Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Lately at Illinoize
Next Post: Marion team strikes out with commission
Posted in:
Scott Reeder, the author of the Small Newspaper Group’s The Hidden Cost of Tenure series asked to respond to the Illinois Federation of Teacher’s response. I figured what the heck. Just means I don’t have to come up with my own stuff.
When I began gathering information for this series, I interviewed a union leader and asked, “Why do tenured teachers so seldom get fired?â€
The response I received went like this: Show me the data that says that.
Of course there is a good chance this leader knew no one tracked that information. But it was a well taken point none-the-less.
So during the next six months I:
• Filed 1,500 Freedom of Information Requests with all 876 school districts to get data on evaluations and teacher remediations.
• Waded through every dismissal case involving any Illinois tenured staff member in the last 18 years.
• Conducted one of the largest media document reviews in the history of Cook County Courts.A 100 percent response rate was achieved from every Illinois school district contacted.
I am going to respond to Mr. Comerford’s comments one at a time.
Sixty-five percent of school districts have successfully dismissed a tenured teacher. The tenure process simply gives teachers due process rights when there is a dispute.
This statement is false. Only 7 percent of Illinois school districts have even sought to fire a tenured teacher and of those cases the school district has succeeded in having a state hearing officer approve the dismissal only 65 percent of the time.
In many cases, tenured teachers resign before a dismissal hearing is held. That data is not tracked by the ISBE, giving a misleading picture of the number of teachers actually removed from the classroom.
The focal point of the series is whether the 1985 Illinois school reforms have brought greater accountability into the classroom. Teachers have always been able to quit their jobs. Is Mr. Comerford’s point that more ineffective teachers are quitting now than before the 1985 school reforms? If so, show us the data.
School administrators are required by law to be trained in proper evaluation procedures. There is no reason for an administrator not to give a bad evaluation to an employee who deserves one.
Only 1 out of 930 evaluations of tenured teachers resulted in an unsatisfactory evaluation, and only 50 percent those who receive unsatisfactory marks leave the profession. If a teacher gave nothing but A’s to all of her students for 10 years straight one could either decide:
• She is teaching nothing but brilliant, hard-working pupils.
• Something is terribly amiss with her standards.I’ll let commonsense dictate which option is correct.
The four-year probationary period for teachers allows ample time for administrators to decide which employees to retain. Nearly half of teachers leave the profession in the first five years of employment.
This is perhaps the most disingenuous comment of all. Both major teacher unions are lobbying aggressively to cut the probationary period in half. If it is a good thing, why do want it shorter?
The IFT does not support keeping bad teachers in the classroom but believes strongly every teacher has a right to a fair hearing.
I don’t doubt that both teacher unions are concerned about children. But they have an obligation to their memberships to provide vigorous, competent defenses to their members in trouble.
Legal fees for most dismissal cases are less than half of the $100,000 figure used in the newspaper article. Dismissal hearings usually last 2-3 days. Well documented cases take even less time for an attorney and the cost is even lower.
According to whom? If one were to average the costs experienced by school districts who have hired outside legal counsel, it may well exceed that. Geneseo school district has spent more than $400,000 on cases involving a teacher who was dismissed. An informal survey of education law firms put the average in the neighborhood of $100,000. And that does not count the salary of the replacement teacher while the case is pending or the back pay awarded in the cases the school districts lose. Monticello education labor lawyer T.J. Wilson tells his clients to expect to spend at least $70,000 in a dismissal case. Attorneys in the Chicago area charge significantly more.
In 1997, the IFT supported legislation that reduced the remediation period from 1 year to 90 days. The IFT also supported legislation requiring continuing professional development for teachers that is mandatory for them to keep their certification.
Both of these things strike me as accurate. But the series never said otherwise.
The Cicero case that the reporter cites involved a school employee, not a classroom teacher, who worked in multiple classrooms and was not supervised adequately. The article implies that the dismissal process for the employee stretched out over seven years. This is not true. As soon as the district attempted to dismiss the employee, she resigned. The case did not go to hearing. Tenure played no role in this case.
The story correctly identified the person as a tenured staff member. The superintendent quoted said this employee had a long-term absence problem – off and on for seven years. The superintendent indicated that the situation reflected a pervasive problem – a lack of accountability.
