February 11, 2011: Vol. 34, No. 7

Past issues

Feeds

Twitter

All Brooklyn news

Neighborhood Map

Bay Ridge

Bensonhurst, Dyker Heights

Brooklyn Heights

Downtown, DUMBO

Carroll Gardens

Cobble Hill, Red Hook, Boerum Hill

Fort Greene

Clinton Hill, Crown Heights

North Brooklyn

Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick

Park Slope

Prospect Heights, Windsor Terrace, Greenwood Heights

GO Brooklyn

Dining Guide

Where to GO Events calendar

Classifieds

The Brooklyn Wire

Mean Streets

Podcasts

Brooklyn Cyclones

February 11, 2011 / Perspective

Seniority should not be the standard

By Michelle Costa

for The Brooklyn Paper

From the day I walked through my classroom doors as a first-year teacher, I knew I was there for a reason. It wasn’t for the salary. It wasn’t for the summers off. It was because I knew that I would have the privilege of impacting students’ lives.

I don’t use the word “privilege” lightly — educating the next generation of children in this country should be treated as such. Unfortunately, teaching positions are too often taken for granted. And while most teachers give it their all, there are sadly some who can’t raise the bar for their students.

In a time of budget crunching across the country, it is becoming more and more clear that New York is not immune. Both Gov. Cuomo and Mayor Bloomberg have stated that teacher layoffs are not simply a possibility; they are a reality.

Layoff decisions need to be made based on effectiveness, and not simply on seniority. Current state law dictates a “last in, first out” policy that is quality-blind. But turning a blind eye to teacher quality in this decision-making process will mean turning a blind eye to our students.

As an educator, the last thing I want is to see any of my colleagues be laid off. I know what the implications will be for my students — larger class sizes, fewer extracurricular activities, less individualized attention. But if we are forced to lose teachers, we need to make sure that we are minimizing the costs to our students’ learning.

It is time that state legislators step up and change the current policy to better reflect the best interests of our students. While measuring teacher effectiveness can be challenging and the “perfect” evaluation system is still a work-in-progress, there are current measures in place in the city that are far better indicators of teacher quality than seniority alone.

For example, last year nearly 2,000 teachers received unsatisfactory ratings from their principals. Hundreds of teachers have excessive absences or lateness. Over 1,200 teachers are not even teaching in full-time positions at all — they are members of the Absent Teacher Reserve pool that earns full salary and benefits for being substitutes or performing clerical duties.

If layoffs are done under the current seniority-based system, there is no doubt that we will be removing excellent teachers from the classroom. It should be our goal to keep all great teachers there, regardless of how long they have been teaching. Our students deserve nothing less.

Michelle Costa is a high school teacher in a Brooklyn public school and is also a member of Educators 4 Excellence, an organization that works to provide teachers with a voice in education policy.

←Art: Label them finalists! Six wine bottle artists make the cut

→Shopping: Get a load of Scott Brindl’s sausage

Reader Feedback

Pappa from Giorgio says:

Michelle......

get a clue, you think cuomo (who you misquoted) and bloomberg care about children? it's about money. when you're in your 15th yr. (if you make it that long) you'll be on the chopping block.

the implications of eliminaitng seniority rights go way beyond the education system, it's middle class destruction.

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:23 am

Pappa from Giorgio says:

ps....

loose that gawd awful necklace in your photo.....

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:24 am

Pappa from Giorgio says:

the gawd awful chain around your neck (in the photo) speaks volumes about your judgement.

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:25 am

Fed Up from Bronx says:

You admit that the "merit" system is not "perfect", and you don't want to see good teachers laid off; however, you are willing to get rid of one system that isn't perfect for another system that isn't perfect. I feel as though you may not be aware of why the system that is currently in place was adopted.

Feb. 11, 2011, 9:21 am

Eddy from Bronx says:

Well put Michelle, I just wish Pappa had given a better comment to actually stimulate discussion rather than empty and shallow attacks.

Fed up seemed to miss the point of your paragraph comparing the two systems. It's about getting rid of one system that isn't perfect for another than is less imperfect. Nuances change the nature of the entire argument.

Fed up, how is the seniority system better?

