Today’s article in the Arizona Daily Star is part of an important discussion that should take place, but there is some information the article leaves out the public needs to know:

1. The article never mentions what the specific policy is. I am of the opinion information of this sort is important for the public to know if they are going to form an opinion as to whether the policy is good or bad.

2. The only real outside source the article uses is The Goldwater Institute. Why weren’t any lawyers or other educational experts consulted? Should the reporters have talked to the AEA as well?

3. TUSD policy and the policy of all school districts in the state in this area are created by state law (ARS 15-539) and every school district in the state uses the same law for hiring and firing teachers. The suggestion that this is a uniquely TUSD policy is unfair to the district. http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/15/00539.htm&Title=15&DocType=ARS

4. There are basically two ways to fire a teacher: one is for “unprofessional conduct,” and the other is for “inadequate classroom performance.” This is a critically important distinction to make.

Firing someone for “inadequate classroom performance” means firing them for not being good at their job, but they have not done anything morally wrong. For example, this might be a person who is extremely dedicated to what they do and is great with kids, but they just aren’t very knowledgable in the subject area they are teaching and kids aren’t learning. This requires a specific process (also defined by state law ARS 15-539) that involves a variety of things a district has to go through before they can officially dismiss the individual. For example, it requires a the charges be based on a legitimate evaluation of the teacher and the teacher is given an opportunity to improve their practice before being dismissed.

Firing someone for “unprofessional conduct” is a completely different and does not require a lengthy or convoluted process to get that individual out of the classroom or school. Unprofessional conduct is what I would consider all of the acts described in the Arizona Daily Star story (it should be noted that there are differing opinions, which have been established by the courts, as to what constitutes unprofessional conduct). All it requires is an administrator to act:

15-539. Dismissal of certificated teacher; due process; written charges; notice; hearing on request

A. On a written statement of charges presented by the superintendent, charging that there exists cause for the suspension without pay for a period of time greater than ten school days or dismissal of a certificated teacher of the district, the governing board, except as otherwise provided in this article, shall give notice to the teacher of its intention to suspend without pay or dismiss the teacher at the expiration of ten days from the date of the service of the notice.

B. Whenever the superintendent presents a statement of charges wherein the alleged cause for dismissal constitutes immoral or unprofessional conduct, the governing board may adopt a resolution that a complaint be filed with the department of education. Pending disciplinary action by the state board of education, the certificated teacher may be reassigned by the superintendent or placed on administrative leave by the board pursuant to section 15-540.

So basically what happens based on state law is:

Step one: administrator conducts an investigation of the alleged offense (decides it is a violation), writes up a statement of charges, and places the employee on leave immediately. That gets the person out of the classroom/school right away.

Step two: The employee can choose whether or not to request a hearing regarding the charges and they have ten days to do this. If they request a hearing that process does take place, but the employee remains out of the classroom while it is going on. It is also a pretty expeditious process in these circumstances.

Step three: After the hearing takes place (if the employee requests it) then the governing board, based on the evidence, chooses what disciplinary action to take.

So how is this important in regards to The Daily Star’s story? First and foremost, this has less to do with what the policy is as opposed to the appropriate implementation of the policy. TUSD is being somewhat painted as the creators of bad policy when this is a policy that was created by state legislators. The representative of the Goldwater Institute says that the policy (remember it’s state policy not TUSD policy) creates a system where the individuals who act heinously are left in the classroom the whole time. This is not true and it’s where the distinction between charges of “inadequate classroom performance” and “unprofessional conduct” is extremely important.

Teachers charged with “inadequate classroom performance” do stay in the classroom (the wisdom of which is fair to argue), but teachers charged with “unprofessional conduct” can and should be removed from the classroom/school immediately. The final part–in defense of the policy–is that there is a mechanism for due process. Those who are accused of heinous acts can be removed from the classroom, but a process exists that allows them to defend themselves against arbitrary and unjust accusations/prosecution. It is possible someone could be wrongly accused. This is a tradition that is deeply rooted in the American tradition and in The Constitution.

I don’t think any of the stories described should have resulted in any of these individuals being allowed to return to the school. It is, however, important to understand the complexity of how this system works and where to place criticism so together we can move in a direction that is in the best interest of students.

The last thing I’ll mention is that one of the issues I have with the article is that it contributes to a pattern of discourse in education that vilifies the teaching profession (and our school district) in general. TUSD is a good school district with good people who have dedicated their lives to public service.

On a side note, I think Professor Yehling would be proud of what I just wrote. If you happen to read this: Thanks!!!

 

This entry was posted on Sunday, February 12th, 2012 at 3:00 pm and is filed under Education, Leadership, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.