Guest post: My school is closing

6/13/2013

The following comes from my friend and colleague, Kathleen Radebaugh. She is a great and wonderful teacher who is in a horrible situation due to the budget gap in the school district: her school is closing. Below she writes with passion and zeal. While I may not completely agree with her conclusion, I think it is worthwhile to read what she says.

---------

My school is closing.

My school is closing, and an entire generation of teachers is being destroyed.

I am a fifth-year teacher within the School District of Philadelphia. I am currently seeking employment in English at my third high school. My first high school turned into a Promise Academy and my current school is closing.

My school is closing.

It’s hard to say out loud and even harder to see it in print. A couple times throughout the second semester, I forgot that my school was closing. The freshmen needed to find out whether or not Romeo personified the falling action, the seniors needed their project papers to be edited, and I believe in my heart of hearts that I had the most talented players on my volleyball team I ever coached.

Yet, my school is closing, and I am currently seeking English positions through site selection.

Many of my friends are seeking employment outside of the School District of Philadelphia, because they were laid off.

It’s not fair.

In March and April, teachers at my school were given the option to fill out Right-to-Follow paperwork. That in itself was a difficult process. Do you follow the majority of your students to either Penn Treaty or one of the Kensington schools? Once you complete your paperwork, are you not allowed to site select? The CTE teachers had the opportunity to follow their students within the CTE track to Mastbaum. What if the school didn’t have the facilities to provide their CTE course like Building Management and Maintenance?

Now all of this Right-to-Follow paperwork is mute, because teachers were laid off.

In April, there were a couple meetings with our building representative, our school union representative, and two regional meetings with the School District of Philadelphia. The Right-to-Follow was comforting and promising. It made sense to many teachers who liked teaching in the diverse classroom of a school in Port Richmond and Kensington. There were many unanswered questions, but the major consensus surrounding the Right-to-Follow paperwork was clear. If you want to, you can follow your students to a couple of schools within the area.

It wasn’t until an article written by Kristen Graham in the Philadelphia Inquirer in the second week of April that expounded on the “doomsday budget for schools.” With a 304 million deficit, counselors, librarians, after school sports, secretaries, and summer school would be cut. In addition, 3,000 district employees including teachers could be let go.

It is unfathomable to operate a school without these imperatives. They are imperatives and legalities.

With this in mind, with all the financial problems facing the district and the reality that layoffs would occur before the school year is done, why seniority?

I know it’s a complicated issue, and I am only a fifth-year-teacher trying to find a position to teach English within my third school in six years. I have a lot to learn but why seniority?

My generation of teachers is being destroyed due to seniority.

Over the past couple weeks, I read a lot of longitudinal studies, case studies with quantified and qualified data, and newspaper articles from the Northeast region. I am trying to understand the union’s position on seniority-based layoffs.

In a policy brief written by researchers from the University of Albany, Stanford, and University of Virginia, seniority-based layoffs that are meant to meet budget shortfalls are more detrimental to students than a system that laid off the least effective teachers first (Boyd, 2011).

This means that teachers who are laid off due to a short number of years within a school district doesn’t mean they are unqualified or ineffective. It means they are young or didn’t teach within the school district for a long time.

There was a teacher laid off at my school that had taught for 12 years, but only taught within the SDP for three years.

It is not fair. We need to change seniority based lay offs because an entire generation of teachers file for unemployment, move out of the city, and leave this wonderful profession in which they are educated.

I am a young teacher, and I have many friends who are seeking employment because they have less than four years within the School District of Philadelphia. These teachers are effective, dynamic, and some of the best coworkers.

My argument isn’t that because we are young we are better. In addition, I am not blaming our union at all for the budget shortfalls. I just want to share my argument that teacher lay offs based on seniority isn’t the answer.

The teachers in my school who were laid off are young and very effective teachers. Why are we not focusing on their effectiveness and instead focusing on the seniority?

In short, they have no seniority. The might never have seniority due to this fixture. My generation is being laid off and there isn’t a valid reason for it.

15 Comments

Stephanie

6/13/2013 12:39:00 am

So if not by seniority, how would lay offs be determined? By performance? And who does the evaluating, the Principal? Is that better?

Steve

6/13/2013 12:40:30 am

If not seniority then what? Should it be a lottery? Should the principals choose? Should it be fire those with the highest salaries? Fire those with the lowest salaries? Teachers vote their peers out of the district? Fire everyone from the 'lowest performing' school?

