New York University's independent student newspaper, established in 1973.

Washington Square News

New York University's independent student newspaper, established in 1973.

Washington Square News

New York University's independent student newspaper, established in 1973.

Washington Square News

Tenure reform needed in California

Students have the right to challenge the obstinate tenure laws of their respective states that keep unqualified teachers in the public school systems. This is exactly what some students are doing in the state of California with the backing of telecommunications entrepreneur David Welch and his nonprofit organization Students Matter.

Last week, a group of students appeared in the Superior Court in Los Angeles to hear the case brought against the state of California regarding the state’s tenure laws for kindergarten through 12th-grade teachers. With the lawsuit Vergara v. California, the group is challenging rules that give permanent employment status to teachers after only 18 months of employment. The policy demonstrates how long and costly the process is to dismiss a teacher, particularly in a seniority-based system that relieves new teachers before older teachers when layoffs occur. Behind these stringent rules are powerful teachers’ unions who defend the  safeguards as a way to protect current teachers and attract new ones.

There is no adequate excuse for keeping ineffective teachers in the school system. John Deasy, the superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District, made the poignant point that the rules and regulations in California bar students from learning from the teachers they deserve. As such, these teachers must be let go. This past week’s trial marks a definite move in the right direction. Many other states have already taken concrete steps to change their education laws. Five years ago, states were prohibited from using student performance when evaluating teachers, whereas school districts in 29 states now use poor effectiveness as a criterion for dismissing a teacher.

If the trial against California is successful, the state should consider standards of poor effectiveness when deciding whether to dismiss teachers. While student performance is certainly an important consideration for school districts, there are many ways to assess whether a student does well in school. The abilities of the teacher are one among many.

A victory for the students and Students Matter could have far-reaching consequences not only for high school students, but also for university students. Although regulations are different for college professors, a successful verdict could certainly shift the discourse on the nature of tenure rules for both secondary-level teachers and university-level professors. The implications would extend to students of all ages and could prompt more effective teachers across the board.

If Students Matter wins the trial, it would be smart to consider the evaluation options hinging on poor effectiveness and on behalf of their teachers. Such a criterion, even if insufficient on its own, may well give California students the caliber of teachers they require and subsequently deserve.

A version of this article appeared in the Wednesday, Feb. 5 print edition. Brittany Sherman is a contributing columnist. Email her at [email protected].

View comments (1)

Comments (1)

Comments that are deemed spam or hate speech by the moderators will be deleted.
All Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

  • P

    PumpkinFeb 9, 2014 at 5:04 am

    Great article. But I do not think this is THE solution. With this sort of thinking, the zone schools of poor and uneducated neighborhoods would be teacher-less. Some outstanding teachers generally avoid teaching at institutions in poor, uneducated, or violent neighborhoods. If the principals of these schools fired the teachers when the students were performing (way) below average, they will soon realize that no teacher can fix this. It is an ideology. The people of these communities generally don’t have high goals and ambitions because they believe the American dream is not for them and that they are being oppressed and kept down by “the system”. My girlfriend once told me a story about her visiting a family in a poor neighborhood and how the woman’s son was looking to get disability rather than find a job. She made a note of this because he was still pretty normal and functional, regardless of being shot (which I do think is a good reason to get disability, but I think her point is a very good one). Others try to have more children so that they can receive a higher welfare check. What kind of condition will those children be living in? Are they our future lawyers and doctors? Statistics strongly suggest otherwise. A teacher can be amazing and her students can be the problem. That is why I think, when judging performance, many other factors need to be taken into consideration before blaming it on the quality of the teacher, not just student performance.

    Reply