- Muriel Bowser commits to keeping Kaya Henderson as D.C. schools chancellor
- Bowser now says she would keep Henderson as DCPS Chancellor
- Capitol Riverfront parents organize to reopen a closed DCPS school
- Calif. court rules teacher tenure creates unequal conditions
- California Teacher Tenure Laws Ruled Unconstitutional
- Gates Foundation urges delay in using tests for teacher evaluation
Muriel Bowser commits to keeping Kaya Henderson as D.C. schools chancellor
The Washington Post
By Mike DeBonis
June 10, 2014
A long-running bit of political kabuki came to end in a Ward 2 living room Tuesday night: Democratic mayoral nominee Muriel Bowser confirmed that, if elected, she will keep Chancellor Kaya Henderson atop the D.C. Public Schools.
Bowser’s position on Henderson, who has led the District’s school system since the 2010 departure of Michelle Rhee, has been noncommittal ever since she announced her mayoral run in March 2013.
At a January debate, for instance, Bowser said the following: “I have made no commitments to keep Kaya Henderson, and I certainly have made no commitments to get rid of Kaya Henderson. … I will tell you, I have some principles that are important to me: That we have a chancellor who has a plan for each section of the city, that we have a chancellor who will act urgently and be visible in the community and be the face of school change. And I do value consistency.”
For parents who value consistency and believe that DCPS is on the right track under Henderson, formerly Rhee’s top deputy, Bowser’s commitment could offer some succor. Bowser’s most energetic opponent, David A. Catania, has also been noncommittal on keeping Henderson: “I’ve been clear that there are a good number of things that I support that the chancellor has done, and there are some things that I have a different point of view on and would hope for a greater sense of urgency in addressing,” he told The Post shortly after Bowser’s primary win.
Bowser campaign manager Bo Shuff confirmed Bowser’s comments were made Tuesday evening at a meet-and-greet of education activists. Shuff said he did not know why Bowser chose to make her declaration at this particular forum. “Somebody asked her the question, and she answered it,” he said.
One attendee tweeted about the exchange:
Henderson, for her part, has said she would like to stay in her post for at least another three years, to see through a number of five-year student achievement and satisfaction benchmarks she set out in 2012.
“If I can meet those goals by 2017, then I will have delivered a very different school district,” she said after the primary. “And then, I’ll be headed to a beach somewhere because the city will have beaten my good years out of me.”
Bowser now says she would keep Henderson as DCPS Chancellor
The Examiner
By Mark Lerner
June 11, 2014
For months Democratic Mayoral nominee Muriel Bowser has been noncommittal on whether she would keep DCPS Chancellor Kaya Henderson in her position if she went on to hold the city's highest office. In reaction, people just shook their heads from side to side. After all, the decision, if there was ever a definition of a no-brainer, clearly falls into this category. Ms. Henderson worked for Michelle Rhee, the Chancellor named by Ms. Bowser's mentor Adrian Fenty. The current Chancellor had a hand in devising and implementing the exceedingly difficult changes Ms. Rhee brought to the traditional schools, but her approach is one of collaboration and respect for others in clear contrast to the combative style of her predecessor. She has not backed away from these policies and has continued education reform on a steady trajectory. All indicators of whether DCPS is improving, whether referring to standardized test scores, enrollment, or student and teacher satisfaction, are moving in the right direction.
Ms. Henderson is also one of the most optimistic and focused individuals I have ever met. Just to sit in the same room with her is inspiring. She has a vision to make DCPS one of the greatest school systems in the country, and if enthusiasm equates to results then the Chancellor is certain to reach her goal.
So the logical question is why would Ms. Bowser reach this conclusion now? The answer, of course, is that she is facing a difficult challenge in her electoral contest by Councilman David Catania. Mr. Catania, who also has been not saying whether he would stick with Ms. Henderson, has numerous substantial accomplishments in his role as education committee chairman, something which Ms. Bowser lacks. There is no better way for Ms. Bowser to obtain instant credentials with those interested in public education in the nation's capital than to endorse Ms. Henderson's performance.