When you're laying off 676 teachers is there any good way to choose? I have been laid off once and force transferred twice. Judging from the hire dates of my laid off colleagues, I was on the cusp of being laid off this year. But seniority isn't the problem. It's creating thousands of charter seats and pretending that if you do that you don't need to reduce the district size--a failure of the SRC. It's reduced funding at both the state and federal levels. It's the state not having paid full pension costs for a decade. Those are the things that are destroying a generation of teachers. There is no reason there should be mass layoffs in a school system with a stable population and a high attrition rate.

So it comes back to seniority being the best way to deal with this since there is no fair way that will somehow get rid of the worst teachers at once. Look at Brian's posts on value added statistics and teacher ranking by year. We don't have a great way to say "these are the 676 worst teachers in the district". This is horrible for everyone. I am losing friends just like you, but let's focus the blame where it belongs.

Andrew Saltz

6/13/2013 01:37:25 am

Kathleen,

I'm sorry for your school, students, and teachers. I agree with the majority of what you are saying (and would argue that I am in your "generation" of teachers).

If we can find a better way than seniority, I'm with it. But right now you have a lot of "advocates", many of whom were the ones pushing your school to destruction, who would gleefully replace seniority with "Student Academic Growth" - a word they use because the reality, "Test Scores", doesn't poll very well.

I'm for a better way to do staffing. I don't support replacing "bad" with "horrible". And I hope you are joining the fight to adequately fund our schools.

Rich Migliore

6/13/2013 01:38:21 am

Kathleen, I have to give you credit for writing the first well written opinion on that side of the issue.

The problem is that there is no fair and viable system for rating teachers across schools and across subject areas or even within schools. In the past, such principal centered evaluations were more often riddled with error and personal bias often based on improper motive. The "take care of my friends and punish my enemies" mentality has been an institutional illness for years and years.

The study you cite by Boyd is riddled with error itself and lacks research credibility.

The fact of the matter is that all of the teacher layoffs are unnecessary. The seniority provisions and last in first out (LIFO) provisions of the School Code were created only for the times when there are "reductions in workforce" because of budgetary factors.

The layoffs are a "choice" which is being made by those in power and authority. They are part of the macro and micro political games that are being played.

The PA General Assembly wrote the LIFO provisions into the School Code because it is the "least bad way of doing it."

Some day you will understand the "wisdom of our forefathers."

I have no present stake in this. I have 38 years experience with this stuff as a teacher, administrator and now, as an attorney and advocate for the best practices. Seniority and LIFO are protections from wrongdoing.

You will eventually be called back. They can not have school in September without calling the teachers back. Wherever you land, there will be really great kids who need a really great teacher just as much as any other really great kids anywhere.

We have all faced adversity in our professional lives and our personal protections are essential to a well functioning democracy and a well functioning public educational system.

Senior Teacher

6/13/2013 02:05:17 am

What your generation of teachers are experiencing and profiting from was established and fought for by senior teachers that you feel you should replace. know your place, if not for the senior teachers' years of struggle and activism on behalf of the profession, you would never have entered the field in the first place. Senior teachers secured all of the benefits you enjoy today through years of sacrifice and activism. When some teachers you work with began their careers, there weren't any prep periods, class limits, competitive salaries, or protections from punitive actions or nepotism. What have you done to better our profession? What sacrifices have you made? What makes you think you are a better educator than a senior teacher? When I choose a professional, be it a doctor, lawyer, or plumber, I don't consult with the youngest of least experienced of those professions, and I doubt you would either.

teach2k13

6/13/2013 06:04:59 am

Beyond brilliant. All comments to this article should be auto-replaced by your comment. I was also laid off, but I know better than to put my mugshot on Faces of the Layoffs, or to question the process that puts priority on seniority. yes...It may change in the future, but it is currently there for a reason. Surely I'm not happy to be laid off, but I was not surprised when the notice came across my doorstep with only a few (albeit, high-performing) years in the district. Of the students eligible to attend high school in my catchment, only about 18% attend public schools; whereas the remaining students attend magnets, special-admits, charters, behavioral facilities, etc. 18%!!! If you wanted to really change the face of public education, you would need to put a mandate on attending the school that is offered to you based on community, alone. This used to be its own set of checks and balances to dictate the type of student with whom you might interact on a daily basis. Obviously public\community-based schools are struggling to keep up because of the clear and present bias in the type of students that cross the threshold of their doors each and every day. These students are, by far, not unteachable. I taught many of them at a high level over the last few years. In fact, the real delinquent students are still in the minority, despite the aforementioned skew. But their numbers (public schoolers in general) are dwindling. A niche is being carved out by private entities for each and every group of students. I won't argue that the alternative schools to a better job, but it is a truth that we must at least acknowledge when looking at the future of education. Looking backwards to understand the history of the unions and looking forward to see a crystal clear plan of closing more public schools in the next two years, you should not be surprised by the layoffs, as unfortunate as they are. Instead, be reactive and proactive. If you were laid off, learn and understand how to 'play the game'. The process of getting certifications changes this year and ultimately becomes more time and cost prohibitive. Either you get your additional teaching certifications this summer or you have to take a slew of additional coursework. In the mean time, secure a job wherever you can find it. You aren't leaving the district on bad terms so give things a year or two to settle down, better your credentials and potentially come back if you so choose. Otherwise this is a trend on which your article, heartfelt as it may be, has little to no bearing on its eventual outcome.

