Why CSBA opposes the teacher tenure initiative 

One of the initiatives on the special election ballot in November, known as the "Put the Kids First Act" (Proposition 74), would do more than extend the probationary period for teachers. One of its lesser-known clauses would change current rules for dismissing tenured teachers.

Following much deliberation and thoughtful discussion during their May meeting, the 270 members of CSBA¹s Delegate Assembly voted to adopt an "oppose" position on the initiative. "The initiative was written without consultation from any experts in education law, so it is poorly crafted and contains fatal flaws relative to teacher dismissals and collective bargaining," said CSBA Executive Director Scott P. Plotkin.

As drafted for the ballot, the initiative contains two key provisions: the first would increase the probationary period for teachers from two to five years. It is this section which has received the greatest amount of public attention. If the initiative contained only this provision, CSBA would likely be in support, Plotkin said. In fact, a task force convened by CSBA in 1996 studied the teacher tenure issue and agreed that two years was not long enough for districts to effectively evaluate a teacher¹s performance, and that teachers need longer than two years to demonstrate mastery of the skills, knowledge and ability needed to justify permanent status.

It is the second provision of the "Put the Kids First Act" that is problematic for governing boards and has resulted in CSBA¹s opposition. That section would define the "unsatisfactory performance" of a teacher for the purpose of dismissal as "the receipt by a permanent employee of two consecutive unsatisfactory evaluations."

After consulting with attorneys, policy analysts and personnel experts in the field, CSBA concluded that the initiative would actually give districts less discretion than they currently have to define the unsatisfactory performance of teachers. Practically speaking, under the initiative dismissal proceedings could not go forward for at least two (and likely three) years, and the unsatisfactory evaluations would have to be made in consecutive years. The initiative would thus mandate additional teacher evaluations during the first five years, thereby imposing significant new costs on districts that would not be reimbursable.

Related link:

• See a CSBA analysis of the "Put the Kids First Act"