Anyone from Cleveland has definitely been feeling down in the dumps lately, but this recent article from the Los Angeles Times has me feeling particularly gloomy about the chances for any meaningful school reform there. The article profiles a turnaround effort in a failing LA public high school which has replaced a significant portion of the staff. Teachers at the school had to reapply for their jobs, and the school reopened with about half of its original staff.
Contrast that with Cleveland's attempt at similar reform. As Emmy previously discussed, a recent arbitration ruling stuck down an attempt by Cleveland schools CEO Eugene Sanders to have teachers in 22 shuttered schools reapply for jobs, rather than be shuffled around on the basis of seniority. This was a critical blow to Cleveland's transformation plan, which proposed badly needed reform in the long-troubled district. Allowing principals to handpick their staff would've better enabled the district to put the best teachers where they are most needed.
On a broader scale, this is just one aspect of the downward spiral of contract negotiations between the district and its teachers union. The process was contentious for months and only recently produced a tentative contract ? one that upholds seniority rights. While the union did make some concessions, the district lost a vital piece of its plan to turn itself around.
As David Abbott, head of the influential Cleveland-based George Gund Foundation, said in The Cleveland Plain Dealer:
Both parties must recognize that the contract must enable transformation, not impede it. Otherwise, they'll be holding onto the contract as we all not so slowly sink beneath the waves. The fact of the matter is this district is dying. Are we going to do what needs to be done to save it?
Abbott is not exaggerating about the district dying. Between 1999 and 2009, the Cleveland schools lost 37 percent of its enrollment, declining from 75,774 to 47,609 students. Its academic results have remained some of the worst in the nation. And during this time the district operated under one of the most restrictive teacher contracts in the country.
The LA Times article points out that replacing staff has yielded mixed results in other districts. But at least the LA school district stood up to the status quo, whereas Cleveland succumbed to it. If Cleveland's tentative contract is any indication, students arriving to school in August will find things exactly as they left them, and that's not good news.
?Eric Ulas