But what does it say about a candidate who does the right thing only in the face of the possibility of losing an election? I'll leave that for others to decide.
Capitol Riverfront parents organize to reopen a closed DCPS school
Greater Greater Education
By Natalie Wexler
June 10, 2014
The newly revitalized Capitol Riverfront neighborhood has all the amenities a family could want, except one: a neighborhood school. But thanks to the efforts of a group of parents, DCPS has committed to reopening one that closed in 2006.
Capitol Riverfront, situated along the Anacostia River between the Navy Yard and Nationals Park in Southeast, is a planned community that seems to work. The neighborhood rose out of the ashes of public housing that was demolished 10 years ago, and it's now home to over 4,000 residents.
With its welcoming parks and trendy restaurants, the area has become a magnet for young families. Strollers crowd the sidewalks, a Good Humor truck cruises at 5 pm, and the Friday night concerts at Yards Park are well attended by babies and toddlers, along with their parents. And thanks to the seamless inclusion of affordable housing in the redevelopment plan, the neighborhood is even socioeconomically diverse.
But about 4 years ago, some residents grew concerned about the lack of a school. Their zoned school, Amidon-Bowen Elementary, is on the other side of busy South Capitol Street and too far away to feel like part of the neighborhood.
The former neighborhood school, Van Ness Elementary at 5th and M SE, had closed in 2006, shortly after the demolition of the nearby Arthur Capper/Carrollsburg housing projects. But the building was still there, serving as office space for DCPS.
Relying on projections of increased growth in the area, DCPS eventually promised it would reopen Van Ness in the fall of 2015. Two years ago Chancellor Kaya Henderson said funds for the school's modernization would be included in the 2014 budget.
Campaign to preserve renovation funds
Sure enough, the budget that Mayor Vincent Gray sent to the DC Council earlier this year included $15 million for renovating the Van Ness building. Then, during budget hearings, an off-the-cuff remark by DC Councilmember David Catania seemed to threaten that allocation. And the reaction to what he said revealed how deeply committed the Capitol Riverfront community is to a school that doesn't yet exist.
Catania, chair of the Education Committee, was concerned because the mayor had eliminated almost $100 million in renovation funds from the education budget, according to a spokesperson, Brendan Williams-Kief. That money was supposed to go towards the modernization of several existing schools.
During the hearing, Catania suggested that some of the money earmarked for Van Ness could be diverted towards those other projects.
His reasoning was that Capitol Riverfront parents want Van Ness to be reopened in phases anyway, beginning with preschool through kindergarten or perhaps 1st grade. Since the whole building wouldn't be needed right away, he suggested, perhaps the renovation could be done in phases as well. Catania never intended to delay or prevent the school's modernization, according to Williams-Kief.
But a community organization called the Van Ness Parent Group (VNPG) whipped into high gear, urging residents to contact Catania and tell him to keep the allocation for Van Ness intact. The phone calls began the morning of May 1, with some coming from former neighborhood residents as far away as Houston and Virginia Beach who still felt ties to the area.
By 4:30 that afternoon, the parents had gotten the word that the entire allocation would stay in the budget. That decision wasn't entirely due to the VNPG campaign, Williams-Kief says. Catania had figured out other ways to find money for the schools whose renovation plans had been derailed. But, he adds, the outpouring of support for Van Ness was impressive.
"They've got one engaged parent group already," he says.
Van Ness Parents Group
The VNPG, created last year, has drawn about 60 families to its meetings, with about 100 kids between them. Meredith Fascett, VNPG's president, says the group is seeking tax-deductible status and hopes to become the nucleus of a parent-teacher organization at Van Ness.
While the group is pleased that the renovation funds are still in the budget, they still have many unanswered questions. They'd like to know when the renovation will begin and what it will entail, whether DCPS will hire a principal for the planning year, and whether the school will open in phases, among other things.
Last week Fascett met with 3 DCPS officials, but she says the meeting failed to provide answers to any of those questions. A DCPS spokesperson called the meeting "productive" and said the school system looks forward to working with the community and to "sharing more details as they become available."
