ADVOCATZ supports any and all efforts to keep teacher tenure as the Law in the US. Our children are relying on us to protect our excellent teachers of all races, genders, and ages.
Betsy Combier, President
 |
| Fred Glass |
NEWS RELEASE
September
16, 2015
Contacts: For CFT: Fred Glass, (510) 579-3343
For CTA: Frank Wells, (562) 708-5425
Contacts: For CFT: Fred Glass, (510) 579-3343
For CTA: Frank Wells, (562) 708-5425
For Information on the Civil Rights Groups
Brief:
Jennifer Bezoza or Candice Francis, (415) 543-9697, ext. 232
Jennifer Bezoza or Candice Francis, (415) 543-9697, ext. 232
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Civil Rights Groups, Researchers, Legal Scholars, and Top Educators
Urge Reversal of Deeply Flawed Vergara Ruling
Amicus “Friend of the
Court” Briefs Filed Today Spotlight Harm to Students and Failings of
Decision
LOS ANGELES — Some of the nation’s top legal scholars,
education policy experts, civil rights advocates, award-winning teachers,
school board members and administrators filed five amici curiae, or “friend of
the court,” briefs with the California Court of Appeal today. The filings shine
a spotlight on the numerous and major flaws that would harm students in last
year’s decision striking down important due process rights for California
educators, as well as other laws governing hiring and layoffs of state
educators. The briefs strongly criticize the Vergara ruling on both legal and policy grounds,
urging that the decision be reversed.
Prominent civil rights organizations including the Lawyers’
Committee for Civil Rights, Equal Justice Society, Education Law Center, Southern
Poverty Law Center, and Advancing Justice-LA filed powerful briefs. These
organizations argued that a lack of adequate funding, and certainly not the
challenged statutes, is the primary cause of educational inequity, and that in
order to close the achievement gap, disadvantaged schools and students must
have the support and resources they need to succeed. Arguing that money and
race influence competition for qualified teachers and the ability of districts
to enact proven reforms like smaller class sizes, the organizations urged the
Court to reverse the “…plaintiffs’ attempt to lay blame at the feet of the
tenure system for disparities that are the product of other factors, including
chronically inadequate funding for education.”
Some of California’s most-honored teachers—including 2012
National Teacher of the Year Rebecca Mieliwocki,(pictured above) and 2014 California Teacher of
the Year and national nominee Timothy Smith—wrote of the importance of due
process and how these laws ensure they are able to teach without fear of
discriminatory, politically-motivated, or baseless termination, and how the
laws support the risk-taking often necessary to be an outstanding teacher. They
also stressed how striking down the challenged statutes would likely worsen
teacher turnover in already disadvantaged school districts. The educators were
joined in their brief by the American Association of University Professors, the
Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, and the Korematsu Center for Law
& Equality.
More than ninety top national education researchers and scholars, including Diane Ravitch, Richard Ingersoll and Eva Baked, took the decision to task for failing to establish any causal link between the challenged statutes and any alleged problems the suit purports to address. These experts argued that current laws play a key role in the recruitment and retention of quality teachers, in a job market where teaching is unfortunately often becoming less and less attractive as a career option for university students. The researchers were also highly critical of the plaintiffs’ proposal to rely on standardized test scores and the “value-added method (VAM)” of interpreting those scores as the major criteria for teacher layoffs due to budget cuts. “VAM scores have been shown to be unstable and to fluctuate dramatically from year to year, so that a teacher could appear very ineffective one year and then very effective the next,” they wrote. “The trial court ultimately failed to consider the possibility that relying solely on VAMs as a way to administer reductions-in-force could drive teachers away from the profession and exacerbate the teacher shortage.”
More than ninety top national education researchers and scholars, including Diane Ravitch, Richard Ingersoll and Eva Baked, took the decision to task for failing to establish any causal link between the challenged statutes and any alleged problems the suit purports to address. These experts argued that current laws play a key role in the recruitment and retention of quality teachers, in a job market where teaching is unfortunately often becoming less and less attractive as a career option for university students. The researchers were also highly critical of the plaintiffs’ proposal to rely on standardized test scores and the “value-added method (VAM)” of interpreting those scores as the major criteria for teacher layoffs due to budget cuts. “VAM scores have been shown to be unstable and to fluctuate dramatically from year to year, so that a teacher could appear very ineffective one year and then very effective the next,” they wrote. “The trial court ultimately failed to consider the possibility that relying solely on VAMs as a way to administer reductions-in-force could drive teachers away from the profession and exacerbate the teacher shortage.”
Past and present school board members, as well as school
administrators, filed a brief that argued making teaching a more attractive
profession is in the best interest of students. Vergara would make teaching a less desirable
profession and would exacerbate a growing teacher scarcity, especially in light
of the fact that it is just one among many ongoing orchestrated attacks on
educators. Among supporters of the appeal were Kevin Beiser, board member of
the San Diego Unified School District; Joan Buchanan, former state lawmaker and
trustee of the San Ramon Valley Unified School District; and Steve Zimmer,
board president of the Los Angeles Unified School District.
 |
| Irwin Chemerinsky |
Perhaps most devastating to the decision was the brief by some
of the top legal scholars in the country, among them Dean Irwin Chemerinsky and
Catherine Fisk of UC Irvine Law School, Charles Ogletree of Harvard Law School,
and Pam Karlan of Stanford Law School. These experts said there was simply no
basis in the law for finding the challenged statutes unconstitutional or that
any causal link had been demonstrated between the statutes and a diminished
education for any student. They argued that striking down the statutes could in
fact make things worse for students. They wrote, “In this case, the trial court
substituted its judgment about desirable education policy and the best way to
improve education for students without regard to the harms its policy choice
might cause and without regard to the evidence or the law about the cause of
educational inequities and the likelihood that the court’s injunction would
redress it. The trial court exceeded its role in our constitutional system and
its ruling must be reversed.”
Attorney General Kamala Harris, representing the State of
California as defendant; and the intervening parties, California Teachers
Association and California Federation of Teachers, had filed separate appeal
briefs earlier this summer. The amici curiae briefs filed today, as well as a
complete list of signatories, can be seen here.
###
The 325,000-member CTA is affiliated with the 3 million-member
National Education Association.
The California Federation of Teachers is the statewide affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers, and represents more than 100,000 faculty and school employees in public and private schools and colleges, from early childhood through higher education.
The California Federation of Teachers is the statewide affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers, and represents more than 100,000 faculty and school employees in public and private schools and colleges, from early childhood through higher education.