The reporter attempts to bury the fact that the assistant principal in East St. Louis was acquitted. Later, when DNA testing proved the allegations, the district fired the employee. Again, tenure was not the reason for the assistant principal remaining on the job; his acquittal by a jury was.
Actually, the fact that he was acquitted is in the top half of the story. When the case went before a hearing officer for dismissal the arbitrator said there was insufficient evidence even though a blood test showed a greater than 99 percent chance that he was the father of his former student’s child. Nine years later a DNA test showed an even greater likelihood. The Teacher Certification Board chose to suspend – but not revoke – his certificate. The majority of members of the board belong to one of the two major teacher unions.
Once again, it’s your turn.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 1:01 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Lately at Illinoize
Next Post: Marion team strikes out with commission
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
In the number of tenured teachers dissmissed, it would seem like stackng the deck, if those who were criminally charged and convicted were included. BTW how many is that. After all I think a bank would be right to fire an employee who was passing cnterfiet bills.
How many teachers have been fired for bad perfromance, is the real question, not “school districts have successfully dismissed a tenured teacher.” there is a differance.
Comment by dozer Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 8:14 am
I’m no fan of tenure, and thought the news story was well done. But I’m a bit troubled by Mr. Reeder’s vehement counter-attack on the IFT.
There’s always two sides to every story, but by stridently attacking the IFT’s response to his news-story, it feels like Mr. Reeder has crossed the line separating him from his role as an objective reporter — he now presents himself as an advocate — person with a vested opinion in one side of the debate.
That calls into question the objectivity of his earlier reporting.
Comment by ILPundit Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 9:01 am
My thoughts exactly, ILPundit.
We need reporters to report the facts, but when those reporters have an agenda or viewpoint they are trying to advance, they are doing a disservice to the public and their profession.
Here, to me, is the most troubling line:
“I’ll let commonsense dictate which option is correct.”
Reeder is saying that anyone who doecn’t draw his conclusions lacks commonsense, but it’s not a reporter’s job to draw conclusions.
I think this argument would be clearer if Mr. Reeder would just come out and write the op-ed piece he obviously wants to write. That, I wouldn’t mind.
To me, Reeder and Cumerford are writing about two different things.
Cumerford is correct, tenure appears to be no great barrier for school districts who want to dismiss a teacher, with a 65% success rate for dismissals.
Reeder seems to be arguing that there are so many steep hurdles in the tenure system leading up to the dismissal phase, that school districts are reluctant to go after bad teachers. He could be right, but he’s ignoring alot of other explanations.
First, he’s ignoring “corporate” culture. If Naperville High School can graduate students who cannot read, why should we be surprised that the system tolerates teachers who aren’t the best teachers?
Secondly, he’s ignoring the laws of supply and demand. Pray tell, if we started mass firings of school teachers, who would we replace them with? School districts are having a tough enough time replacing the teachers who leave through retirement or who drop out of the profession. Is Reeder going to call for a tax increase so we can offer more incentives to attract teachers to Illinois? If not, where will the money come from?
Third, Reeder ignores just how disengenuous the whole tenure argument is. People like Reeder want schools to be run more like a business, but America is not a nation that fires people. We don’t. Even in corporate America, mediocre employees are more likely to be pushed to the margins or simple not promoted. And the folks who tend to rise to the top are those who are good at kissing butt and telling people what they want to hear.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 9:54 am
I believe that it is extremely difficult to fire a teacher. It is a long process and is no wonder that people do not come forward when you can have a paternity test with a 99% chance of the principal being the father, yet, he still kept his job until later when the test further proved he was the father. That was a 14 year old girl! That is just wrong. I am not talking numbers, I am talking about a human being that had her whole life ahead of her. He should have been held to a higher standard due to his position. What happened to his backpay once proven? Did he pay it back to the district?
This is not the only school district with that kind of a problem. It can take years. The teacher gets representation from the union and the school (tax payers) pay large amounts of money to get rid of a bad teacher or they pass the teacher to another unsuspecting school district with a good review.
The average teacher earns $53,820 for 9 months of work in downstate Illinois. Summers off. How many people in Illinois work for less and through the summer? How many get paid less, work more hours, and get fired on the spot if they do a bad job with little or no warning. Are teacher’s above the tax payers?