I recently met with Fascett and two other members of the group in the community room of a condo in the neighborhood, while their toddlers took turns trying to set off a fire alarm just within their reach on the wall.
All three women expressed concern about whether the school will actually open in a little over a year, as promised. "There's a lot of planning to do," said Kelly Stormer.
The school building looks fairly dilapidated from the outside, although the women say when they've been inside to vote it hasn't looked too bad. Then again, they only saw a hallway and the gym.
"I don't know what I'll do if Van Ness doesn't reopen," said Rebecca Sohmer.
All three entered the lottery this year to find preschools for their 3-year-old sons. Stormer lucked out: her son will be going to Eagle Academy charter school on New Jersey Ave. SE, just across the street from her condo building. But the school only goes through second grade.
Both Fascett's and Sohmer's sons got into schools that will require a commute. Fascett's son will be at Inspired Teaching Demonstration charter school, currently located in the U Street corridor but soon to move to the Edgewood neighborhood in Northeast.
Sohmer didn't even apply to Amidon-Bowen, her zoned school, because someone told her it was dangerous. (She admits she didn't have time to do much research.) Instead, her son will be going to Walker-Jones Education Campus near Truxton Circle, about 2 miles away.
A school within walking distance
Sohmer and Fascett aren't sure how they'll get their children to school, and both would much prefer a school within walking distance. All 3 women live within 6 blocks of the Van Ness building.
"A big reason we live where we live is that we want to be able to walk to everything," says Sohmer. "We love walking to the park, seeing our neighbors out in the street. We want to be able to walk to school, too."
In an era of school closures, the phenomenon of a closed school being brought back to life is a rarity. But with many young families in DC committed to living in a walkable urban environment, it may become more common. That's one reason DCPS is loath to part with its empty school buildings, which are often eyed covetously by space-hungry charters.
Then again, Capitol Riverfront may be an anomaly. Most neighborhoods aren't razed to the ground and then rebuilt from scratch, with a cohort of children all approaching school age at the same time. It remains to be seen whether parents in communities whose demographics change more organically will organize around a closed school the way parents in Capitol Riverfront have done around Van Ness.
Calif. court rules teacher tenure creates unequal conditions
The Washington Post
By Lyndsey Layton
June 10, 2014
A Los Angeles judge Tuesday struck down teacher tenure and other California laws that offer job security to educators, a decision that is expected to trigger widespread challenges of teacher job protections nationwide.
Plaintiffs in the case argued that California children who are poor receive an inferior education because they are saddled with the weakest teachers, who are entrenched in their jobs and are difficult to fire. Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu sided with the plaintiffs against some of the most powerful labor unions in the country, striking down California’s teacher employment laws because he determined that they violate students’ civil rights.
Calling it a landmark decision, attorneys for the plaintiffs said that California was just the start of a planned effort to knock down tenure in a state-by-state campaign across the country. Those who have opposed tenure — from the right and the left — have long said that the protection is an impediment to stronger U.S. education because it keeps bad teachers in the nation’s classrooms. Tuesday’s decision could mark a new front in national education reform, with attacks on tenure moving into the courtroom.
“This is going to be the beginning of a series of these lawsuits that could fix many of the problems in education systems nationwide,” said plaintiffs attorney Theodore Boutrous, who was joined in the effort against tenure by former U.S. solicitor general Ted Olson. The same legal team won a U.S. Supreme Court victory that allowed same-sex marriages to resume in California. “We’re going to roll them out to other jurisdictions.”
Boutrous and Olson were among several prominent lawyers hired by Silicon Valley mogul David F. Welch, founder of an optical telecommunications firm, who created Students Matter, an advocacy group, to challenge teachers unions in California. Welch pumped several million dollars into the effort. Students Matter is considering similar lawsuits in New York, Connecticut and other states with teacher job protections similar to those in California, Boutrous said.
The ruling was a serious blow to labor unions, whose core mission is to protect teachers’ jobs. The judge issued a stay pending an appeal by the unions, and a final resolution could take years.
