For two-and-a-half years, the District of Columbia Public Schools were locked in a difficult negotiation of a new collective bargaining agreement with the Washington Teachers' Union. The process has had its fair share of fits and starts, high drama and moments of intrigue. After announcing a tentative agreement with the union on April 6, last week our teachers voted to ratify the contract by an 80%-20% margin, a resounding endorsement of the proposal.
Many doubted such overwhelming support from teachers was possible given the innovative nature of the contract. However, what teachers showed us is that they're ready for change. They sent a clear message that they're willing to be held accountable as long as they are treated like professionals.
The contract is groundbreaking in many ways, and can serve as a roadmap for other districts - including, I hope, the largest and most important public school district in the country, New York City, where teachers have been working without a contract since October. Despite some real improvements achieved over the past few years, New York continues to operate under a contract that is much more focused on arcane rules, seniority and job protections than about how to promote better learning outcomes for kids. United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein must change this.
The D.C. contract includes many provisions that were once considered "sacred cows," but as it turns out, were wholly embraced by our teachers. These include:
- Individual pay for individual performance. Our agreement gives the district the ability to implement a pay for performance system - paid for with private money, and voluntary for teachers - that recognizes and rewards our most highly effective teachers for their individual accomplishments in raising student achievement.
- Seniority. When a school undergoes a budget reduction and a layoff is necessary, that decision is made based on performance, not seniority, and it's one that teachers themselves are engaged in making.
- Mutual consent. A teacher cannot be placed at a school unless the teacher and the school principal agree. Moreover, if there are teachers who cannot find a "mutual consent placement," they are moved out of the system.
- The end of tenure as a "job for life." If a teacher is rated as "ineffective," she is immediately terminated from the system. If rated "minimally effective," he has a freeze on his pay raise and after two years is terminated. Further, teachers cannot grieve their ratings, they can only grieve procedural errors.
In exchange for these reforms, teachers are receiving unprecedented levels of support, resources, professional development, voice in decision-making and pay - an increase of 20% over previous salary levels (with additional bonuses making it possible to make twice as much).
We negotiated this agreement with the help of American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten, who used to run New York City's UFT. At its conclusion we all agreed that the new deal is good for kids and fair to teachers.
I completely understand the situation that New York City's Department of Education and the UFT are in now. Based on our experiences, here are the lessons I think can be drawn for the city's contract.
Read more:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2010/06/13/2010-06-13_dc_school_chancellor_michelle_rhee_says_new_york_must_learn_from_her_groundbreak.html#ixzz0qmr5hIB5
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
