"quality-blind" layoff rules used by most districts would make a bad situation even worse

It looks like Congress will soon pass the $26 billion package that will provide $10 billion to (supposedly) prevent educator layoffs and $16 billion for Medicaid assistance to the states.  I have very mixed feelings about this.  Putting on my investing hat, I think the U.S. economy is very feeble and we're on the verge of a severe double-dip recession and deflation, so federal government spending is very necessary to avert this.  I think we're at least a year away from being able to safely cut spending and reduce our deficits.  Thus, this $26 billion is a small step in the right direction and at least it's not going toward building bridges to nowhere.  That said, it kills me that the $10 billion isn't being used to drive even more change in the education sector.  It would be SO simple to add one sentence to the bill that says: "None of these funds may be used in districts with layoff policies driven primarily by seniority." 

 

Here's an email from The New Teacher Project with yet another study showing how important this issue is:

 

Friends:
 
Earlier this year, as school districts across the country confronted the unpleasant prospect of teacher layoffs, we released a short paper describing how the "quality-blind" layoff rules used by most districts would make a bad situation even worse. We highlighted the perverse effects of these policies, which lay off the newest teachers first, regardless of talent. They force schools to cut effective teachers while retaining less effective ones. They maximize the number of layoffs necessary achieve a given budget reduction, since newer teachers earn the lowest salaries. And they have a disproportionate impact on the neediest students, who are more likely to have newer teachers.
 
Our report proposed a smarter teacher layoff system that considers several measures of teachers' effectiveness-their attendance, classroom management skills, and annual performance rating-in addition to seniority. Surveys we conducted in two large urban districts suggested that teachers would overwhelmingly prefer this system to current quality-blind policies.
 
Now, new research from the National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (CALDER) confirms that a quality-based layoff system like the one we proposed can have substantial long-term benefits for students. Researchers also found that laying off teachers based exclusively on seniority harms student learning by depriving schools of good teachers. You can read more about the CALDER study in today's edition of USA Today.
 
Although this year's wave of teacher layoffs has mostly passed, the issue isn't going away. Next year is likely to worse. States and districts should start working with teachers and other stakeholders now to develop smarter policies they can use if layoffs become necessary. Our paper outlines a system that most districts can implement right away, and that teachers will be likely to support. In fact, the school district and teachers' union in Indianapolis recently agreed on a quality-based layoff policy similar to the one we proposed.
 
We cannot cling to bad policies when better ones are within reach. Transparent, fair layoff procedures based on performance are possible--it's only a matter of taking action. Let's not allow a generation of talented young teachers and the students they serve to become the next victims of this recession.
 
We hope you'll reach out to decision makers in your community and ask them what they are doing to act on this critical research.