RIF of DCPS teachers ($40million budget short fall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or maybe they are going to keep the cheaper new teachers and fire some of the older morse expensive and maybe less performing teachers?

Yup, that seems to be what's in the cards. Hire 900 new teachers (when no one is predicting any real increase in enrolloment) and then you can RIF the older teachers once school starts. I think this must be Rhee's Plan C. Plan A was get the union to sign on to eliminating tenure in exchange for higher potential salaries. Plan B was the unnamed threat that if the union wouldn't sign on there would be arbitrary dismissals without any promise of higher salaries. Plan C is screw seniority, we'll flood the system with new teachers we know we don't need, then, after they spend a month in the classroom. we'll declare that we have too many teachers and that we can tell that all the new ones are better than older ones.

Good plan, as some of the DCPS teachers that have been there for years are terrible. The only way to fix the system is to blow it up and start over.

Keep the good, get rid of the bad... seniority is a joke anyhow, as there is a marginal increase of returns - in improved teaching - for every added year of teaching perhaps after 5 or 6 years in the classroom. Renumeration then outstrips value after a period of time.

I am a much better teacher after ten years. Yes, I had love and enthusiasm when I began. Now I have best practices, reflective practice, wisdom gained through trial and error etc. etc. AND love and enthusiasm. I feel confident, happy, and still eager to learn and adapt.
I know what research says--and I don't belittle teachers starting out. They have great energy and can be amazingly effective. But there should also be teachers finishing up long careers in a school house, and all the teachers in between. You do realize that teachers imbue each other with ideas and insights? That some of the more long-standing teachers are the wise mentors and the beginners the energetic coaches? I would worry for you if you sent your child to a school with ONLY one 'type of teacher'-with regard to the seniority spectrum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good plan, as some of the DCPS teachers that have been there for years are terrible. The only way to fix the system is to blow it up and start over.

Keep the good, get rid of the bad... seniority is a joke anyhow, as there is a marginal increase of returns - in improved teaching - for every added year of teaching perhaps after 5 or 6 years in the classroom. Renumeration then outstrips value after a period of time.

What do you do for a living, wait tables? You're obviously unfamiliar with a professional environment or the concept of "institutional knowledge" would be familiar to you. Where exactly do think that comes from, if not experienced professionals?

[Anonymous]

It really sucks to start laying off teachers a few weeks into the school year and there's very little basis for evaluation of the new teachers after this short a period of time.

I'm so tired of Rhee's we have to destroy the village to save it mentality. If DCPS is filled with incompetent teachers, why can't they be fired for cause? She's had 2 years. And the news I've seen about who gets fired suggests that it's as likely to be critics as incompetents. At best, the process seems arbitrary and capricious. At worst, it seems vindictive.

And for all her talk about thinking only of the best interests of the children, why does Rhee create this scenario where, in essence, after a month or more in school, many children will be back to square one?

[Anonymous]

Last year our school had a ridiculously abusive and terrible teacher. It took her physically endangering students (she was the one who locked kids out of the buildings for 10 minutes at a time in 10 degree weather among other things). She was out (rubber roomed) for several weeks while it was investigated by the office of school security. They determined that the events (there were 2 separate things she was investigated for- both endangering and negligent) in question did happen, but since that "was all" there was , it was not enough to fire her. It was incredibly frustrating and disheartening. There is not a parent here that would ever let a sitter take care of your kids again after what she did- yet the teachers union protected her tooth and nail. She came back to the classroom. Fortunately, she left, but it was on her terms. I support Rhee doing whatever it takes to protect our kids, and make sure their teachers are competent, caring, talented, and professional.
My experience has been that it is very very difficult, if not actually impossible, to get rid of teachers in the current tenure situation.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Last year our school had a ridiculously abusive and terrible teacher. It took her physically endangering students (she was the one who locked kids out of the buildings for 10 minutes at a time in 10 degree weather among other things). She was out (rubber roomed) for several weeks while it was investigated by the office of school security. They determined that the events (there were 2 separate things she was investigated for- both endangering and negligent) in question did happen, but since that "was all" there was , it was not enough to fire her. It was incredibly frustrating and disheartening. There is not a parent here that would ever let a sitter take care of your kids again after what she did- yet the teachers union protected her tooth and nail. She came back to the classroom. Fortunately, she left, but it was on her terms. I support Rhee doing whatever it takes to protect our kids, and make sure their teachers are competent, caring, talented, and professional.
My experience has been that it is very very difficult, if not actually impossible, to get rid of teachers in the current tenure situation.

