Political Horizons for Sept. 23, 2012

Differences do exist between the Chicago teachers, whose seven-day strike ended last week, and those in Louisiana. So it’s hard to make comparisons, particularly between a large city and a small state.

Teachers, both here and up there, share anger at teacher evaluation programs, which impose standardized tests to define student progress and were a key issue in the Chicago strike.

Teachers also share the same frustrations: At being blamed solely for failures in public school education, at being vilified as a pampered class by elected officials and their supporters, and at the politicalization of real problems.

“To dehumanize the profession of education by top-down accountability rules and blasting teachers during the legislative session as the cause for the lack of progress in student achievement begs the question,” said Scott M. Richard, executive director of the Louisiana School Boards Association.

The annual MetLife survey of public school teachers, released March 7, showed a dramatic 15 percent drop in teacher job satisfaction since 2009. Four times more teachers — about 29 percent — said they were searching for new jobs, the survey showed.

The flashpoint of all this frustration is teacher evaluation programs that elected officials in this state and others have pushed as the panacea for ailing public schools, Richard said. He criticized efforts in Louisiana to judge the effectiveness of teachers with a one-size-fits-all test that accounts for about half the evaluation score along with reliance on what he calls a “very complicated algebraic logarithm.”

“What we’re seeing is an attack on public employees all across the country. And in Louisiana, Gov. Bobby Jindal is just part of that movement,” said Albert Samuels, who teaches political science at Southern University.

Across America, school administrators and elected officials wonder aloud if the Chicago strike will spread. How about to Louisiana?

The answer is not likely, for two reasons.

First, the leaders of the two competing teachers unions here say Louisiana’s teacher evaluations haven’t fully kicked in yet, so the impact on individuals is hard to articulate now.

Secondly, not to put too fine a point on it: the two unions compete. The thousands of teachers in Chicago are represented by one union and speak with one voice.

The leaders of both local teachers organizations, the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and the Louisiana Association of Educators say they can get along on the big stuff.

“We have different philosophical beliefs,” LAE President Joyce Haynes said.

But she added that the two unions are not far apart when it comes to teacher evaluation issues.

“Teachers are expecting one clear voice that’s in their interests,” LFT President Steve Monaghan said. “We shouldn’t be fighting on the small differences between the organizations. It’s counterproductive.”

Back in the day, when the national organizations with which the two local unions are affiliated were formed, the two sides differed, basically, on whether teaching was a profession or a trade.

One group, the American Federation of Teachers, is affiliated with the AFL-CIO and refused membership to principals and other managers with the ability to hire and fire.

The other organization, called the National Education Association, opened its membership to all, including those who commanded others in schoolhouses.

In most parts of the country, members of the two organizations effectively have merged. But in some parts of the South, with little tradition of an organized work force, competing associations continue.

“All the polling that we have ever done internally suggests that, if given a choice, the teachers in the state of Louisiana would like to see both organizations come together,” Monaghan said. “To me, the day that happens and there is a unified front for teachers, it’s going to be a great day.”

In the meantime, Louisiana teachers will watch how the teacher evaluations evolve.

Labor action may wait for a few months until evaluations start finding veteran teachers, certified teachers, respected teachers coming up short on the standardized tests and formulas, Haynes said.

“That’s when we’re going to have a problem, and that’s when frustration really crystallizes and we can come together,” she said.

“It’s going to be a very difficult spring, there’s going to be a lot of anger,” Monaghan said. “And that’s going to drive the rest of the story.”

Mark Ballard is editor of The Advocate Capitol news bureau. His email address is [e-mail].

Comments

1) Comment by Traveler - 25/09/2012

Two competing professional organizations for educators is counter-productive. The organizations are forced to expend huge amounts of time, energy, and money in competing for members, when they could be using their resources to combat the enemies of public education. The "philosophical beliefs" to which LAE president Joyce Haynes refers are minimal and could easily be resolved by mutual agreement. LFT president Steve Monaghan is correct in reporting that the rank-and-file members of both groups would like to see the two unions merge. To fail to do so is to play into the hands of anti-public education forces who recognize that while the two groups are fighting one another, they are distracted from their expressed mission to serve the best interests of teachers. Since affiliates of the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association have successfully come together in a number of other places, iIt would appear that the leadership of LAE is more interested in "protecting their turf" than in taking care of the members who pay their hard-earned dues for representation.

2) Comment by Iamhopeful2 - 23/09/2012

To jeffsadow - Place your bet then Jeff. Contrary to your uninformed conclusion, it is the highest performing and most experienced and qualified teachers who are outspoken in their disdain for the chosen method of evaluation. Teachers see formal evaluations as only one measure of the daily accountability they answer to every day. The first critical analysis of there performance comes from the students (130+) they teach who unabashedly report from their perspective to their parents -scarey thought? Then there are the parents who, rightfully, have the interests of their children foremost in mind (260+/-). Then there are the report cards teachers are required to produce which in and of themselves (unfortunately) are the results of strict parameters set by policymakers and not for the most part designed to reflect student ability or learning but more often to reflect student's willingness to perform assigned tasks and to think inside the box. I have had parents tell me that their child had learned a lot the previous year as evidenced by A's on his report card. think about that. So does that mean students who made lower grades did not learn as much? Then we have one standardized high stakes test given as per a strick timetable (regardless of the student's personal circumstances i.e. dog run over by truck, grandma dying of cancer, no breakfast.....) a test that no student, parent or teacher sees after it is graded and has no opportunity to analyze to determine student needs.... All of this responsibility is being laid on the teacher with the teacher paying the consequences or benefiting from the fact that she teaches middle class English speaking students. Even that is no guarantee of success. Teachers of gifted students are probably most intimidated by this eval system because their students typically score highly and show little of the "progress" on which her evaluation will rest. Again - neither the teacher nor the parent will have evidence to examine as to the results. Tests sent off, scores returned, complicated value-added metrics applied and bingo the teacher is deemed effective or not. And make no mistake, there will good and bad teachers who lose and their careers will be ended due to an unreliable and invalid measure of learning. Congressman Miller, Chair of the Health and Education Committee stated today on Education Nation that the tests being used since No Child Left Behind are "lousy and useless" -the same tests we have held students and schools accountable for all these years - and yet he somehow thinks new tests being created for the Common Core Curruculum will be great. The status quo IS THEUSE OF THE STANDARDIZED TEST used for the last 20+ years. It has no effect on improving learning and yet we use the results/scores it produces to gauge the progress of our students and schools. Testing is not teaching.

3) Comment by jeffsadow - 23/09/2012

I am willing to bet that the increased proportion of teachers reporting dissatisfaction are precisely the low performers that need to be ousted or need that extra motivation to perform up to standard. Ballard, of course, creates a straw man argument when he claims that there is antipathy towards teachers and that they are entirely to blame, by uncritically reporting that sentiment propagated by defenders of the status quo. In fact, any serious reformer recognizes the problem is with a susbet of incompetent teachers allowed to persist by the status quo, and that this is just one problem that has caused the disservice of LA's schoolchildren. And to my friend Albert, I am a public employee like you and see no such war on the public sector as you imagine. What I do see is efforts to give taxpayers their money's worth and reduce the privileging afforded to some in the public sector at taxpayer expense.