rob

6/13/2013 02:33:38 am

I believe the best means for evaluating teachers is by peer review. I think there should be a 7 member panel (six teachers, one AP) each serving for 3 years - 2 new members every year. They will have an interview with every teacher about their professional goals, challenges, insights, ways to improve the school, etc, to learn more about who they are and their perspective and philosophy of education. There would also be 4 evaluations per year - 2 teachers each time making observations, once with just the principal (near the end) All teachers will know what is being evaluated - basically classroom management, student engagement, grade level appropriateness. There will also be 2 evaluations done by the students. This survey will be done via internet anonymously. The results of the interview analysis (done by all on the peer review committee) 4 classroom evaluations, and 2 student surveys will be put together in a document to be looked at by Principal. Every document should be available to the graded teacher and transparency is key. I think everyone in the building - except in some cases the administration - knows who the good teachers and bad teachers are. The problem is that the people in charge on making the decisions sometimes do not. I think you may find a correlation between the results of the evaluation process and test scores. Just my idea, I'd like others to comment and critique

rob

SamuelWylieCrawford

6/13/2013 03:21:55 am

" I think everyone in the building - except in some cases the administration - knows who the good teachers and bad teachers are. The problem is that the people in charge on making the decisions sometimes do not."

Rob:
This is, by far, the most insightful segment of your post. In fact, I would suggest that rather than some cases, IN MOST CASES, the administration is only segment of the building that does not know the difference between a good teacher and a bad teacher.
I think it is accurate to say, and rarely spoken on, that the weakest link within the SDP, is the administration within most of the schools. The reasons why are many, I am sure, and can be debated forever, but without a doubt, most AP's and many, many Principals are completely incompetent.
The notion that Principals within this District need more autonomy is probably the most preposterous suggestion put forth in the most recent contract negotiations and "reform" whims. The schools that succeed are the ones with strong, effective leaders at the top. Sadly, there are few of those that exist, at least here in the Philly SD.

Jane J

6/13/2013 03:36:37 am

Thank you for expressing your opinion. Teachers are not the only profession in which layoffs are done in order of seniority. In fact, ask many of the manufacturing employees around the country and they will likely agree with you about the fact that seniority just isn't fair when it comes to layoffs. What is the alternative? Self-employment looks better and better these days. Good luck to all of those laid off. I was there once and know it isn't fun. Unemployment is going to also cost the SDP money, and in the end, many of those employees will be called back before September. At least that is what happened in 2011.

SamuelWylieCrawford

6/13/2013 03:48:06 am

Although I have already made a comment with regard to the competency of SDP administration, I felt compelled to post directly in response to Kathleen's moving letter.
Kathleen,
The reason for seniority based layoffs is a result of a lack of a fair or honest way to go about doing so. I, too, was forced out of a school that I worked at for years and loved, when it became a Promise Academy. And although I am currently "safe" in this round of layoffs, who knows, maybe the next round will get to me.
Please, please do not be naive enough to think that school administrations would fairly or ethically choose who to layoff based on something such as "effectiveness".
One of the main protections our Union and collective bargaining ensures is that teachers, and other employees, cannot be cut loose based solely a principal's wishes.

