Two state senators — a Republican from Ridgefield and a Democrat from Medina — want to reform Washington’s public education in ways that are sure to cause controversy and complaints. But the ideas make sense and are worth exploring.
Senate Bill 5914 was introduced only last week in the Legislature and went before the Ways and Means Committee on Wednesday. So it likely won’t see much action this year, but as a conversation starter, the bill performs sublimely. And the recommendations from state Sens. Joe Zarelli, R-Ridgefield, and Rodney Tom, D-Medina, warrant close examination by lawmakers. Not only do the bill’s sponsors present a bipartisan approach, they also bring to the conversation a bulk of double-edged experience, Zarelli in finance as a budget expert and Tom in education as a member of the Senate’s Early Learning and K-12 committees. Their recommendations are:
Stop the “last hired, first laid-off” policy in public schools. This scheme pushes aside merit and ranks longevity as pre-eminent. Washington’s students deserve the best teachers … period. Sometimes those high-quality teachers will be seasoned veterans; sometimes they will be rookies. But to use experience as the sole deciding factor in who gets laid off is, to begin with, an insult to teachers.
Those teachers might not say this at a meeting of their union — the Washington Education Association — but we suspect that many, if not most, of them would love working in an environment that respects value. Currently, though, when school districts have to lay off teachers, newcomers are first out the door, and it often doesn’t matter if they just happen to be the best teachers in the school.
This seniority standard — essentially a form of tenure — is written into contract agreements between local teachers unions and school districts. Zarelli and Tom would change that. A four-tiered teacher evaluation system is being piloted in several districts around that state and, if it succeeds, certificated classroom teachers with the lowest evaluations would be first to have their contracts not renewed. That would be unfortunate for them, but not for their students, and not for taxpayers who deserve a decent return on their investment.
Assignment of teachers to schools in the lowest tier of the State Board of Education’s accountability index could not be made without each principal’s permission. In other words, districts could not shift underperforming teachers to underperforming schools. This would be an excellent tool in the effort to close the gap between high- and low-performing schools.
Principals could more quickly initiate termination of underperforming teachers (based on at least three years of results), with expedited school board review of that decision and any teacher appeal. Currently, it is difficult, if not impossible, for school districts to remove ineffective teachers from classrooms.
Salary bonuses to teachers who earn national board certification would end after two years if the teacher is not ranked in the top evaluation tier. It would make sense to insert this accountability measure into the equation.
Teachers would no longer receive bonuses for post-bachelor’s degrees beyond 45 credits. And teacher bonuses currently earned for each of the first 16 years of service would apply only for eight years. Zarelli and Tom cite national research that supports such a change, but WEA officials dispute that data and no doubt will fight this proposal ferociously.
But fierce opposition should not stop lawmakers from trying to improve our schools. We believe teachers want that improvement just as much as parents want it.