I am not saying that teachers do not have a hard job but, I am tired of hearing how much they don’t make when their average pay is more than the general population.
There are some great teachers out there. There are also some REALLY bad ones. There needs to be a way to get rid of the bad teachers easier. There is no other profession in Illinois that has that kind of security. Do a good job for the pay that you make. Period. If you do a bad job you are fired like the rest of the taxpayers in Illinois.
With comments like “When the two unions work together, no one can beat us.” from Ms. Blackshere. That is scary to me as a parent. I want the best educator for my children. Not the best bullies that that have the best union in Illinois.
Comment by Parent Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 10:27 am
The “problem” with Mr. Reeder’s story is that it is too in depth, too detailed, too thorough and too well done.
Here in Illinois, we like short and salty sound bites. It is rare that newspapers have the time and ability to truly explore the details of a complicated topic like tenure.
My hat is off to Mr. Reeder, but I doubt many people actually read his series. I don’t think he stepped over the line in defending his work, either.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 12:14 pm
Parent, where did you get the $53,820 figure?
Comment by Just Wonderin' Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 12:54 pm
Two thirds of the cases brought to an arbitrator resulted in teachers being fired. Mr. Reeder chose to cite the 35 percent of cases that do not succeed in his story and his uses the word “only†in his response hear. The entire series uses selective language to slant the story.
Reeder says, “The focal point of the series is whether the 1985 Illinois school reforms have brought greater accountability into the classroom. Teachers have always been able to quit their jobs. Is Mr. Comerford’s point that more ineffective teachers are quitting now than before the 1985 school reforms? If so, show us the data.”
My point is that when districts present a good case against an employee, they usually resign and don’t take the case to arbitration. My interpretation of accountability is to be able to dismiss or discipline those who are proved to be failing in their job. If a teacher resigns because of actions brought against them by the administration, the net effect is the same as a teacher being fired through arbitration.
Mr. Reeder cites statistics on the evaluations of school employees. I don’t disagree that many administrators rarely write negative evaluations. The point I made was that there is no reason that administrators should not write bad evaluations for employees who deserve them. The union can’t prevent this and there is no need for a lawyer to help write an evaluation. That responsibility falls squarely on the administrator.
The IFT does support reducing the time frame for a teacher to receive tenure from 4 years to 3. The point is still the same. A 3-year time period is adequate for administrators to decide if an employee should continue in their district. A 3 or 4-year time period gives the administration time to weed-out those who aren’t fit for education. This helps reduced the number of problem cases down the road.
The IFT does not spend anywhere close to an average of $100,000 for dismissal cases. If law firms are charging this much to most school districts, then they need to reevaluate the firm they are using. Again, a hearing usually takes 2-3 days. How can you justify a $100,000 cost? The better a case is, the less time it should take an attorney to prepare. A district is not required to use an attorney in arbitration.
I am aware that Mr. Reeder’s series did not mention the IFT’s agreement to legislation that reduced the timeframe for the remediation process and added professional development requirements for teachers. That’s my point. The series only attempts to place unions in a negative light.
The lack of accountability in the Cicero case had to do with administrative oversight, not tenure or union representation. I think I clearly outlined that.
Comment by Dave Comerford Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 1:04 pm
Parent-
First, you start of your post indicating you believe it is difficult to fire a teacher yet your supporting case cites a principal who is clearly an administrator and not a teacher in the first place. Secondly, you indicate the administrator was not fired until a paternity test proved he was the father. Was that wrong? Should someone be punished before proof has been provided?
You also indicate the average teacher in downstate IL makes $53,820 for 9 months of work and summers off. I question the figure but let’s take it at face value anyway. Many teachers arrive early and stay late on a daily basis. In addition, their evenings may be filled with grading papers, planning for classes, contacting parents, attending school functions, etc. These are all ‘unpaid’ hours. A good many taxpayers receive overtime or some form of compensation when they work past their normal shifts whether they be walmart cashiers, plumbers or nurses. Summers consist of trying to fit in classes for continuing education requirements and then planning/preparation for the upcoming school year so it isn’t idle days of lounging. Most teachers take their vacations then since unlike most ‘normal’ workers they cannot really be gone while school is in session.
