Prop. 74: Terminating Teachers Is the Wrong Solution for State Schools By Darcy Infante Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger could learn something about the fundamentals of good education from the famous child psychiatrist D.W. Winnicott, who coined the phrase "the good enough mother." "Good enough" means that a caring mother can raise a child successfully without being perfect. If a child is better off with a "good enough mother" than with no mother at all, it stands to reason that the same would hold true for teachers. A teacher is likely to be one of the most important adults in a child's life and assumes at least some of the care-taking responsibilities. Is a child better off with a "good enough teacher," or with no teacher at all? Prop. 74 promises to improve the quality of education by increasing the probationary period for public school teachers from two to five years and by giving school boards broader powers to dismiss a teacher who receives two consecutive unsatisfactory performance evaluations. The logic of this promise just doesn't add up. Prop. 74 should be defeated. This initiative is misleading and unnecessary. It attempts to place the blame for California's poor education report card squarely on the shoulders of teachers, one of our school's most valuable assets. There are already procedures in place to get rid of bad teachers. Furthermore, statistics from the California Department of Education show that 30% of teachers quit within the first three years. Increasing the two-year probationary period to five years will only encourage more teacher dropouts. How can decreasing the number of teachers improve education in California—a state plagued by chronic teacher shortages? Consider the state's history: In the 1997-98 school year, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing issued a record 33,994 emergency teaching permits and credential waivers. According to the National Education Association's figures for the fall of 2001, California was one of the top three states with the highest pupil-teacher ratio. California has between 20 and 20.9 pupils per teacher; the national average is 15.9. California is also the most ethnically diverse state in the nation, with a student population that increases by as many as 145,000 students each year. This poses unique problems for teachers and districts. Discouraging teachers, who already face monumental challenges, with threats of dismissal is likely to decrease the number of incoming teachers in a profession that is already stretched too thin. An aging teaching corps, whose retirement rate hovers around 5percent per year, and a 5 percent annual loss of teachers through attrition, eats away at the state's reserve of trained educators. California can't afford to lose more. "We have to recruit from many different states all year round. It's expensive and labor-intensive," says Archie Polanco, executive director of the Human Services Division of the San Diego School District. Increasing the probationary period from two to five years would make recruitment efforts even more difficult. Given the need, it would seem that state education officials and local districts would move decisively to sweep away barriers to recruitment. Instead, Prop. 74 would result in putting up more roadblocks. If the governor really wants to improve schools for California students, he should increase the budget for education instead of threatening teachers with punitive measures. Spending per pupil in California is now 44th in the country, down with Idaho and Tennessee. Even after class-size reduction, the average size in elementary schools ranks 48th; the proportion of high school teachers with degrees in the subjects they teach ranks 34th. Prop. 74 would do nothing to remedy under funding, overcrowding and lack of materials. Solutions should move beyond this "kindergarten cop" mentality and into the realm of critical thinking. Gov. Schwarzenegger is correct in his belief that the state needs educational reform measures, but Prop. 74 just isn't the answer. |
|---|