Feb. 11, 2011, 9:41 am

enough with the lies from Brooklyn says:

This is very deceptive.

1) Many ATRs work full time teaching or guidance jobs. I have an amazing ATR guidance counselor. She will never be hired because of the twisted funding formula developed by Klein Bloomberg.

2) These amazing young teachers leave teaching at an incredibly high rate within their first five years. Why prioritize a teachers job who is very likely to leave within 2 years anyway? The answer is obvious, you can pay them less.

3) Anything coming out of E4E - a group funded by a group that Klein is on the board of with money from Bill Gates, is well, not representative of what real New York City teachers think.

4) The current system was put in place to prevent racism, sexism, and age discrimination. You know exactly who will be fired if these job protections are lifted.

5) This is all a scare tactic to pressure the governor and the general population into changing a law that has been very effective for many years. Look at all the teachers who were fired in New York for being communist party members. Don't think it won't happen again? You are kidding yourself.

Feb. 11, 2011, 9:52 am

Michael Fiorillo from NYC says:

Readers of this site should be aware that the organzation to which Ms. Costa belongs, E$E, is funded by Bill Gates and hedge fund interests seeking to privatize the public schools.

Notice how, rather than objecting to (unnecessary) budget cuts, she and her cohort accept them as the natural order of things. God forbid taxes should be raised on the groups and individuals who who caused the econmic crisis afflicting states and cities, and who are funding her Trojan Horse organization, whose purpose is to divide teachers and have them fighting among themselves.

Feb. 11, 2011, 10:01 am

Kelly from Queens says:

Excellent piece, Michelle!

Maybe if people were looking out for the best interests of their students and not themselves they could read this piece with a clear head.

Also agree with Eddy about Pappa's shallow and empty attacks...I sincerely hope he is not shaping the minds of our nation's children.

Feb. 11, 2011, 10:08 am

Your future from Flushing says:

Dear Michelle,

While you may have been seduced by the seemingly altruistic goals of Bloomberg/Klein/Black/Gates/Walton/Broad/et. al., and you see yourself as the "answer" to all that is "wrong" with education today, your view WILL change. There is nothing wrong with education today. Simply put, not every child is college bound. This is a reality that politics have tried to push aside in currying favor with voters. The elimination of vocational programs was the true disservice to students. As others have stated, layoffs should be the LAST RESORT to budget problems. All extraneous programs, such as ARIS, Acuity, school report cards, etc. MUST be eliminated first. Seniority was a necessary tool to prevent discriminatory practices. It still is. Your mayor is involved in blatant AGEISM. He should be prosecuted, not supported. Remember, some day, no matter how much of a star you are, your salary and seniority will become a liability, too.

Feb. 11, 2011, 10:32 am

Steph from Brooklyn says:

Well said Michelle. It is nice to see a teacher who still believes in her students' futures and their potential to achieve success. May the best teacher stay in my opinion. I don't think my children deserve anything less - whether that means the teacher is 24 or 64.

In no other industry do we see seniority play a place in job security - so why should those who educate our children be held to any less of a standard? Teachers play a special, wonderful, and invaluable role in shaping the minds of our future. As such, they should be held to the highest of standards and compensated accordingly. It takes so much to be a great teacher - but the impact they can have is invaluable. Let's make sure we keep the best ones we can - regardless of age, race, or sex.

Feb. 11, 2011, 11:18 am

Pappaducho says:

Pappa, I can't imagine why you'd sympathize with keeping ineffective teachers on payroll just because they've been there a long time. Maybe you don't have kids in school, maybe you're one of those bad teachers -- those are my only two guesses. It would explain why your best argument against Costa's thoughtful and common sense approach is "your necklace is ugly."

And Fed Up, everybody knows why the current system is in place -- unions and political bargaining. Those reasons don't even come close to having student interest at heart. Merit may be imperfect, but that doesn't mean it's not better.

Feb. 11, 2011, 11:48 am

Your future from Flushing says:

I would appreciate all the "still wet behind the ears" fresh faced newbies stop throwing around the "what's best for the children" mantra. You have no clue what's best for the children. If you did you certainly wouldn't be espousing the manipulative agenda of a few right wing capitalists. Merit is a farce. There is absolutely no objective way to determine merit. We do not work in a profit based system. If you support merit, which is based on SUBJECTIVE UNIFORM criteria, then you cannot support differentiated instruction. Differentiation recognizes DIFFERENCES among individuals, merit demands uniformity and conformity. If there are bad teachers, no system is protecting them. Some administrator either lacks the courage or knowledge to remove them from the system. Merit is based on statistics, statistics can be manipulated, therefore merit can be manipulated. For the inexperienced, we call that logic. If we are talking specifics, most new teachers have HORRIBLE classroom management skills which will impede learning at every turn. Maybe we should lay them off first?????? (How does it feel?)

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:01 pm

Toilet in Flushing says:

Flushing, I can't tell if you're a troll or not. "IF there are bad teachers" and "there's no problem with our education system" are absolutely insane comments to make. I hope to god you're not in charge of students, but I'm afraid you have been for 25 years (and so will never be fired, no matter how terrible of a teacher you may be.)

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:14 pm

Your Future from Flushing says:

Despite the rhetoric to the contrary, you cannot force an education on anyone. If that were true, then everyone would be literate and have an advanced college degree. In truth, some people are not destined for academic success or careers. It is an elitist and presumptuous attitude to suggest that everyone should be academically successful. There are many successful people lacking in formal education. The fact is that we have no shortage of educated people. We do, however, have a severe shortage of tradespeople. Again, a reflection of an elitist culture. Toilet, evidently you are one of those not academically inclined yet elitist cotradictions. Now, the phrase, "If there are bad teachers", is perfectly correct in the context. It is a suppostion setting up a logical argument. As far as the problems, again, I choose not to subscribe to the rhetoric. I do, however, fully support the concepts of problems in parenting and politicians with hidden agendas that are unrelated to education.

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:35 pm

Your Future from Flushing says:

Don't be afraid, Toilet, of me being in charge of children. I am actually, in charge, and my students fare very well. I have the thank you notes, pictures of graduations, and gifts to prove it. Oh, by the way, yes, for over 20 years. My students are also bright enough to understand that Bloomberg/Klein/Black are incompetent. They express those thoughts freely, God bless their little hearts, and often. You see, they have to suffer Bloomberg/Klein/Black incomptetence on a daily basis. They are also much better judges of teachers than Bloomberg/Klein/Black, Rhee, E4E, you or any of the other cultists masquearding as concerned educators.

Feb. 11, 2011, 12:35 pm

Rose from Kew Gardens says:

In my ten years of teaching, I have encountered at least fifteen (I counted the ones I remembered) teachers who began and ended their careers within three years of entering the system. Of this group, I was sad to see three go. Those three were smart, dedicated teachers who became disenchanted by a system that works against poor and minority students by forcing schools to dumb down tr curriculum. It's the new teachers who get the less advanced classes because they don't yet have the knowledge or skill to handle the higher level classes. The unfortunate reality is that the lower level classes are usually difficult to manage. Young teachers generally don't have the skill to manage their classes and make an impact. This comes with experience; and research supports this.

Seniority is necessary in a system which forces principals to choose between having experienced teachers and basic resources. At the PEP meeting a DOE official was asked why there was a disparity between the resources a new school had and the resources the poorly performing school had, he replied that the new school could hire new staff at a lower rate of pay and use the rest of their budget on other things like computers. The "failing" school had too many teachers making too much, so the school had no money for anything else. Why should this be the choice in education? Experienced staff and no resources to help them succeed or inexperienced staff and limitless resources? This is a recipe for failure and it would suggest an implicit policy (in we do away with seniority) of getting rid of high paid staff so that there would always be money for additional resources.

By the way, seniority does not just apply to teachers. It applies to cops and firemen, among other municipal employees. For those of you against seniority rights, who do you want to protect you, the rookie cop or the veteran?

