When a teacher fails to meet even basic job duties yet remains in the classroom, is that the fault of byzantine laws governing teacher dismissal鈥攐r the failure of administrators to adhere to them?
That鈥檚 just one of the questions that emerged here during the first week of testimony in a sweeping lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court that is challenging key dimensions of teachers鈥� job protections and drawing national notice as a potential harbinger of similar challenges elsewhere.
In Vergara v. California, filed in May 2012 on behalf of nine students and their families, the plaintiffs argue that five statutes governing teacher tenure, dismissal, and seniority in the Golden State violate students鈥� equal-protection rights by making it too difficult to rid schools of 鈥済rossly ineffective鈥� teachers. The suit names Gov. Jerry Brown, state Superintendent Tom Torlakson, and the state education department and school board as defendants.
All California pupils are at risk, the plaintiffs contend, but minority students and those living in poverty are in reality the hardest hit.
鈥淭hese statutes work together in a kind of vicious cycle. The system harms students every day,鈥� Theodore J. Boutrous, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said during his opening statement.
The trial is the latest volley in a nationwide effort to reshape the fundamentals of the teaching profession. All but a handful of states are working to institute teacher-evaluation systems that include consideration of student learning. Efforts to that end have been unsuccessful so far in California, one factor that prompted Students Matter, an advocacy group based in Menlo Park, Calif., to file the suit.
The state teachers鈥� unions, which entered the suit as intervenors on the side of California in March of last year, have portrayed the case as an attempt by well-heeled noneducators to force controversial policies on the state.
Legal experts highlight the lawsuit鈥檚 unusual tactic, which interprets access to good teaching鈥攏ot merely funding and facilities鈥攁s part of the state constitutional right to an equitable education. That feature, coupled with the legal action鈥檚 scope, makes it hard to predict the outcome, they say.
鈥淚 see this as a fascinating case that could only occur in California,鈥� said Perry A. Zirkel, a professor of educational leadership who specializes in school law at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. 鈥淯nlike an issue like desegregation, which is literally black and white, this one is a mixed bag. The measure of inequality is nowhere near as blatant. It鈥檚 not what the courts are very good at.鈥�
L.A. Superintendent Testifies
The specific California laws in question require that tenure be given by March 15 of a teacher鈥檚 second year of employment, mandate that layoffs be made in nearly all cases in the order of reverse seniority, and establish a dismissal process for tenured teachers consisting of multiple hearings and appeals.
Both the plaintiffs and defendants in Vergara v. California plan to call prominent researchers to weigh in on topics such as teacher evaluation.
FOR THE PLAINTIFFS
Thomas Kane
The Harvard University professor is among several economists whose use of statistical methods has uncovered large differences in learning among students taught by more and less effective teachers.
Arun Ramanathan
Mr. Ramanathan is the director of the advocacy group Education Trust-West. The group sponsored a 2012 paper using Los Angeles test data to show that poor, Latino, and black students were more likely to receive the lowest-performing teachers than higher-income, white, and Asian peers.
Raj Chetty
The Harvard economics professor has studied how students taught by more effective teachers have higher lifetime wages and are more likely to attend college.
FOR THE DEFENDANTS
Linda Darling-Hammond
A Stanford University education professor and chairwoman of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, Ms. Darling-Hammond opposes the use of test scores in teachers鈥� evaluations and is a proponent of performance tests for aspiring teachers.
Jesse Rothstein
A professor of public policy and economics at the University of California, Berkeley, Mr. Rothstein has raised concerns about the stability of value-added measures and their appropriateness as a part of teacher evaluations.
Susan Moore Johnson
The Harvard professor has written extensively about peer-assistance and -review programs, which unions say help weak teachers improve.
SOURCE: 澳门跑狗论坛
The state teachers鈥� unions argue that the laws are crucial to recruiting and retaining a skilled teaching force. They also have pointed out links between Students Matter鈥攍aunched in 2011 by David Welch, a scientist in fiber optics and an entrepreneur鈥攁nd groups with a history of battling teachers鈥� unions.
The case is being heard by Judge Rolf M. Treu without a jury. Even if his ruling favors the plaintiffs, immediate changes in law seem unlikely, as an appeal is certain. And a ruling could take a while; with more than 150 potential witnesses yet to take the stand, the trial itself could last more than a month.
Last week鈥檚 court sessions were dominated by direct and cross examinations of John E. Deasy, the superintendent of the 651,000-student Los Angeles Unified School District. Mr. Deasy鈥檚 testimony outlined the heart of the plaintiffs鈥� case: Despite its efforts, the district has been unable to rid its classrooms of all its ineffective teachers, he said.
The state鈥檚 rules for granting tenure do not allow enough time for principals to assess probationary teachers, offer remediation, and make an informed decision about whether to grant them tenure, Mr. Deasy said. Seniority rules favor even ineffective teachers during layoffs, he argued. Dismissals must be approved by the school board, then by an independent panel, he noted, and then face possible appeals in the court system.
Such cases can cost an average of $250,000 to $450,000, Mr. Deasy testified.
鈥淲hen you have a finite budget, you have to make decisions about whether to invest to create greater supports for students鈥� or continue pressing for dismissals, he said.
Rhetoric and Reality
During cross-examination, lawyers representing the state of California and the state teachers鈥� unions spent hours trying to chip away at such arguments, showing that in 鈥渨ell managed鈥� districts, the statutes don鈥檛 prevent administrators from dismissing ineffective teachers.