John Deasy, superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District and a witness for the plaintiffs, called it a “historic day.”
“We can rectify a catastrophe,” Deasy said. “We can and will and must assure that children have the most effective teachers in their classrooms every day. Not some children, not most children, not even nearly all children. But all children.”
Labor leaders said the case is part of a broad assault on unions, since government workers make up more than half of the nation’s union membership.
“Let’s be clear: This lawsuit was never about helping students, but is yet another attempt by millionaires and corporate special interests to undermine the teaching profession and push their own ideological agenda on public schools and students while working to privatize public education,” Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, said in a statement.
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said the lawsuit focused on the relatively small pool of “grossly ineffective” teachers — estimated at 1 to 3 percent of California’s 275,000 teachers — and ignores other factors that affect the quality of education, especially for poor children.
“It’s surprising that the court, which used its bully pulpit when it came to criticizing teacher protections, did not spend one second discussing funding inequities, school segregation, high poverty or any other out-of-school or in-school factors that are proven to affect student achievement and our children,” Weingarten said.
Tenure and related employment laws in California protect teachers from arbitrary firings, reward experienced teachers and make teaching an appealing career option, Van Roekel said. The ruling will make it more difficult to attract and retain high-quality teachers, he said.
But the plaintiffs argued that California’s laws make it too difficult to get rid of ineffective teachers, costing districts as much as $450,000 in each instance and taking 10 years in one case, according to one trial witness.
In a 16-page ruling, in the case of Vergara v. California, Treu struck down three state laws as unconstitutional. The laws grant tenure to teachers after two years, require layoffs by seniority, and call for a complex and lengthy process before a teacher can be fired.
Treu said the evidence presented at trial “is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience.”
Defendants in the case, including Gov. Jerry Brown (D) and other state officials, were joined by the California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers.
In many ways, the case was a proxy fight for some of the national conflicts over the teaching profession.
Backing Welch were some of the most incendiary players in the fight over the future of public schools, including Michelle A. Rhee, the former schools chancellor in Washington who got rid of tenure in the District in 2009 and went on to form an advocacy group aimed at eliminating it across the country.
“It is my hope that this movement continues on the national stage for all of our students,” said Rhee, who is now chief executive of Students First.
For the unions, the ruling poses a serious threat to tenure, which was first adopted by New Jersey in 1909 to protect teachers from firings on the basis of race, pregnancy, politics or other arbitrary factors.
The California unions have staved off attempts to change the laws through the legislature, leading Welch to try through the courts.
Welch used a novel civil rights approach, arguing that poor and minority students in California are being denied their right under the state constitution to equal access to public education because they are more likely than affluent white students to be taught by “grossly ineffective” teachers.
Under the laws struck down by the court, school districts have about 18 months after a teacher is hired to award tenure. That is not enough time to make a valid decision, the judge found, noting that California is one of only five states with a period of two years or less. Thirty two states have a three-year period and nine states have four- or five-year periods. Four states have no tenure system.
The complaint also attacked seniority rules and “last in, first out” policies, which say the newest teachers are the first to be laid off when jobs are cut, regardless of performance.
Since 2010, Republican governors and legislatures have been trying to eliminate or weaken teacher tenure laws. Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida and a potential Republican presidential candidate who heads an education foundation, applauded the ruling, saying, “Its impact will be felt well beyond California.”
Some Democrats also joined in cheering Tuesday’s verdict.
Rep. George Miller (Calif.), an old-school liberal and the top Democrat on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, suggested that the antitenure movement ought to spread beyond California. “It is not only Californians who should celebrate today’s decision, but families in every state and school district across the country,” Miller said. “Unfortunately, school districts nationwide have policies in place that mirror those challenged in Vergara. . . . This is simply indefensible. Today’s ruling puts every school with similar policies on notice.”
U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan also criticized tenure laws.
“The students who brought this lawsuit are, unfortunately, just nine out of millions of young people in America who are disadvantaged by laws, practices and systems that fail to identify and support our best teachers and match them with our neediest students,” Duncan said in a statement.