I remember your story from when you first told it and I also remember you unfairly blaming the union. Here is the earlier thread:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/38559.page

As you wrote then:

"The Principal has not submitted the incident reports she was required to do after this, and has not filed for previous incidents with the same teacher regarding safety concerns and mistreatment concerns. "

Throughout the earlier thread you displayed a very anti-union bias even while admitting that your problem was primarily with the principal. I assume that you understand that if that principal is still in place, it will be her deciding which teachers stay and which go. Given your previous experience with her, I doubt that is what you want to happen.

[Anonymous]

Well if Rhee manages to terminate only older teachers, the DCPS will eventualy lose more than 40 million dollars. Has anyone heard of age discrimination. Sure, by the time the matter get to court Rhee and Fenty may be history, but the taxpayers will get the bill. Rhee needs to find the right and legal way to terminate non-performing teachers. And, all teachers over the age of forty are not hasbeens as many of this forum would like to suggest. Nor, are young, bright bushy tale 22 year-old graduates the answer. I admit, I do not know the answer, but I do know that you can not say that I am getting rid of all the old people to make room for the younger more energetic ones. I believe godfather Nickels tried that with the attorneys at the Office of Attorney General. Not only did he have to bring back most, if not all the attorneys he riffed, the city had to pay out an unspecified amount of money due to the age discrimination claims. Some lessons are never learned, or some people just don't give a dam*

[Anonymous]

The school that this person speaks of does have a new principal this year. One that the majority of the school community has great faith in to make these hard decisions, as unfortunate as they are.
This incident and the multiple breakdowns that compounded it were very complicated. The former principal did drop the ball in a big way. However, once she picked the ball up the parents heard a lot of "my hands are tied . . ." This did give the impression that the union was protecting this teacher.
I think this parent understands the damage that an incompetent teacher can do to a child. If there are more teachers out there like this, it is frustrating to think that there is not much you can do about it. Possibly not even get them help and support they may need. I am not anti-union, just understand this particular incident and how frustrating it was.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Throughout the earlier thread you displayed a very anti-union bias even while admitting that your problem was primarily with the principal.

My problem was primarily with both. Generally I am pro-union. I believe, and my experiences ( I/my children have had more experiences with dangerous teachers who mistreat children and could not be let go) were, that the WTU does not act in the best interest of the children. Just out of curiousity, does the WTU represent teachers in charter schools?

[Anonymous]

My understanding is that in DC, charter school teachers are not union members.

I think the pay scale is also quite a bit lower. I know of a teacher moved from DCPS to charter and the rumor was her salary dropped by $6,000. This teacher was excellent but got caught last summer in the "if you're not highly qualified, you're fired" trap. Also rumored that her documentation for highly qualified was lost downtown at DCPS.

[Anonymous]

06:44 is partially correct.

The teacher's union holds no sway over DC Charter schools, so that even if teachers were union members in a DCPS school, if they move to a charter it makes no difference. The charters are not obligated to honor DCPS contracts with the union.

The pay scale is not necessary lower. It may be lower in some schools, however there is parity in others. In a few, it is my understanding that the contracts are extremely competitive and the pay may even be higher. Charters are allowed to write their own contracts, so pay scale is only one possible point of difference between them and DCPS. Benefits may also be different. Perks may be different. Hours and vacation may be different. And the requirements that the schools can make on the families who enroll are different (i.e., they may have to agree to certain codes of behavior, honor codes, and commit to a certain number of volunteer hours).

[Anonymous]

IMHO, if you have opted out of DCPS and are sending your child to a charter, then your opinions about how the WTU contract effects teaching in the school is simply theory. If you have children in DCPS , you may have a much more realistic (accurate ) idea of how the contract impacts the children.
I am the poster who was said to "have a very anti-union bias" and I will simply state that that is not true. I am a firm supporter of the unions as a general belief. I, however, have seen the damage that incompetent/dangerous teachers have inflicted upon children (not just my own) and so sadly, in this case, I feel absolutely solid in not being supportive of the union. I appreciate not being called "anti-union" or otherwise being against the workers. If forced to choose, and unfortunately with WTU we are, I am proudly pro-children.

I do not know why posters who have opted out of DCPS are so anti-Rhee. Clearly you were not satisfied with the DCPS offerings. Rhee is the first leader who has shaken things up enough to see real changes. And I say this as a lifelong DC resident.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:IMHO, if you have opted out of DCPS and are sending your child to a charter, then your opinions about how the WTU contract effects teaching in the school is simply theory. If you have children in DCPS , you may have a much more realistic (accurate ) idea of how the contract impacts the children.

Fair enough. Then, why don't you explain some of those ways? The example you have so far provided involved a principal not doing her job. That had nothing to do with the union.

