Misnamed
the "Put the Kids First" initiative,
this would increase the length of time
a new teacher must spend on probation
from two to five years. It would
also allow school districts to terminate 'tenured' teachers
after two years of poor evaluations.
Everything
about this initiative is wrong, including
the way its proponents filed the signatures:
petitions were turned in on May 3 by
the governor, accompanied by children
removed from charter schools for the day
for that purpose.
The governor's proposal rests on two
false assumptions: that asking new teachers
to swallow five years with no employment
rights instead of two years will somehow
improve public education; and that it's
impossible to get rid of "bad teachers" once
they have 'tenure,' or permanent employee
status.
Today, nearly half of all new teachers
quit by their fifth year.
We lose these dedicated and idealistic young people due
to the difficulty of their jobs and
lack of support for new teachers in our
severely under-funded public school system,
piled on top of their low salaries. What
effect do you suppose it will have on
our ability to attract and retain good
young teachers if, in addition to these
challenges, they know that their job security
will be based entirely on the whim of
their principal for five long years?
What is 'tenure'? For one thing, 'tenure'
is a word that is never mentioned in California
law for K-12 teachers, and in the public
mind it is often confused with academic
tenure in higher education. But in K-12,
it is hardly a Supreme Court appointment.
It's simply the right
to a hearing before being fired, during which reasons
for termination must be presented.
Is this "due process" protection a hurdle
to getting teachers fired? Yes, and it
should be. We have "tenure" to provide
teachers with due process rights that
protect them against arbitrary and unreasonable
firing.
California law already provides
a system to fire teachers who are not
performing in the classroom. The Education
Code allows teachers to be fired for unsatisfactory
performance, unprofessional conduct, criminal
acts, dishonesty and conduct unfit for
associating with children, no matter how
long they have been on the job. That's
why the California School Boards Association–whom
we might imagine would support Prop 74–instead
opposes it.
In other words, Prop 74 is unfair and
unnecessary. This isn't education reform.
This is a vendetta against teachers.
Vote NO on Proposition 74.