Mr. Deasy鈥檚 management of the LAUSD was exhibit A, as the defense documented how fewer Los Angeles teachers have been automatically granted tenure under his watch. They noted that he has recommended for dismissal greater numbers of teachers鈥�99 in 2011-12 and 57 in 2012-13, up from 10 in 2009-10, the year before he became the district鈥檚 superintendent.
At times, such arguments highlighted stark differences between legal positions and the real world of hard-knuckle politics: The unions鈥� largest affiliate, United Teachers Los Angeles, has strongly opposed Mr. Deasy鈥檚 plans to toughen tenure and evaluation policies.
Still, Mr. Deasy鈥檚 efforts show that 鈥渢he statutes are enforceable,鈥� said Laura Juran, a lawyer for the California Teachers Association, in an interview last week. 鈥淲hether the local association complains that the implementation is aggressive is not really relevant.鈥�
The state鈥檚 attorneys general, meanwhile, sought to show that the Los Angeles district had not discriminated against poor or minority students by assigning them to weaker teachers. But Mr. Deasy said the layoff procedures forced his hand on at least one occasion.
鈥淎n unfortunate byproduct of following the law is the discrimination of a youth having to be placed in front of an ineffective teacher,鈥� Mr. Deasy said.
None of the nine students who joined in the lawsuit had testified yet as of late last week, but declarations filed with the court sketch out the particulars of their complaints.
Kate Elliott, now a senior in high school, says one of her middle school teachers showed YouTube videos and gave coloring assignments rather than teach. Beatriz Vergara and her sister Elizabeth allegedly faced a series of poor teachers, including one who slept in class and one who referred to his Latino students by the racist term 鈥渃holos.鈥�
Disturbing though those examples may be, lawyers for the unions plan to make the case that the nine plaintiffs don鈥檛 have standing to sue on an equal-protection basis. Six of them are not disadvantaged; three are not students of color; and two are in a district 鈥減ilot鈥� school, where most teacher-protection rules don鈥檛 apply, said James M. Finberg, a lawyer with the San Francisco-based firm Altshuler Berzon, which is representing the CTA and the California Federation of Teachers.
Moreover, he said, they will show that some of the teachers named as ineffective are not, having received teaching awards and other honors.
鈥淧laintiffs will not be able to identify any specific instance in which the challenged statutes caused them to be assigned to any specific ineffective teacher, let alone a grossly ineffective teacher,鈥� Mr. Finberg said in his opening statement.
鈥楪rossly Ineffective鈥�
The very definition of a 鈥済rossly ineffective鈥� teacher is being contested.
The plaintiffs are basing their case in part on research showing that students鈥� achievement varies greatly depending on the teachers to whom they鈥檙e assigned. Those studies hinge on a statistical method known as 鈥渧alue added,鈥� which aims to isolate the effect of each teacher on his or her students鈥� standardized-test scores.
But that method has proved controversial as states and districts, prodded by federal incentives, adopted it in systems for evaluating individual teachers.
Many teachers contend the measures aren鈥檛 fair and affect teaching in unproductive ways. The value-added method was recently labeled 鈥渁 sham鈥� by Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, the parent union of the California Federation of Teachers.
And Nimrod Elias, a California deputy attorney general, said in his opening statement that value-added measures were 鈥渕ethodologically flawed鈥� and 鈥渓imited in what they purport to show.鈥�
Both the plaintiffs and defendants in the Vergara trial have lined up competing expert witnesses to testify on whether the measures are valid鈥攁 fact that highlights the deep ideological divides on teacher quality even among scholarly researchers.
Raj Chetty, a Harvard University economics professor, took the stand late in the week to testify that students taught by teachers with low value-added scores were at risk of 鈥渟ubstantial harm.鈥�
The scope of the Vergara lawsuit may be impressive, but that doesn鈥檛 mean a victory will be easy, according to legal experts.
Prior education equity suits have addressed teacher quality only insofar as underfunding has harmed districts鈥� ability to recruit and retain teachers, said David Sciarra, the executive director of the Newark, N.J.-based Education Law Center. Mr. Sciarra served as a counsel to the plaintiffs in New Jersey鈥檚 landmark Abbott cases, which established mandatory pre-K programs, among other measures, for a subset of schools.
No previous cases, he said, have concluded that teacher work rules by themselves have impeded staffing to such an extent that they undermine a state鈥檚 constitutional guarantee of an equitable education.
鈥淚t鈥檚 at best a serious stretch,鈥� he said of the lawsuit. 鈥淵ou may not like the work rules, or think they need to be reformed or improved, but there鈥檚 no evidence that terms and conditions of employment of teachers are the deciding factor that would lead to systemic deprivation of resources.鈥�
Experts also are divided on whether the case could set a precedent for action in other states. Students Matter and its clients have made no secret of high hopes for the lawsuit鈥檚 outcome.
鈥淓ven though we鈥檙e focused on California constitutional provisions, we think it could provide a model for challenging the laws of other states that have the same arbitrary, unequal effects on rights of students,鈥� Mr. Boutrous said.
But Mr. Zirkel of Lehigh University is less sure.
鈥淧ractically,鈥� he said, 鈥渆ven if the state language is the same, there are always interpretations of the language.鈥�
