SB5 is very harmful to new teachers

When the supporters of SB5 talk about the teaching provisions, they use an ugly, divisive argument. The argument is mean to pit teacher against teacher, young vs old, like this example from "Better Ohio"

Or this from an extreme right wing blogger

It's an ugly argument, full of falsehoods on a number of levels, for a number of reasons. They not too subtly imply that because of seniority, young teacher get laid off - and that it's these young teachers that are "the best".

This should offend any veteran educator, in no other profession is experience denigrated or misrepresented in this manner.

The very best teachers in Ohio have some of the deepest and longest experience. Consider Ohio's teachers of the year

Tim Dove, 2011 Ohio Teacher of the Year - 29 years experience
Natalie Wester, 2010 Ohio Teacher of the Year - 7 years experience
Jennifer Walker, 2009 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 14 years experience
Deborah Wickerham, 2008 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 33 years experience
George Edge, 2007 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 28 years experience
Eric Combs, 2006 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 20 years experience
Deepa Ganschinietz, 2005 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 20 years experience
Kathy Rank, 2004 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 20 years experience
Doreen Uhas-Sauer, 2003 Ohio Teacher of the Year - over 35 years experience

The argument is particularly ugly because no one wants to argue that there are some fine young teachers, but all the evidence in the world indicates that if SB5 passes it is young teachers, not more experienced teachers, who would suffer to the greatest extent.

First, teaching is an incredibly hard, complex job, requiring lots of skill, practice and experience. This is one of the primary reasons why it is estimated that almost a third of America’s teachers leave the field sometime during their first three years of teaching, and almost half leave after five years (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education). If we were to rely predominantly on young teachers our schools would experience significant shortages and very distruptive turnover.

Moreover, study after study shows that teachers become more skilled with experience (see Rice, 2003; Murnane, 1975; Murnane & Phillips, 1981; Ferguson, 1991; Ferguson & Ladd, 1996; Greenwald, Hedges, & Laine, 1996; Hanushek, Kain, & Rivkin, 1998; Grissmer, Flanagan, Kawata, & Williamson, 2000; Rivers & Sanders, 2002; Rowan et al., 2002; Wayne & Youngs, 2003; Nye, Konstantopoulos, & Hedges, 2004; Hanushek & Rivkin, 2004; Hanushek, Kain, O’Brien, & Rivkin, 2005; Kane, Rockoff, & Staiger, 2006; Gordon, Kane, & Staiger, 2006; Harris & Sass, 2007; Aos, Miller, & Pennucci, 2007; Clotfelter, Ladd, & Vigdor, 2006, 2007a).

If teachers are to be evlauated, paid, hired and fired based on their performance, it is unlikely that most new, inexperienced teachers are going to benefit from this rubric when compared to their more experienced colleagues. Indeed, in the absence of preferential treatment or compensation level based decisions that seniority protects against, younger teachers should expect to be let go more often, not less. See their pay grow slower and not faster

How many people would want to enter such a profession?

To be explicit. If SB5 were to become law, young teachers entering the classroom would be harmed significantly by it.

Supporters of SB5 are not interested in rewarding the best teacher, or any teachers. If they were they would have included money in the bill, or the budget, to provide that reward. Instead they made unprecedented cuts to public education.

Bringing Out the Me in Team

A great first person account of how high stakes test based evaluations destroys team work in schools

Test scores are the new epicenter for the war over education. On one side are politicians and reformers advocating test scores to evaluate teachers. On the other side are teachers and unions arguing for more comprehensive evaluations rather than relying on scores alone. In a society that values results, reformers are gaining the upper hand. In report after report, districts and states have adopted evaluations primarily based on student achievement on end of grade tests. The results, the reformers argue, will retain the best teachers while removing the bad ones. It is a system that has worked in the private sector and could revolutionize our schools.

Despite the mountain of evidence against using test scores in this way (a nice summary here), I have to admit, there seems to be a bit of logic to the argument. A talented teacher like my wife would be rewarded in a system like this, while lesser teachers would soon be removed. In theory, it seems reasonable. . . until I saw it in action.

[readon2 url="http://killingclarkkent.wordpress.com/2011/05/31/bringing-out-the-me-in-team/"]Continue reading...[/readon2]

A pernicious argument

There's a pernicious argument being made by supporters of S.B.5. It's quite vile in its attempts to pit middle class against middle class. It was on full display in the Plain Dealer over the weekend in an op-ed article written by Brent Larkin

Supporters of Senate Bill 5 own a convincing argument in the staggering cost borne by taxpayers for sweetheart health care and pension benefits now enjoyed by public-sector employees. That's especially true when those perks are contrasted with sacrifices made by private-sector employees.

Lest you think this is an isolated case, the Buckeye Institute leads with the same nasty rhetoric

government workers continue to prosper at the expense of their private sector neighbors. As our State of the State report details, the average government salary (not even to mention the entire compensation package) increased at all levels. Local government increased by nearly $1,000, state government by over $1,500, and federal government by almost $800.

You would think they had talked to each other before writing these screeds.

But these are the same failed tactics to divide that were made by people who opposed increasing the minimum wage, which Ohioans recently voted in favor of overwhelmingly. The same failed tactics used by the chamber of commerce pushing union busting "right to work", that in 1958 went down to massive defeat 2,001,512 to 1,106,324.

These forces against progress have always had the same prescription - the middle class boat should not be raised for everyone, it should be lowered in persuit of lower taxes for the wealthy, only then can everyone prosper. It used to be an insultaing argument, that has since been proven to be demonstrably false, now it's just craven and damaging to the fabric of our communities.

The Washington Post has an article today which reveals the true effects of this kind of rhetoric

It had never occurred to the Embrees that firefighters and nurses could be unnecessary. They thought of themselves as linchpins of the community — and one of the biggest rewards of their jobs was knowing that the rest of the world thought so, too.

“Kids go trick or treating in firemen’s costumes,” Jim Embree, 48, said. “Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts come and take tours and sit in the truck and blow the horn. People talk to you in the grocery store. I’m used to positive interactions with people. So it shocked me. To hear people speak in a public venue like I’m a Rockefeller . . . it shocked me.”
[...]
One of those was Heather Baugess, 44, a librarian married to a firefighter. Baugess said she was less upset about proposals that would require her to work longer and receive less when she retires than she is about how people view her and her husband.

“It’s not the money,” said Baugess, who earns about $60,000 and whose husband, Larry, earns a bit more. “We’re comfortable. It’s the teacher-bashing. It’s the negativity. I guess I live in my own perfect would where everybody supports teachers and everybody supports firefighters. I don’t want that to change.”

The whole WaPo article is worth a read. We need to stand together, to oppose these forces that seek to divide, we need to stand together and defeat S.B.5 to send yet another reminder that Ohioans will not be divided and pitted against each other.