Rereading this Washington Post article on Michelle Rhee's plan to woo teachers into ceding tenure and seniority privileges, I noticed a passage near the end that illuminates a different ed policy discussion:
Rhee can restrict seniority rights through a little-used District law that allows principals to diminish seniority rankings and use them among several other factors... The law was aimed at addressing "bumping rights," which allow senior teachers losing their positions during cutbacks to displace less-experienced peers at other schools."Bumping rights had been viewed as a problem for those of us trying to get quality teachers in the classroom. But we knew it was a challenge getting it out of the contracts," Kevin P. Chavous, who was on the D.C. Council when the law passed, said in a recent interview. "Even after the law was passed, superintendents operated under the assumption that bumping rights were still there."
Chavous's observation bolsters the claim that at least some of the blame for poorly-run schools should be redirected from unions to lily-livered leaders. In this Chavous echoes a recent Fordham report, The Leadership Limbo , which found that many big-district teacher contracts give school and district leaders a fair amount of autonomy and flexibility, which they simply fail to take advantage of. It would take an exceptionally strong-willed leader, it seems, to overcome the inertia that weighs as heavily on reform efforts as do union contracts. Thankfully Washington has just such a leader in Michelle Rhee.