California Teacher Tenure Laws Ruled Unconstitutional
The New York Times
By Jennifer Medina
June 10, 2014
LOS ANGELES — A California judge ruled Tuesday that teacher tenure laws deprived students of their right to an education under the State Constitution and violated their civil rights. The decision hands teachers’ unions a major defeat in a landmark case, one that could radically alter how California teachers are hired and fired and prompt challenges to tenure laws in other states.
“Substantial evidence presented makes it clear to this court that the challenged statutes disproportionately affect poor and/or minority students,” Judge Rolf M. Treu of Los Angeles Superior Court wrote in the ruling. “The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience.”
The decision, which was enthusiastically endorsed by Education Secretary Arne Duncan, brings a close to the first chapter of the case, Vergara v. California, in which a group of student plaintiffs backed by a Silicon Valley millionaire argued that state tenure laws had deprived them of a decent education by leaving bad teachers in place.
Both sides expect the case to generate more like it in cities and states around the country. David Welch, a Silicon Valley technology magnate, spent several million dollars to create the organization that brought the Vergara case to court — Students Matter — and paid for a team of high-profile lawyers, including Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., who helped win a Supreme Court decision striking down California’s same-sex marriage ban. While the next move is still unclear, the group is considering filing lawsuits in New York, Connecticut, Maryland, Oregon, New Mexico, Idaho and Kansas as well as other states with powerful unions where legislatures have defeated attempts to change teacher tenure laws.
The teachers’ unions said Tuesday that they planned to appeal. A spokesman for the state’s attorney general, Kamala D. Harris, said she was reviewing the ruling with Gov. Jerry Brown and state education officials before making a decision on any plans for an appeal.
“We believe the judge fell victim to the anti-union, anti-teacher rhetoric and one of America’s finest corporate law firms that set out to scapegoat teachers for the real problems that exist in public education,” said Joshua Pechthalt, the president of the California Federation of Teachers, one of two unions that represent roughly 400,000 educators in the state. “There are real problems in our schools, but this decision in no way helps us move the ball forward.”
In his sharply worded 16-page ruling, Judge Treu compared the Vergara case to the historic desegregation battle of Brown v. Board of Education, saying that the earlier case addressed “a student’s fundamental right to equality of the educational experience,” and that this case involved applying that principle to the “quality of the educational experience.”
He agreed with the plaintiffs’ argument that California’s current laws make it impossible to remove the system’s numerous low-performing and incompetent teachers, because the tenure system assures them a job essentially for life; that seniority rules requiring the newest teachers to be laid off first were harmful; and that granting tenure to teachers after only two years on the job was farcical, offering far too little time for a fair assessment of the teacher’s skills.
Further, Judge Treu said, the least effective teachers are disproportionately assigned to schools filled with low-income and minority students. The situation violates those students’ constitutional right to an equal education, he determined. It is believed to be the first legal opinion to assert that the quality of an education is as important as mere access to schools or sufficient funding.
“All sides to this litigation agree that competent teachers are a critical, if not the most important, component of success of a child’s in-school educational experience,” Judge Treu wrote in his ruling. “There is also no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teachers currently active in California classrooms.”
The right to an education is written into every state constitution. But lawyers for the states and teachers’ unions said that overturning such laws would erode necessary protections that stop school administrators from making unfair personnel decisions. They also argued that a vast majority of teachers in the state’s schools are competent and providing students with all the necessary tools to learn. More important factors than teachers, they argued, are social and economic inequalities as well as the funding levels of public schools.
Critics of existing rules hailed the decision as a monumental victory and urged lawmakers to make immediate changes to laws. Mr. Duncan issued a statement saying the ruling could help millions of students who are hurt by existing teacher tenure laws.
“My hope is that today’s decision moves from the courtroom toward a collaborative process in California that is fair, thoughtful, practical and swift,” Mr. Duncan said. “Every state, every school district needs to have that kind of conversation.”
In essence, Judge Treu ruled that a quality education is guaranteed for all students in the state — which relies on effective teachers — and that anything less undermines the quality and violates the equal protection clause in the state constitution.
