• King of Education in Arizona
    posted by Mike McClellan at 28 November, 9:37 AM  0 
    Share on Facebook+1Share on Twitter

    Me.

    Well, not really.  Not even close.  But you might’ve read about the Valley mayors who want to play a role in education reform in AZ, including providing sufficient funding to our schools.

    As a retired teacher, I’m interested in their plans.  And as a loudmouthed blogger, of course I have an opinion about reforms.

    So I emailed three mayors my suggestions (turns out to be a 10-point plan).  If I were King of Education in Arizona, here’s what I’d do (or at least here’s what I emailed Mayor Stanton of Phoenix, Mesa’s Scott Smith and my mayor, John Lewis in Gilbert):

    I saw you on TV yesterday and read about your plans in the paper.  Thanks for diving into a contentious issue that needs some calm, level-headed thinking.  
     
    As an old teacher — emphasis on “old” — I’d like to suggest a few reforms to consider:
     
    1.  We already have a gate at the end of the third grade — kids who underperform in reading are to be held back starting at the end of the next school year.
     
    I’d suggest that we do something similar at the end of the sixth grade and/or at the end of the eighth grade as well.  As is, very few middle school kids are held back, no matter their abilities.
    Given that, teachers see kids who are clearly unprepared and worse, quickly unmotivated, to succeed in high school.  With some kind of level of ability to use as a gate before entering high school, we might see kids more motivated in junior high and thus, later in high school.
     
    2.  Tenure in schools has already been weakened, what with the law that now says seniority cannot be used to lay off or rehire teachers after a layoff.  We need to take that one step further:  Tenure in its current form should be eliminated — if a veteran teacher is underperforming or is simply incompetent, principals should have the ability to fire that teacher at the end of a school year.  I believe you could get teachers to agree with that as long as there were some legal protections from vindictive principals going after teachers they don’t like.  There might be some labor laws now that could apply here, but if not, I’m sure some wise men could create legislation to do so.
     
    3.  Administrators at all levels should be held to higher standards.  For example, school administrators should have extensive classroom experience prior to becoming administrators.  As is, too often we have teachers entering the classroom as new teachers hellbent on getting out as quickly as possible and becoming administrators.  Often, because of their classroom inexperience, they have little understanding of what teachers face, and are thus less effective.  I believe Rep. Fillmore — who’s no longer in the House — had a bill in the last session that would’ve required an administrator to have at least six years of classroom experience.  I’d say 10 is better, in that it takes at least 3 years for even the best teachers to feel they have a feel for what works.
     
    4.  Administrators’ jobs ought to be just as on the line as teachers’ jobs.  If a school consistently underperforms, the principal should be replaced.
     
    5.  How to decide if a school’s underperforming?  You need a uniform pretest across the state — maybe the Common Core curriculum will do this — and a uniform posttest to give at the end of the year.
     
    That way, you can actually measure growth within a year of the schools’ students.  That way, you can get a fairer measure of how good a teacher is.  Currently, we use the AIMS scores from one year to the next to measure growth, which I’m guessing statisticians would say is a silly way to measure a teacher’s or school’s quality.
     
    6.  We should find some way to reward our best teachers.  Here’s one suggestion:
     
    Give each school a sum of money, based on the number of teachers in the school.  The principal can then use that money for performance bonuses.  The criteria?  As a baseline, maybe only the teachers who have 80% or more of their kids grow at least one year in their classroom, based on pre and post tests (or maybe 80% of their kids pass the test at the end of the year — again wiser men than I can come up with that standard).
     
    Add to that peer evaluations of those teachers — teachers know who the leaders in the school are and who just stay in their classrooms, maybe doing a fine job, but not providing any real leadership in the school
     
    And from that winnowing, the principal would have a small list of teachers who receive the bonus.
     
    7.  As we know, not every kid is destined for college.  So while EVIT and schools like it are good alternatives, they are limited in enrollment.  Why can’t we encourage public-private partnerships between various professions and high schools?  For example, if a school provided the facilities for teaching plumbing or electrical work, why couldn’t a consortium of plumbing or electrical companies provide the instruction?  Kids who had an interest in electrical work or circuitry work, or whatever non-college profession could apprentice while in high school, or at least learn enough to become an apprentice following high school.  Maybe approach a business group to pilot something like this at a high school, see how it works.
     
    8.  One way to possibly drive down costs is to have a uniform health insurance program for all public schools in our state.  As is, we have (mostly) individual districts with their own insurance plans.  I’m no insurance expert, but it would seem logical that one plan for all school employees would drive down bureaucratic costs and maybe the premiums as well, given the large pool an insurance company would have.  I know there are autonomy issues here, but smart guys like you mayors could find a way, right?
     
    9.  We need to find a fairer way to help our poverty-based schools.  As is, they suffer from less funding than other schools do, in part because those districts tend to vote against overrides.  Thus, the rich get richer and the poor districts continue to fall behind, ending up with larger classes, outmoded equipment, and lower paid teachers (which often translates into less able teachers).  This is a tough one.  Good luck.
     
    10.  Speaking of tough, the last one is the toughest.  As you know from your own experiences, kids from supportive families, involved parents, tend to do much better in school.  So how do we motivate parents to stay involved in their kids’ school lives?  You’ve seen it –at the elementary level, open house nights are packed with parents.  In high school, the attendance is pathetic.
     
    This one’s a tough nut to crack, but worthy of study.
     
    With these reforms, I believe you can go to the legislature and argue for more funding, which I believe is one goal of the group.
     
    I don’t know if these help, but I hope they do.  Good luck to you and the rest of the mayors.
     
    Mike McClellan
    Gilbert
     

  • Azcvoices.com is a network of community bloggers created by The Arizona Republic, azcentral.com and 12 News to highlight diverse viewpoints. Members' opinions do not represent the views of Republic Media.
  • Recent Arizona Politics Posts

  • More Posts by Mike McClellan

    Mike McClellan

    Post Author: Mike McClellan


    Bio: Mike McClellan has lived in Arizona since 1967 where he attended high school and the University of Arizona. McClellan taught high school English for 36 years, including 30 years at at Dobson High School in Mesa. He has been a contributing columnist to both the East Valley Republic editions and the East Valley Tribune.


    Website: http://azcvoices.com/politics/author/mikemcclellansblog/

    Users of this site agree to the Terms of Service, Privacy Policy/Your California Privacy Rights and Ad Choices