Tie teacher cuts to performance

Philip S. Cicero is a retired superintendent of Lynbrook public schools and an adjunct professor of education at Adelphi University.

Faced with the consequences of a looming $9.3-billion state budget deficit, projected reductions in state aid, and the probability of a tax cap, school districts will face yet another challenging budget year. Many will be forced to consider teacher layoffs as a way to significantly reduce spending to compensate for significant reductions in state aid and federal initiatives.

Of all the ways to cut school costs, teacher reductions are the most unpopular among administrators, teachers and parents, because they typically increase class size and eliminate electives. But, with compensation for teachers representing about 70 percent of any district's budget, teacher cuts can be the most expedient way to realize deep and immediate savings.

Teacher layoff decisions across Long Island will likely begin and end with seniority as the most important determinant. This last-hired-first-fired approach means those earning the most - where meaningful savings could actually be found - are usually spared while a larger number of newer, lower-paid teachers are let go. Yet protecting the most senior and costly teachers doesn't necessarily mean that the most effective teachers are protected. Retaining younger and recently hired staff members with the skills and enthusiasm needed to be successful must not be ignored. It's time for local and state officials to consider effectiveness as an alternative to seniority when determining who gets shown the door.

Concerns about traditional seniority policies are relatively new. In July 2009, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan hinted at his perspective on the issue during an address to the National Education Association, the largest labor union in the United States, representing more than 3 million teachers. "We created seniority rules that protect teachers from arbitrary and capricious management, and that's a good goal," he said. "But sometimes those rules place teachers in schools and communities where they won't succeed, and that's wrong." Former New York City schools Chancellor Joel Klein, in his final weekly letter to principals last month, called the last-hired-first-hired rule unconscionable, noting that students need the best teachers, not those simply serving the longest.

In March of last year, the New Teacher Project, an organization founded by teachers, reported results from its survey of more than 9,000 teachers, which found that an overwhelming 75 percent rejected quality-blind layoffs. Instead, teachers believed that factors such as classroom management, instructional performance and teacher attendance should be considered in layoff decisions. And they're right: All of these contribute more to effectiveness than time spent on the job.

Teacher seniority rules are being challenged across the country. In September 2009, Michelle Rhee, then chancellor of the Washington, D.C., schools, laid off around 400 teachers as a way of compensating for a shortfall in school funding. What made this action controversial - besides the obvious - was that Rhee found language in an existing clause of D.C. law that allowed her to consider "school needs" without regard to seniority as the determining factor in layoffs.

In Los Angeles, a similar scenario developed when a number of newly hired and energetic teachers working in poverty-stricken areas were laid off. This, after their students made exceptional progress in both math and English. The city, its mayor and an organization called the Partnership for LA Schools have legally challenged the last-hired-first-fired rule. But efforts to revise seniority rules in California have so far failed in the face of opposition from the state's teachers union.

Meanwhile in Baltimore, the teachers union voted against a new contract that would have used the success of teachers in the classroom - rather than seniority - as a variable in determining pay.

While most states don't mandate that seniority be a determining factor in layoff decisions, there are 14 states that do have seniority layoff policies, and New York is one of them.

To move beyond the status quo, two assumptions need to be challenged. The first is that the most experienced teachers are the best ones. There's a body of research that concludes that teachers in their third year of teaching are generally as effective as long-tenured teachers.

The second is that low class size, generally considered between 18 and 22 students, makes a significant difference in student learning. Instead, the most important variable in the teaching-learning process is the effectiveness of the teacher, and research has shown that an effective teacher in a class of 21 students is still effective in a class of 25.

So New York's seniority-based, quality-blind system, which serves the best interests of adults and not students, must be challenged and abandoned. Some may believe that attempting to change it will be too fraught with political obstacles. Butt the same objections were heard when it was suggested that teacher evaluations should be linked to student achievement. And nevertheless, this past spring, an agreement was reached between the State Education Department and New York Teachers Unions to tie teacher evaluations, in part, to student achievement on state exams. The unions had fervently opposed this change for years.

The cost of education in New York will continue to grow. The New York State School Boards Association recently released a report on how Gov. Cuomo's proposed 2 percent tax cap would affect school districts across New York State. The limit on property tax increases, coupled with average increases in salaries and other personnel costs, would leave the 668 school districts across the state with a shortfall of $815 million a year.

That report proposed seven alternatives to reduce the fiscal crisis facing districts. But none is exceptional - or even new. The school boards have good reason to seek to reduce personnel costs. This current fiscal crisis provides the perfect opportunity for them to lobby for legislation to amend or change the seniority practices. That could be just the pressure New York needs to put costly longevity and seniority behind teacher effectiveness and student learning.