Feb. 11, 2011, 1:36 pm

tee gee from sunset park says:

we've all seen private industry replace 55 year olds with 25 year olds to save on salaries. but there are other reasons why the protection of seniority is important.

i taught for 34 years and during most of my tenure i was considered a model teacher - principals would have me mentor young teachers and my classroom was the first stop for visiting DOE visitors. but once, i bumped noses with a new principal and at the start of the summer vacation she gave me a "gift" of a U (unsatisfactory) rating. there was nothing to back it up. all my observations were above average and i even had a formal letter from her in my file praising my work.

but because of a personal disagreement, in a fit of anger, she pretty much ruined my summer. when school began in september, i filed a grievance with the union and the principal immediately rescinded the U rating. imagine if there was no union, imagine if there was no seniority.

there are burnt out teachers who need to be prodded, but i would not trust principals alone to determine who needs prodding. in fact, thru the years i saw many teachers who from day one should not have been teaching, but they were there because a friend or relative in DOE got them their job. they live protected careers of incompetence. let's work on getting rid of them first. like all industries, it all comes down to accountability and transparency.

Feb. 11, 2011, 2:11 pm

Tee from Whitestone says:

I'd find it easier to buy into what E$E is being paid to talk and write about if they actually knew and understood how the NYCDOE works. Most new teachers leave within five years- many for better situations in the suburbs (who could blame them) or quit altogether. It's terribly sad to me that we don't value the people who've shown their commitment to kids by actually STAYING in the system, unlike the two founders of E$E who QUIT.

We need to get away from this "young and new is good, old and experienced is bad" idea. The most amazing teacher I know is pushing 60 but is at the top of the salary scale, so she might be in jeopardy, not the 23 year old TFA teacher who kisses up to the admins and spends lots of her daddy's money to do nice things for her kids and isn't that great of a teacher.

I haven't known very many truly bad teachers during my 15 years in the city- and the admins who allow bad teachers who remain are the ones who should be penalized, not the teachers who've reached the top of the salary scale. Anyone who thinks that good, veteran teachers will be safe is terribly misguided.

The city will attract the excellent teachers it wants when they begin showing respect to teachers, giving support to teachers and not engaging in constant combat over basic rights that ALL workers should have.

Feb. 11, 2011, 2:31 pm

Steph from Brooklyn says:

Tee - It seems like that is just the point this article makes. I think the debate is not young vs old, but involved vs burnt out. It seems to me the only thing this article argues is that seniority should not be the ONLY determining factor? I think there are lots of sweeping generalizations being thrown around in the comments here, when I think the point this article makes is that teachers should be evaluated on an individual basis and not swept into senior vs rookie classifications. So if the older teachers are best - keep them, but give that courtesy to the rookies who will some day be the vets if they're being successful in the classroom. And to that point - Rose - I want the cop who can best keep our neighborhoods safe. I don't care what age. Maybe the vet is better at calling the shots and the rookie is better pounding the pavement on the night shift. I think in all of these instances, it comes down to the individual - and not their age - and maybe I'm wrong, but that seems to be the point here.

Feb. 11, 2011, 2:51 pm

BronxEnglish from Bronx says:

Costa simply spouts the drivel from E$E. . . it's amazing how they seem to think if they repeat the same talking points (which by the way mean absolutely nothing, and are actively trounced by research), they'll somehow convince everyone. We all know what's going on here. The privatization of the education system, and the conquering of the $308 billion dollar education "market" for private use. The zillionaires simply don't have enough. They've got to make automotons of the children, and wage slaves of the professional teachers. Makes me sick every time I think about it.
MFiorillo--Thank you, as usual, for your pithy and to-the-point comments. You always get to the heart of the matter.

Feb. 11, 2011, 2:54 pm

Tee from Whitestone says:

Steph, I honestly think, regardless of quality, that it's going to come down to cheap vs. expensive. The changes Joel Klein made when Chancellor mean that principals get a lump sum of money, as opposed to being told, "you need X number of teachers". Thus the system is set up to favor less experienced, cheaper teachers. The other issue is that there is no real clear standard for what makes a "good" teacher. We are satisfactory or unsatisfactory. There is just way too much wiggle room.

It has also been pointed out by the mayor and Assemblyman Bing, who sponsored the anti-seniority bill, that laying off pricier teachers means that fewer overall layoffs will be needed. If the statements they both made (which are easy enough to find if you're interested) are any indication, and absent a clear, fair eval system, you're going to see lots of vets laid off, which I imagine will also affect pensions.

