If the district gets what it is asking for, and what No Child Left Behind calls for: More discretion to reassign and layoff teachers, don't count on the district using that power to protect the jobs of its higher paid teachers. The realignment process was manipulated in such a way as to realign a maximum number of high seniority / high paid teachers out of their jobs. If given the necessary authority, the district will also "realign" high-seniority-teachers-without-licenses out of their jobs.
Its the corporate way of cutting costs. A "good" teacher is a low-paid teacher. They're all qualified, right? "Experience doesn't matter that much, beyond the first 3 to 5 years. The old-timers are too set in their ways, too old to relate to young people..." and so forth. I have been hearing a lot that kind of talk, and some of the senior teachers say they have gotten an earful of it too. At the board meeting last night, a few realigned teachers said that union officers are telling them what they want to hear: That they can get an elementary classroom job in 2005-2006 by bumping another elementary classroom teacher with less seniority, under the current law. At least one of the board members, Ross Taylor has been saying the same thing. But it just isn't so. Think about it. Would you get more chaos or less if every teacher's job just was fair game for a more senior teacher? There would also be a shift of more seniors to the better schools, and lower seniority teachers to the worst schools. The dynamic would be similar to the concentration of rookie teachers in poor performing schools when the district did its class-size reduction program in the 1990s. I believe that was a big factor in widening the achievement gap in the Minneapolis Public Schools in the 1990s. I am for narrowing, not widening the gap. The Minneapolis school district now has few if any probationary teachers in elementary teaching jobs. And the Teacher Tenure Act does not give the district authority to bump a tenured teacher to make room for a more senior teacher who fails to keep up a teaching license needed to hold their current position. On the other hand, tenured teachers are almost impossible to dislodge from their jobs, if they are doing their jobs fairly well and assert their rights under the teacher tenure act (few have done so in recent years, but I expect that to change). Tenured teachers are not supposed to be subjected to involuntary transfers unless their position is excessed or they are being "realigned" to preserve the job of another tenured teacher. If the district's projected enrollment decline proves accurate, there will be no opportunities for teachers to bid back into elementary teacher jobs in the next 3 to 5 years. Realigned elementary teachers who shuck their other licenses during the upcoming year will likely be off the district's payroll in 2005-2006. To get back on the MPS payroll they will probably need to get a license to teach in a high need area, which elementary classroom teaching is not. -Doug Mann, King Field www.educationright.com - REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
