Picture taken on 02/25/13 -SLTA Leadership with Michael Clara
TEXT OF EMAIL TO SLTA LEADERSHIP:
Dear Ms. Tzourtzouklis, Ms. McFarland & Mr. Harman,
I have received several calls from teachers who cited an email they received referencing your joint opposition to my “idea of mandatory teacher transfers in our schools”. I am so sorry that following our meeting on Monday, I left you with the impression that I supported that concept because I do not. (See: Salt Lake Teacher’s Association Issues a Stinging Rebuke on Michael Clara)
I also want to clarify that I have never stated: “69% of the teachers on the westside are ineffective”.
My use of the adjective, “ineffective” and using it in conjunction with the noun, “teacher” has always been within the context of the “student growth model” which was established in 2011 (see USOE Effectiveness PP).
In our current educational setting, measuring teacher “effectiveness” using a ‘student growth model’ is the latest measurement being used. While placing the word “teacher” and “ineffectiveness” together, is upsetting to some; it should be noted that I did not invent the term and I should not be pelted for its use in a school board study session. (See Board Meeting: 02/19/2013 (Audio)
This is however, one of the measurements that I consider when deliberating on policy or the allocation of resources for our district. I recognize that the data from the ‘student growth model is preliminary, as I stated in the Tribune article:
“Clara said in an interview the data he cites on “ineffective” teachers in west-side schools are preliminary and notes he was not allowed access to all the district’s information. (Do West-Side Salt Lake Kids Have Too Many Ineffective Teachers? – Tribune 02/26/13).
It appears that the headline editor for the Tribune took the term ‘ineffective teachers’ that is used as a category in the ‘student growth model’ and inflated the term to describe all westside teachers. Had I been consulted, I would recommended a different title:
Board Member Seeks More
Resources For Westside Teachers
My quotes in reference to the student growth model statistics, in large part come from the school board discussion on February 19, 2013, which as you are aware, are recorded and posted on the district’s web page as well as this blog.
The topic at the school board meeting was the STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT PLAN ASSESSMENT. One of the power point slides in the presentation titled EDUCATIONAL DATA and ANALYSIS had a bullet point on it: STUDENT GROWTH –Teacher Effectiveness Report. Link to Slide #3
I was looking at School Improvement Plans in front of me. They listed the 2011-2012, Teacher Effectiveness ratings by schools. I could see that westside schools had higher numbers in the “ineffective teacher” category. I then asked why is this the case?
The 67% “ineffective teachers” in the subject of science for one school was noted in their School Improvement Plan. That is my only reference to that number. See Page 6 of this School Improvement Plan
I’m not sure how one question in a school board meeting got shape-shifted into me saying that “69% of westside teachers are ineffective” because I never said that.
My question was specific to the STUDENT GROWTH –Teacher Effectiveness Report as indicated on the power point slide in the school board study session. Link to Slide #3
As quoted in the Tribune article Christine Marriott responded to my question: “One of our big problems with our distribution system for teachers, is that we have a lot of new teachers in west-side schools every single year. … The rubber really hits the road when you are looking at whether our west-side disadvantage[d] students are with the most effective teachers we can put in front of them.” She added: “We need to do something to turn around that very pattern that you can see.”
Christine’s Marriot’s explanation matched what parents and westside educators had already been telling me. I had been hearing about the high teacher turnover rate at several elementary schools and how that was adversely affecting the life of the school and was a contributing factor to low student achievement scores.
I began to ask questions in the board meeting, in an effort to determine the relationship between “teacher effectiveness” and “teacher experience” against the demographics of the students.
The conversation was cut short by the superintendent who declared that we were not going to talk about it because the agenda item is “student achievement not teacher effectiveness”.
The following day I asked to have this issue placed on the agenda, I was told that it would not be placed on the agenda. (see Agenda Request)
After being told that I could not discuss it in a board meeting and that it was not going to be placed on the agenda of another meeting; I could at this point choose to bury my head in the sand and ignore the problem or I could seek other ways to address it.
After consulting with other educators and parents in my community, I chose to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. (see OCR Complaint)
Had I followed the lead of the superintendent and others in ignoring the current conditions, I would have betrayed the trust my neighbors placed in me when they elected me and the confidence you extended to me with your endorsement.(see SLTA Endorsement)
Since the Tribune article was published, I have been contacted by well over twenty educators with recommendations on how to solve the problem of the high teacher turnover rate in westside schools. Prior to this incident, other recommendations had already been offered. This continuous dialogue and exchange of ideas is a form of SHARED GOVERNANCE.
One educator pointed out to me that the school board had this very discussion in January of 2012. Sure enough, I went back and listened to the audio of the meeting. At the time, the curriculum department reported to the board: “Students in Title 1 Schools have five times higher chance of being with a marginal or ineffective teacher”.