Anonymous wrote:
I am the poster who was said to "have a very anti-union bias" and I will simply state that that is not true. I am a firm supporter of the unions as a general belief. I, however, have seen the damage that incompetent/dangerous teachers have inflicted upon children (not just my own) and so sadly, in this case, I feel absolutely solid in not being supportive of the union. I appreciate not being called "anti-union" or otherwise being against the workers. If forced to choose, and unfortunately with WTU we are, I am proudly pro-children.

I do not know why posters who have opted out of DCPS are so anti-Rhee. Clearly you were not satisfied with the DCPS offerings. Rhee is the first leader who has shaken things up enough to see real changes. And I say this as a lifelong DC resident.

Simply shaking things up and creating change are not satisfactory signs of success. As for Rhee, if she would spend half the time that she spends on PR on actually working with the teachers, I don't think her relationship with them would be nearly as bad. I fear that this administration's goal is the privatization of as much of the public education system as possible. Contracts with Teach for America and the like will replace the WTU contract. More services will be outsourced. Schools are being closed and sold off to developers (despite laws stating that they should be offered to charter schools first). Don't forget that Rhee's only teaching experience was in a for-profit experiment in a public school (one that ultimately failed). While Rhee admits that she struggled as a teacher, press clippings from that time show that she had already honed her PR skills.

[Anonymous]

Charter schools ARE DC public schools. They are all part of the same system. You haven't opted out of the system by selecting one.

I think perhaps you may not be "anti-Union" but anti the Washington Teachers Union. I am also a lifelong DC resident (and a product of the DC public school system) Yes, Michelle Rhee has made enormous strides (mostly in the facilities management/improvement area). With this RIF, She is simply gaming the system same as the WTU is.

I haven't noticed an overabundance extra teachers at my children's school. Are they all just waiting in the wings somewhere to rush in and take the place of these older, fired teachers? What can I expect to see on the ground in terms of staff cuts (probably nothing as i live in Northwest, my guess is most of the cuts will be in less affluent neighborhoods where parents may not feel as empowered to complain)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Charter schools ARE DC public schools. They are all part of the same system. You haven't opted out of the system by selecting one.

I think perhaps you may not be "anti-Union" but anti the Washington Teachers Union. I am also a lifelong DC resident (and a product of the DC public school system) Yes, Michelle Rhee has made enormous strides (mostly in the facilities management/improvement area). With this RIF, She is simply gaming the system same as the WTU is.

I haven't noticed an overabundance extra teachers at my children's school. Are they all just waiting in the wings somewhere to rush in and take the place of these older, fired teachers? What can I expect to see on the ground in terms of staff cuts (probably nothing as i live in Northwest, my guess is most of the cuts will be in less affluent neighborhoods where parents may not feel as empowered to complain)?

I think the PP's point is that whereas charter schools are public schools and yes, they are in DC, they are nonetheless NOT part of DCPS. By definition, right? As they are independently chartered. Ergo, if you have opted for a DC Charter school, then you have opted out of DCPS. Michelle Rhee is not the Chancellor of YOUR school - your school has its own "head of school" or "director" and that person is analogous to Michelle Rhee. And BTW, NO - the Principal is (usually) not the Director or Head of School. It is a completely separate job. Just as the Principal of School Without Walls is NOT the Chancellor of DCPS.

This is, incidentally where OSSE, Fenty, and the City Council make so many boneheaded mistakes with respect to dealing with charter schools. They seem to be under the (mis)impression that if they simply convey their information/mandates/budget cuts/demands to the PCSB (Public Charter School Board) that they have somehow adequately fulfilled their obligations. WRONG! The PCSB is not an umbrella governance organization for charter schools. If you want to have a dialogue with the charter schools you need to talk to EACH head of school as if you are talking to Michelle Rhee.

Anyway, carry on...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:06:44 is partially correct.

The teacher's union holds no sway over DC Charter schools, so that even if teachers were union members in a DCPS school, if they move to a charter it makes no difference. The charters are not obligated to honor DCPS contracts with the union.

The pay scale is not necessary lower. It may be lower in some schools, however there is parity in others. In a few, it is my understanding that the contracts are extremely competitive and the pay may even be higher. Charters are allowed to write their own contracts, so pay scale is only one possible point of difference between them and DCPS. Benefits may also be different. Perks may be different. Hours and vacation may be different. And the requirements that the schools can make on the families who enroll are different (i.e., they may have to agree to certain codes of behavior, honor codes, and commit to a certain number of volunteer hours).

Charter schools can make no binding requirements on families that enroll; they can only suggest codes of behavior. For all intents and purposes they are public schools. I wish they could; it would be great!