrifice all, for the good of mankind. I have the torch in hand.

Hi, I'm your new teacher, Mrs. Manson-Hitler

Okay I might as well call myself Manson-Hitler as that's what many educators would want to call me if I expressed my true feelings. so here goes....as one of my students would say, "bring it on haters!"

1. unions...ok I'm part of CTEN- California Teacher's Empowerment Network but that's more a support group than what a current union is..and its free. You have to pay dues in my state and those without knowledge i.e. me in my first year as a teacher, don't know you can say no to the union....they make it seem you must join or no job for you. But if you have to pay regardless so you may as well join. But see they don't represent you the first two years (since you're not tenured and considered a temp employee) so you're wasting money towards protecting worse teachers than you, ones that kept their job- you pay for them to keep their job as you lose yours in a layoff. Oh and how you have no say where your dues go politically...what if you're diabolically opposed (ok a bit extreme of a term there...) to what you're funding? Too freakin' bad....pay up! So I've paid two years of dues to fund politics that I feel actually harm people but I digress...

2. collective bargaining....hours and layoffs...I work at a non-union school (egads) and it's a charter (double egads....see told you I'm evil) so no colletive bargaining. I took a personnel course for my MA (which was all about unions and nothing much about personnel, go figure) and had to review contracts etc and wowza... it explains why in high school I recall one of my teachers there from 6:45-2:00 daily on the exact dot....school hours were 7:00-1:45, teachers had to be there 15 min before and after. She NEVER took home one single piece of work and would only help students during school hours. She was the union rep for the school and knew her contractual hours and obligations and let me tell you, the students suffered because her teaching wasn't stellar and papers were graded eons after they were turned in because, well, contractually speaking she was not to work on lesson planning or grading "after hours". At my school we have teachers there 2-3 hours after school quite often. Yeah it "sucks" but at the same time we have very passionate teachers doing amazing things in the classroom, where they can actually begin to fill the many roles society piles upon us- staying after school that long allows them to not just have great lessons (individualized!) but make the classroom cute and cozy, buy snacks for hungry students, tutor after hours, have sports and art clubs, collaborate with staff, help families, you name it.
Oh and layoffs.... so I was in that personnel course and the state as you know is in the hole and there are layoffs like mad. Most 1st-2nd year "temps" are fired...errr....laid off, let go, RIF'ed. Some tenured teachers with the least seniority are even "let go" in the harder hit districts. This has to happen due to budget cuts, yes, but is it fair? Some "crappy" teachers with ten years tenure stay while that great 2nd year teacher is let go. And certainly whoever is let go loses income and may not be able to support their family which is quite sad. So in our class the teachers said their district had proposed letting go of staff and yadda yadda, everyone was tenured so they just hoped class size would not increase and budget cuts would end soon. But they wanted some solution to ending it and I said, keep good non-tenured teachers and do a 5% salary cut across the board. Oh Lordy I seriously thought I'd get jumped, as the looks of disdain, disgust, hatred in their eyes was something to be seen. They said they could NEVER survive off such a salary, they EARNED it through education and years of service and teachers NEVER make enough. (Ok yes GOOD teachers are grossly underpaid...but that's another story). I said, hello, I make less than your district's beginning teacher salary, after 5 years experience in my charter and I'd like more money but I survive. I cut back our cable service, mow my own lawn, etc. And I said, if you do the 5% cut NO ONE loses their jobs, NO ONE is out on the streets....thought I'd appeal to their emotion as no one wants to see a co-worker homeless right? WRONG. They actually had the audacity to say, essentially, better them than me. They said they would rather non-tenured staff lose their jobs than they lose 5% of pay. They had seniority and deserved it and someone has to make sacrifices (just not them.) They actually supported the notion of watching fellow co-workers lose their jobs, homes, whatever, instead of a mil pay cut for themselves. I was livid. And these "caring" people work with our children? As role models? Wow.

3. Experience, education, seniority..... Years of experience and education does not make the teacher. Then again a lay man doesn't either. However...my husband has taught some classes at church and done training in his career and if he were my teacher, I'd be amazed. I'd want to come to school and I'm not saying this because he is my husband. He has passion, charisma, knowledge, "fire" in his teaching. He gets people motivated, interested, thinking... I think I'm a good teacher but actually, he might be better, You need some pedagogy, history, psychology of learning to teach, and some practice etc that the education programs offer as I've seen knowledgeable people in non-public school environment try and teach and they can't handle a classroom and they seem clueless as to their clientele, so everyone needs to know how to teach. But knowing how to teach isn't all. That piece of paper called a credential really means nothing. I think of a principal I knew....she had a teaching and admin credential and MA degree so really qualified right? She gave K-3 kids bazookas (the instruments not the weapon) in an assembly. At the beginning. On a snowy no-recess outside day (on the third day of no recess.) Right before the holidays. Total mayhem and she tried to gain control but hello, 300 little kids, pent up, ready for Santa, with bazookas? Come on....you'd think a MA degree would afford the common sense to say hmm let's give the bazookas out at the end of the day.
And seniority....just because you've been there forever doesn't mean you're a great teacher. I've known teachers there for eons that read newspapers in class and let the class run wild. Meanwhile the amazing teacher next door, in her second year of teaching, is on the chopping block. Ok I've also known some horrible new teachers that also throw in the towel and let the class run wild (and I've been a part of suggesting to the admin that they go elsewhere) and great senior teachers. But seniority is ludicrous. We tell kids not to "hold place in line" but seniority is kind of like that, first come first serve. I have been "let go" twice due to lack of seniority. This makes my resume sub-par and usually tossed aside as who would want to hire someone who only lasted at a school for one year..twice? Yet I know I'm not alone.

Oh there's more evil ideas in my head but that's for another time.