Anne Tenaglia

6/13/2013 04:49:49 am

Kathleen,

I was in your shoes in the late 1970s/early 1980's. When I graduated from college, the head of the department told us there probably would not be jobs for us for 5-8 years. He was right. I had opted to teach in the city of Philadelphia because I knew that they would need teachers before the suburbs would. I was laid off 7 years in a row. Luckily, I was hired back each time, but not at the same position, and not before school began. In those years I taught Pre-K, K, Science, K again, and Grade 2. Eventually, I had outlasted many new hires and was able to not be laid off. Consider it paying your dues. Seniority is a valuable tool in this profession, especially in these times. If seniority rules didn't apply, Schools would only hire the least-experienced/lowest paid teachers. Once you got above a certain salary, you'd find yourself without a job. I have been in several school where that would definitely be the case. The principals in those school didn't care about the quality of instruction. There are many principals who don't have a clue about which teachers are good and which are hanging on by a thread. I hope you get rehired and eventually find your niche. I retired last year after 37 years and made a space for someone. Maybe the same will happen for you. Don't be bitter. Pay your does and it'll happen eventually.

Forman Bills

6/13/2013 11:53:33 am

While I don't advocate applying capitalist principles to public education, performance based teacher evaluations do make a lot of sense. Tenure will often breed laziness, and why pay more$$ for a sub-par, tenured body leading the class room? You get more bang for the buck and accountability with an effective evaluation program. It's not like the School District will magically have a ton of money in years to come. They need to be effective with their limited resources and retain the best teachers possible, regardless of the whether they've taught for 5 or 50 years.

Rich Migliore

6/13/2013 01:20:54 pm

May I ask you how you define "performance based?" How do you purport to measure performance?

History Teacher

6/13/2013 10:56:39 pm

Mr. Miglore,

First I'd like to say I've read and learned a lot from your comments and commentary on The Notebook. However, maybe you can answer this as a former administrator...Performance based evaluations are definitely not the answer to teacher evaluations and retention, but how in the world do you justify keeping the 20 yr teacher who does nothing but sit in their room, pushing paper, pen and textbook in front of students and literally have them do section and chapter reviews the entire class? When I started teaching, I taught next door to a teacher who did exactly that and if that had been this year, instead of 2006 when I entered, I'd be out a job and that teacher would be back to sit in front of a class to and I quote "get my last 2 years in so I can retire"

Being in a comprehensive HS I've seen the benefits of union protection but have also seen the incompetents it protect. How do we balance that?

Rich Migliore

6/14/2013 12:53:47 am

History Teacher: That is a good question. But first, let me clear: I am in favor of performance based evaluations. However, what we mean by performance needs to be clarified and defined. In reality, performance is a "judgment based on perceptions." Before anything can be measured or judged, it must be defined. My question about performance was really directed towards performance being measured by standardized tests alone.

As to the situation you described, teachers are rated by the principal who is the rating authority for teachers. All administrators should be visible every day in the halls and classrooms in a positive manner. They also should be reading lesson plans and doing both formal and informal observations. When a teacher is packing it in, it is the principal's and AP's professional responsibility to do a formal observation, and if unsatisfactory, there is a process for writing an "unsatisfactory observation" which includes a section for areas for improvement. What is legally required is "an opportunity to improve." A second unsatisfactory observation leads to an unsatisfactory rating and in the procedures of the district, the regional superintendent also does an observation. After two years of unsatisfactory ratings, the teacher can be removed for "incompetence."

If the teacher needs to be removed more quickly because he or she refuses to do the job, the principal or AP can write up the teacher for "repeated negligence" and can be removed rather quickly through "progressive discipline." I have done that a few times in my career and the other teachers in the school have always thanked me.

I have counseled out many teachers in my time, and I have done so in a very supportive and honest way. There is also a pre-written agreement which the district has whereby we can say to a teacher that he or she needs to agree to retire to prevent disciplinary action from occurring. I have also done that to one teacher in my time, and ironically, she complimented me for doing it "humanely."

The problem with rating teachers from best to worst is how to create a fair and unbiased performance based process. We do not have that now, and in our history, principals have often played games of favoritism and forced teachers out with improper motive.

The purpose of tenure, in the language of the PA Supreme Court, is to "prevent teachers from being subjected to unfounded charges" based on "improper motive" or "political activity." If any teacher is fairly evaluated, they can be removed.

One of the few revisions to teacher tenure which I would like to see, is that for the teacher who has packed it in, there should be a speedier process for removing them, but still giving them a fair due process.

But again, if it were not for the "reductions of workforce" which are "choices" made by the SRC to privatize public schools, these issues would not be so explosive.

We should spend more time and energy on creating a "professional climate" in our schools which is collaborative and collegial. Then, and only then, will we retain "the best and brightest" to remain in our profession.

A viable and strong "profession of teaching" is what is needed to promote "effective teaching" which serves our children best.

What are the "best practices" in your eyes?

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Guest post: My school is closing

Leave a Reply.

Author

Contact Me

Email Updates

Archives