In his ruling, Judge Treu added his voice to the political debate that has divided educators for years. School superintendents in large cities across the country — including Los Angeles, New York and Washington — have railed against laws that essentially grant teachers permanent employment status. They say such job protections are harmful to students and are merely an anachronism.
Three states and the District of Columbia have eliminated tenure, but similar efforts have repeatedly failed elsewhere, including California. Under state law here, administrators seeking to dismiss a teacher they deem incompetent must follow a complicated procedure that typically drags on for months, if not years. Teachers are eligible for tenure after 18 months, and layoffs must be determined by seniority, a process known as “last in, first out.”
Judge Treu, who was appointed by former Gov. Pete Wilson, a Republican, wrote that “both students and teachers are unfairly, unnecessarily and for no legally cognizable reason (let alone a compelling one) disadvantaged by the current Permanent Employment Statute.” He added that current dismissal statutes are “so complex, time consuming and expensive as to make an effective, efficient yet fair dismissal of a grossly ineffective teacher illusory.”
He also had harsh words for the layoff system that protects veteran teachers without regard to any evaluation. “The logic of this position is unfathomable and therefore constitutionally unsupportable,” he wrote.
Judge Treu is expected to issue a final opinion on the case by the end of the month after taking comments from both sides, but for now he ordered that the existing laws remain in place while the case makes its way through the appeal process.
John Deasy, superintendent for the Los Angeles Unified School District, who testified for the plaintiffs, said he hoped the decision would be a rallying cry for an immediate response from state lawmakers, who have been reluctant to make any changes to tenure laws.
“Every day that these laws remain in effect represents another opportunity denied,” he said. He echoed language used in desegregation rulings: “With all deliberate speed. I don’t think we need to watch for two generations more to fix this.”
Gates Foundation urges delay in using tests for teacher evaluation
The Washington Post
By Lyndsey Layton
June 10, 2014
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which has invested more than $200 million to create, support and implement the Common Core State Standards, said Tuesday that states should hold off from using new standardized tests aligned to the Common Core to evaluate teachers, promote students and make other high-stakes decisions.
Vicki Phillips, who heads the foundation’s K-12 program, released a statement in which she said teachers and students need more time to adjust to the standards and the new tests.
“The standards need time to work,” Phillips wrote. “Teachers need time to develop lessons, receive more training, get used to the new tests, and offer their feedback. Applying assessment scores to evaluations before these pieces are developed would be like measuring the speed of a runner based on her time – without knowing how far she ran, what obstacles were in the way, or whether the stopwatch worked!”
Phillips wrote that the new standards are yielding positive results in many places, but that teachers are legitimately worried about the fast pace of the rollout and subsequent testing.
By 2010, 45 states and the District of Columbia adopted the K-12 standards in math and reading, which specify the skills and knowledge every student should possess by the end of each grade. Three states — Indiana, Oklahoma and South Carolina — have since changed course and passed legislation this year to pull out of the standards.
Participating states have been rolling out the standards during the past several years, with all committed to giving new standardized tests next spring that will be aligned with the Common Core. Most states also are using new teacher evaluation systems that rate teachers based in part on student test scores.
That is worrying many teachers, Phillips wrote.
“As I’ve talked with our partners over this past year, I have heard over and over again their wholehearted support for the Common Core and their very real anxiety about the challenges that come with change,” Phillips wrote. “The teachers’ anxiety is understandable: A rushed effort to apply the assessments could punish teachers as they’re trying new things, and any hiccups in the assessments could be seen as flaws in the standards.”
The call by the foundation for a moratorium echoes similar positions taken by the two major teachers’ unions. Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, said consequences should not be attached to the Common Core tests until at least the 2015-2016 school year while Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, has called for a two-year moratorium on high stakes associated with tests.
The question remains whether the Obama administration will agree to a moratorium. The administration has required states that received waivers for the federal No Child Left Behind law to use new teacher evaluation systems that rely, in part, on student test scores.
Asked for reaction to the statement from the Gates Foundation, a spokeswoman for Duncan did not respond.