In response to that statistic the board president expresses her “alarm” and she repeatedly asked “what can we do?” at one point she ask “Where are we empowered to make some of these changes?” ( see Experienced Teacher Inequity: School Board Was Aware in 2012)
Had I been on that board at that time I would have said: “THE BOARD OF EDUCATION IS EMPOWERED TO MAKE THE CHANGES!” I strongly believe that school boards have the power to change the face of education within our own communities if we would only have the courage to act.
I am convinced that the revolving door of first year teachers in westside schools is of the district’s own making. When the system is not supporting the teacher, we should not wonder why that teacher does not want to stay in a westside school.
So the question is, how do we solve the problem of high teacher turnover in westside schools?
The top four solutions from the educators themselves is as follows:
- Utilizing the principles of shared governance, allow the community and teachers to form a committee and interview principals that submitted applications for an opening at that school. Then allow them to choose the best candidate for their school.
- Modify the one-year provisional category so that a first year teacher has more stability
- Realign the hiring process timeline so that we are in synchronization with neighboring districts.
- Allow Title I schools to have a full-time counselor and fulltime family involvement specialist
If you recall, in our Monday meeting, I stated that if OCR deemed my allegations as valid, the district would be allowed to go into an ‘early complaint resolution phase’. The investigation does not proceed and we could mediate the complaint by offering and implementing these types of ideas.
My purpose is to improve the working conditions of the teachers and the placement practices of the district, so that teachers are not pushed away from westside schools. Thus providing the much-needed stable academic environment where students can succeed.
I hope you can now, clearly see that it was never my intention nor did I ever advocate for the forced transfer of eastside teachers to westside schools.
Moreover, it is unfair to attribute a newspaper headline as words coming from me.
It is also counterproductive to demonize me for asking a data question in a school board study session. Isn’t that what board members are supposed to do? (see Angry Salt Lake Teachers Demand Apology From School Board Member (KUTV))
I am also not understanding (Elaine), how on Monday we can greet each other with a hug and leave a meeting with a smile (see attached photo) -then you turn around and send out information to teachers misrepresenting my position.
I asked for the meeting on Monday and came to you in good faith. In the future, I would ask that the courtesy of a phone call be extended to me if you feel I have done something negative towards SLTA. I am far from being the enemy of teachers. There is no need or reason to attempt to paint me as the villain.
Please recognize that I live here on the westside. I see firsthand the destruction that is caused in a young adult’s life when they do not do well in school. I have spent time at the jail, hospital, and funeral home with parents who have lost their children to crime, violence, and death.
I am no stranger to the risk factors that a child from my neighborhood brings into the school. I am also aware that those risk factors take their toll on the student and the teacher’s ability to teach.
So when fellow board members and others chide me for being “angry” and “impatient”, I am guilty. They say they “don’t like my style” and they “don’t like the way I asked for an item to be put on the agenda”. Are those really good enough reasons to deny our children the best education we can give them?
Over the last three months, I have spent time with dedicated educators in my living room, in their classroom, in their office or the coffee shop; talking about ways, we can make improvements in the educational system of our district. I realize that we all have ownership in this community whether we live here or not.
As any educator from the westside knows, we are a close-knit community and we care about each other. Many of us are allowed to treat our neighbor’s children as our own in terms of support and correcting them when they veer off the path to success.
My contribution to my community at this point-in-time is to ask difficult and sometimes painful questions about the method of educational delivery.
As my neighbors’ representative on the school board, I follow these five guiding principles:
- Focus on student achievement as the number one job
- Allocate resources to support students based on their differing characteristics and needs
- Monitor return on investment and report back to my community with transparency and accountability
- Use good data to inform me on how to support student success
- Engage the community (parents & teachers) in providing real opportunities to give input into the policy making process (w&g)
There is no question that I am deeply troubled by the current state of affairs. There is indeed a sense of urgency about me. I echo the words of LBJ: “In education the time we waste today is a life-time wasted tomorrow”.
I regret that I had to frame this problem in the form of a ‘civil rights’ violation and cast a shadow over the good teachers in our district.
I was however, left with no choice when we have a superintendent who has allowed the current conditions to flourish, and appears to have no desire to change the current circumstances or improve the working conditions for our teachers and the learning environment for our students.
Please rest assured that as member of the board of education; I am more concerned about an ineffective superintendent than I am with a student growth model that labels teachers.
P.S. Article that was recently published: ARE SCHOOL BOARDS TOO INSULATED?
http://www.deseretnews.com/
Un abrazo,
Michael Clára 801-205-0389 Board Member, District 2
cc: Association Representatives