Feb. 11, 2011, 3:15 pm

disgruntled from brooklyn says:

Perhaps the real problem is not just the layoffs but teachers who are undertrained (tfa), focus on the low hanging fruit by only pushing students that are already known to perform well, and not holding the bar high for all students. I'm also pretty sure that if teaching were considered a privilege as Costa says it is then we probably wouldn't even have so many young, inexperienced, and incompetent teachers (I apologize to those young teachers that are the opposite of this and I know you are out there) who are looking to only pad their resumes before they then go on to do what it is that they "really want to do."

Feb. 11, 2011, 7:12 pm

J from Queens says:

First of all, @Michael F: Hilarious that you typed E$E instead of E4E. Was that a typo or did you do that on purpose?

That being said, enough drivel from the anti-seniority crowd. It's utterly disingenuous for anyone to claim that seniority doesn't count in private industry - maybe it's easier to get rid of an older, more experienced, more expensive employee in a private company, but legal recourse is always possible using age discrimination as an argument. Costa, seniority is not "the standard," it is an objective guideline and nothing more. And as has been pointed out by multiple individuals here and by me on various different blogs, should you choose to stay with the system, one day you will find yourself more experienced, more senior, and more expensive, and then YOUR job will be in jeopardy. When you are pushing 40, or 50, or 55, and you are suddenly faced with the prospect of losing your job and your retirement, I hope you will remember that you screwed the generation before you when the generation after you screws you.

Firefighters and cops need to stand with teachers on this. Enough is enough.

Feb. 11, 2011, 9:05 pm

Jeff Kaufman from Brownsville says:

Without reiterating the excellent points many have made here I would like to question what indicators you refer to when you state, "While measuring teacher effectiveness can be challenging and the “perfect” evaluation system is still a work-in-progress, there are current measures in place in the city that are far better indicators of teacher quality than seniority alone."
Are Regents exams one of these indicators? Are student pass rates in your class? Graduation rates? I think not. One of the major problems with your thesis is that there is no escaping the subjective nature of teacher evaluation systems and they can never be perfect.
Seniority layoff protections were passed by the Legislature not because unions put pressure on them (they date back to early 1900's) but because state lawmakers wanted to take favoritism and nepotism from these decisions, believing that they were inconsistent with education in a democracy.
Utilizing "U" ratings in the layoff order also permits favoritism and nepotism to play a role in this decision and will necessarily terminate excellent, experienced teachers whose only error was having a personality clash with a supervisor or being "rewarded" for whistleblowing. It is sad that our less experienced colleagues buy into this charade.

Feb. 12, 2011, 8:13 am

DanaWolfson from midtown says:

this youg teacher is living in a fantasy land......

effective = low salary
ineffective = high salary

nothing more, nothing less

Feb. 12, 2011, 9:48 am

Old teacher from Brooklyn says:

To Address "Merit is a farce. There is absolutely no objective way to determine merit." The teacher who unfortunately did face a discriminatory U (thank heavens got reversed) shows how merit can be assessed: Mentoring teachers in a team, being showcased - for all those years - is that not one way merit can be assessed?
"i taught for 34 years and during most of my tenure i was considered a model teacher - principals would have me mentor young teachers and my classroom was the first stop for visiting DOE visitors"

In Need to Know, Jon Meacham interviewed an amazing prinicpal whose Brockton Mass school was failing miserably. By enlisting her whole staff, in a seemingly Professional Learning Community, they turned the school around. But her teachers, all of them, had to pull together, adopt a uniform system of teaching their students how to read critically and then write - how many of your colleagues in your own schools would agree to do this? No body is saying dismiss all senior teachers, keepi only young teachers - what people interested in educating students are saying, is give a look to the merit of the teachers you are thinking of dismissing - have they mentored, have their students showed academic growth, have they gone the extra mile to involve parents when possible?
"There is nothing wrong with education today. Simply put, not every child is college bound. This is a reality that politics have tried to push aside in currying favor with voters. The elimination of vocational programs was the true disservice to students"
I do support the idea that not all students should think of college only - there should be career oriented academic programs that prepare students to have a meaningful way to earn a living, that is not tied to getting a B.A. Teaching schools are getting together to look at this proposition. But to say that "there is nothing woring with education today" - - oh, my - is that why we can't get the majority of students to get at least a 65 on Regents? Is that why we're ranked 15th and lower in Science/Math? Is that why some neighborhood checkout young person scan't make change without the register? Is that why we have students that employers deem illiterate when they apply for a job with a high school degree? Right now, 98% of teachers are rated "satisfactory". If that were the case, 98% of students would be literate and competent in basic math and writing. They're not.

