DO SEATTLE SCHOOL TEACHERS HAVE TENURE?

Does the term "tenure" apply to the public school teacher in the state of Washington? The answer is unequivocably "NO". We have NO contracted rights to "tenure". "Tenure" is a term applied to the ranks of University professors and there, indeed, they get "tenure". In the case of university professors "tenure" is an important piece in enabling Universities to hold on to top quality professors (not necessarily top quality teachers) and it enables professors to focus much more on their research and the things that they do to bring dollars into the university while not being at risk every year of looking for a new teaching position. But what about Public School Teachers?

Perception and Reality are absolutely different in this case and any time, at least, the Seattle School District wants to show the Seattle Stakeholders that it can remove ineffective teachers it can do so within the construct of the way the contract is written today. As a matter of fact a teacher in the professional growth cycle (PGC) has much less contracted protections then does a teacher on the performance growth cycle, which is effectively a probationary period for new teachers with less than four years experience. As the contract is written, an administrator can place a teacher on the PGC with nothing more than an informal assessment. This is not the case with a teacher on the performance growth cycle who must have two formal observations and post observations before they can be put on probation.

The public perception that it is the NEA or WEA or SEA, these monolithic union enterprises, which are protecting incompetent teachers is a misapprehension of the facts at least in the state of Washington. Both the School Districts and the Union are conscribed to conform with the laws of the state of Washington as set forth in the common school manual. Under Title 28 of the common school manual section 28A.405.100, the state is very specific as to the minimum criteria upon which a certificated employee must be evaluated. "For classroom teachers the criteria shall be developed in the following categories: Instructional skill; classroom management, professional preparation and scholarship; effort toward improvement when needed; the handling of student discipline and attendant problems; and interest in teaching pupils and knowledge of subject matter." If a teacher is able to show competence in these areas then they are not subject to probation and their contracts are automatically renewed. This automatic renewal of contract is both a convenience to the district and the employee and insures a consistent teaching force year after year. This is the reality of what is the teachers' "tenure".

The laws of the state of Washington put the burden on the employer to prove that a teacher is incompetent in any of these areas before they can be put on probation and terminated. It is the state of Washington that has put up protections for the classroom teacher and it is the obligation of the District and the Union to conform their evaluation system to those protections. As these are the minimum standards, it is within the purview of the District and the Union through the collective bargaining contract to add other reasons for which a classroom teacher can be evaluated, put on probation and terminated. In our last contract the district and the union without a vote of the membership added to the evaluation criteria something like "incompatibility". If a teacher is "incompatible" with the Seattle School District program, or building they can also be terminated. This additional clause has already given the SSD extraordinary latitude in being able to terminate teachers and with the new Mackenzie report pointing out the deficiencies in administrative oversight of its teaching staff, it is most certain that, all of the clauses will be used to begin to move underperforming and problem teachers out the door.

In our email discussions, the case of the Superintendent of the Washington D.C. schools put out the challenge to her union and her teachers that if they would automatically subject themselves to probation then she would make the effort to raise their salaries to 100-130k securing funding from private sources. Our Collective Bargaining Agreement, already enables the district to put teachers easily on probation. Our district need not offer us any improvement in our salary schedules to begin to take action against underperforming teachers.

SHMUEL