Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's announced plans to give school districts the "flexibility they need to retain new, talented teachers" will not come soon enough for this year's round of layoffs -- as hundreds of teachers this week are expected to receive pink slips based on their tenure, not on the quality of their teaching.
The Education Committee last week rejected a proposal that would restrict districts from only considering years of service when making layoff decisions, instead opting to wait for a model teacher evaluation to first be created.
"Given the fact that we know there are districts that lack robust evaluative systems... it's hard to see how this is the time," Rep. Andy M. Fleischmann, D-West Hartford, and co-chairman of the Education Committee, said before voting against the proposal. "This would allow for senior teachers, who may be good teachers but expensive to a district, to become particularly vulnerable to layoff by a district that is focused on dollars during these tough fiscal times."
In a review of more than half the school districts in the state, 77 percent used seniority as the sole or primary factor when making layoff decisions, the state's largest teachers union told lawmakers last month.
"We should not be allowing seniority to be the only factor," said Sen. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton and ranking Republican on the Education Committee. "We have hundreds of teachers being laid off and we should require a more equitable measure."
A recent survey conducted by the education reform group ConnCAN shows 89 percent of the participants felt layoff decisions should not be only decided by how many years a teacher has been in the classroom.
Last year, 1,500 teachers were laid off and education officials are expecting a similar number to be let go this year.
And while the American Federation of Teachers, Malloy and the co-chair of the education committee acknowledge something needs to change so districts can retain great new teachers, all say it is too soon to make that shift this year.
As part of its Race to the Top bid last year, the state committed to creating a model evaluation system that will include student outcomes, but it will not be complete and ready for districts to consider using until July 2013.
Lawmakers are considering pushing up that deadline by a year -- to July 2012 -- and also requiring it include a 100-day dismissal process for teachers who fail the evaluation.
"The process can go on for a very long time and it's very expensive for the boards of education to dismiss a teacher," said Sharon Palmer, president of American Federation of Teachers-Connecticut. "If the teacher does not improve in one school year, then that's it, they will have 100 days' notice."
Malloy is in favor of the 100-day deadline and bumping up the deadline.
"I support tenure but I think the AFT recommendations are a good way to go at reforming it. It is taking into consideration not just how long someone has been teaching but what they've been teaching with excellence as well," he said. "I think it's a start. I think it's a very bold and brave move on their part."
But the proposal has its critics, including the state's other major teachers' union, the Connecticut Education Association.
John Yrchik, CEA's executive director, said the proposal "would impose a one-size-fits-all approach to teacher evaluation. This is not necessary and not productive."
But Patrice McCarthy, general counsel of the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education, said it would just be an option for districts to use and not a requirement.
"We need a good evaluation system out there," she said. Last in, first out "is a major issue as teachers face layoffs."
Alex Johnston, leader of the New Haven school-reform group ConnCAN, said even absent a model evaluation being ready, he is disappointed districts won't have the ability to retain new teachers.
"Everyday we are seeing more and more news of more layoffs. The sooner we fix this the better," he said.
At Capital Preparatory Magnet School in Hartford the impact is real, says principal Steve Perry, who is frustrated the state is waiting for an evaluation system to be in place.
"Every other job allows the boss to decide if their employees are doing a good job -- except in education," he said. He said the current system has restricted him from hiring interested teachers from other districts -- including the "teacher of the year" from South Windsor -- because they know they will be the first to be fired when layoff decisions are made. "That's just crazy. There's a wall around this city."
So Toni, what's the equitable measure? People with less experience cost less so that's it?
This is a tool that every School Board would love to have. Got older, expensive teachers or teachers with experience who are troublesome Union agitators? With this you can purge the ranks every 8-10 years, cut costs, with younger staff keep health care costs lower, get rid of uppity employees and help impose the "low wages for Americans" model that Republicans like Boucher love so much.
Whether or not it improves education is another question but don't we have too many
Read MoreAs the resources of Connecticut state dwindle (for that matter any other city or state or even the federal government), and the layoffs is the only way to balance the budgets of the states and the cities (and in some cases this will be a problem even in private sector), there will be fights within the ranks of workers as to who should be dismissed first. In other words, there will be cannibalism galore and the weakest will be the senior teachers and workers against whom the younger generation will gang up by saying that they are weeding out the
Read MoreWhat is completely missing from the discussion is what is in the best interests of students?
How can both the left and the right defend tenure-based layoffs? How can either side tolerate the terrible teacher evaluation systems we currently have in place?
Why is it so hard to get people to acknowledge that laying off experienced teachers is bad, laying off new teachers is bad, but laying off poor teachers is good? And why won't anyone take a serious look at how to identify and retain good teachers?
The best interests of students is and should always be a family affair (not just of a nuclear family, but of the whole family) -- first and foremost. A proper family orientation in creating and inculcating proper social and ethical moorings, and good and hard work ethics and habits will always keep a student on a straight path, to scale greater heights easily in his life. This is the fundamental foundation in the upbringing and growth of a child, and if it is weak, in any sense, the schools can not remedy it at all, notwithstanding the cockamamie theories introduced
Read MoreThe LIFO system is insidious and self-perpetuating. The old guard at the unions abhor anything other than seniority based lay-offs because when the newbies leave the system, the teaching corp. loses people who are more energetic, more open to innovation, and more willing to lay down their swords and put aside the US vs. THEM mentality that has enveloped education politics and policies for half a century. These young teachers are not good for business.
So we haven't yet designed a comprehensive evaluation system yet? Ok, so how about at least using some basic, reliable, and pertinent data that
Read MoreJeff, how many teachers are taking numerous days off to lengthen a weekend? Do you know? What do these reviews entail? The anti-union schtick simply muddies the waters.
Throwingcurves, the best interst of the students is foremost to have experienced teachers who are quality teachers. There is no doubt that districts would use the bottom line to determine which teachers to keep. Adamowski, the patron saint of reform, availed the district to Teach for America grads because he sees teachers as chattel.
The problem is there is very little in the way of valid evaluation of teachers. What is
Read Moreactually the waterbury paper did a multi part article on teacher absenteeism on Monday/Friday. This was in 2005- they have tightened up on this but here are the numbers-sorry- thanks google
http://forums.youthrights.org/archive/index.php/t-3326.html
Evaluations are not that hard to develop. Why hasn't that been done in the past? Data can be easily extracted from evaluations which can be used in decision making. Why isn't it being done?
If health care professionals can be readily evaluaated, why not teaching professionals? The JCAHO requires health care facilities to conduct competencies - we should expect teachers to be held to high standard reviews as well.
What is the fear if a teacher is good at their job? Why wouldn't those good teachers want to rid the system of the bad ones?
Redladyblustate: Have you ever worked with, let alone devise, a fair, true, wholesome, and equitable evaluation instrument that is both subjective and objective oriented, and that had incorporated all the needed parameters (how many?), so that the data so collected can not be distorted and or terribly misinterpreted and misapplied, by any devious and selfish administrator and his underlings (that would include most of the time your own peers)? Please note that there are statistics, and more statistics, and then lies. Even fair and true statistics could always be interpreted or misinterpreted to promote or oppose any point of view.
Read MoreAm I to understand that the profession that is responsible for teaching and evaluating our children can't figure out a way to evaluate themselves?......explains a lot.
RUsh10M...You appear to be confused. You stated:
"Am I to understand that the profession that is responsible for teaching and evaluating our children can't figure out a way to evaluate themselves?......explains a lot."
Pretty silly. In the teaching profession, you would be evaluated by ADMINISTRATION....not your peers.
In many/most cases, ADMINISTRATION has never stepped foot into a classroom.
Think about it.