Feb. 13, 2011, 12:41 pm

Public Employee from NY State says:

I work in NY state I get hired from 2 years, before I work in private sector before the market crash for more than 10 years.
I see how bad is the quality of employers who work for 10-20 years compare to the new hires.
New hires are more energetic , eager to work, up to date in their field otherwise they will not be hired.
Old employers they have the experience but since they are protected they are less careless, lazy.
I hear someone say if the department get more responsibility instead of give it to the current employees who already do nothing they hire a new one to do this job.
When I start my state job I was grapping work, try to finish everything on time, by time start to compare my previous work an how I have to work hard to get my income and people here who do nothing and get paid well in this tough economy.
Last issue in the state is "working out of title" means people get hired to do a job and later on they get promoted to a different job title not related to what they previously do, and without any degree/certificate. Example someone hired as a Janitor and later work as a tech, nurse, etc..

Feb. 13, 2011, 8:31 pm

Shelly from East Village says:

Michelle's point that merit be the main consideration in hiring and firing is crucial, but it can't stop there. Tee: "the way the NYCDOE works" is that it doesn''; it has been failing our students for decades, and it needs to be completely restructured. Every employee in the DOE must be held accountable for the results they put out every single year. This is difficult, and it means that we must find an authentic way to measure results, but just because something is difficult doesn't mean we shouldn't make it happen. Our students are worth it. People in the private sector are employed at will and expected to produce every year, and educators should be no different.

To address a separate point: It's true that not every person is going to choose to go to college, but it should be an educated decision an individual consciously makes rather than the result of a system that failed to do its job.

Feb. 14, 2011, 12:35 am

Parent from Westchester says:

These young teachers are so naive, and misinformed. Further, they are overconfident. As a parent, I do not want my children being taught by inexperienced 20-somethings. Give my kids teachers with 10 plus years of experience. I wouldn't let any of you over-zealous E4E kids teach mine.

Feb. 14, 2011, 4:59 pm

Seth R from Harlem says:

Michelle is wrong and dishonest on this issue. I'm a PhD physicist who worked in Science Education at the university level for over a decade - I have never been a school teacher, but I have the utmost respect for them. Seniority may not be perfect, but it is much better than any other system. Merit based? Nonsense. Teaching is a complex and subjective art, how would you measure it? Let the administration decide? School principals and administrators are often a serious impediment to quality teaching, and this amounts to allowing your boss to decide who to keep based on personal preference. Test scores? - even worse, standardized testing is the biggest problem facing education right now - you can't test complex learning and deep understanding with a high-stakes test. also, standardized tests have been show to have race and class biases towards white and middle-class students. The push to standardized testing is making education much worse, and tying teacher tenure to test scores would accelerate this process and further devastate the learning process is schools. Seniority also makes sense bc it is natural for an employer to try to fire senior personnel in times of crisis to save pension costs and such. I don't know much about E4E, but they are either unwitting tools for the pro-test, anti-teacher, anti-worker agenda during this time of increasing attacks on workers (who are not to blame for the econ crisis - the bankers are, but they are trying to make workers pay), or they are stooges for these interests. Either way, their arguments are dishonest and their policies dangerous.

Feb. 15, 2011, 3:15 am

jimmy from queens says:

Obviously this fool has a BS in BS.

Feb. 16, 2011, 1:37 pm

Enter your comment below

Name: Neighborhood:

By submitting this comment, you agree to the following terms:

You agree that you, and not BrooklynPaper.com or its affiliates, are fully responsible for the content that you post. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening or sexually-oriented material or any material that may violate applicable law; doing so may lead to the removal of your post and to your being permanently banned from posting to the site. You grant to BrooklynPaper.com the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual and fully sublicensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part world-wide and to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.