Also don’t forget when throwing about your ‘Teachers getting paid more than most taxpayers’ that Teachers are required to have at least a Bachelor’s degree and many work on up through their Master’s degree. A college education has consistently been shown to net you a higher average salary than your uneducated counterparts. So keep that in mind.
Are there bad teachers, yes. It is no different than having bad cops or bad doctors. Many are good and their jobs would be easier if many parents put forth a modicum of effort instead of complaining about the education system. Tenure is not your problem here. Tenure protects teachers from administrqators and school boards who care more about the bottom line and getting re-elected from firing them when they have too much education and experience and cost significantly more than a brand new teacher. You instead need to work with the unions to find a compromise method to streamline disciplinary actions since a bad teacher is a hindrance to both the school and their fellow teachers.
Comment by Naidirem Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 2:13 pm
Even here, all of you are missing the point with the 65%. If only 7% try to fire a teacher, (we don’t know how many would if the process was easier) and only 65% are approved, we cannot assume that the other 93% have acceptable teachers. Even within corporate America, more than 7% of the businesses fire employees.
While there are many arguments against Jack Welch, he talks about the 10-80-10 law. Every business has 10% of employees that need to be dismissed and it even governmental agencies would fall under this theory.
The teaching profession is not any different than other professions, there are mediocre employees that need to be dismissed, but can you imagine the union uproar. Oh wait, I have just read some of it above.
Comment by Logic Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 2:54 pm
You know what’s sad…it that only 9 people have commented on this story while 56 felt the need to make some kind of comment on Taxenberger and the Slum lord of Joliet.
Comment by Sad Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 3:25 pm
Sad - I agree with you, but then look at “BAck to School” night and “Parent-Teacher” nights and see the lack of parents around. Parents aren’t as active anymore. The parents that are active and speak up are seen as trouble makers by the school, at least where I’m at. (Preparing for the bash I’m likely to get.)
Some good teachers leave teaching within the first few years because of burnout or for better paying jobs. That stuff never makes the papers. Kids never come home and talk about the ones they like, but parents hear about the ones they don’t like.
I’m not sure there’s any good answer to what this series of stories is bringing up except maybe (here I go again) if school systems and PTA worked with the IEA and IFT, together they could come up with some good solutions to help make kids lives better.
Man, I’d better go back into hiding.
Comment by Tessa Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 5:08 pm
Just Wonderin’,
It was in Mr. Reeder’s segment titled “Teacher Union’s Clout Keeps Tenure Strong” on this site. It stated:
According to the State Board of Education, the average Illinois teacher earned $53,820 last year. In Chicago, the average was $62,241.
Naidirem,
The way it was written, it was 2 paternity test. The first one was only 99% accurate and not allowed in court because the police did not obtain the information correctly so it was thrown out. Was that the girls fault? It was still 99% that it was his. It wasn’t until after the second test that was more accurate, evidentally, and the police procedures were done correctly.
It was a technicality in the court. That doesn’t mean that a grown man did not have sex with a 14 year old girl. I would never want someone fired without the facts. I would also never want a grown man to have sex with a 14 year old and get off because of a technicaltiy.
Just to make it clear. I am very involved in our school district and help in every way possible. I have many friends that are teachers. My concern are the bad ones.
I do agree with Sad.
Comment by Parent Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 5:13 pm
Logic, I’ll say it again. We do not support keeping bad teachers in the classroom, but management has to make a case against them. It’s up to management to identify bad employees and make their case to get rid of them. We don’t support firing someone without just cause. When management makes a good case, most of the time the person resigns rather than go to arbitration.
Comment by Dave Comerford Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 5:16 pm
Logic would be if a paternity test shows 99% then he was the father. Just because the evidence could not be admitted into court, doesn’t mean that the arbitrator could not take that into consideration. The arbitrator in fact had that information and still ruled in favor of the principal.
Naidirem,
How about the piece on Mr. Roth? He was fired and is still costing the school district money.
Comment by Parent Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 5:38 pm
Dave: Do you have any data about how many teachers resign after the administration starts discharge procedures? If 93% of schools never try to fire anyone, what does that suggest to you?
Comment by respectful Thursday, Dec 8, 05 @ 8:17 pm