The Vergara trial is an effort by a wealthy tech entrepreneur to win a judgment that any due process rights for teachers harms the civil rights of minority students.
The defense (the California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers) called Harvard professor Susan Moore Johnson to testify. Johnson is one of the nation’s leading authorities on the teaching profession. Plaintiffs’ lawyer attempted to rattle her by asking narrow questions about California law and pointing out that she had studied only one district in California, as though the laws there operate in a vacuum. Here is an account from a corporate reform source.
In contrast, the following was sent by a colleague with access to the trial transcript:
“Diane –
“I wanted to let you know that Susan Moore Johnson testified on Tuesday at the Vergara trial. Her testimony was rock star stuff because of her credentials and I thought it’s worth sharing with you for your blog. The plantiff’s tried to say that she wasn’t very qualified to testify because she had only studied a few districts in California directly in the course of her work on the issues that the trail was about. They also admitted that income inequality, poverty and other issues were at play in high poverty schools but they said those things are irrelevant because they only want to focus on taking away teachers rights. You can see some quotes below.
“In Vergara v. California, evidence won the day. Dr. Susan Moore Johnson took the stand on February 18 and 19, using a lifetime of experience and research to back up her testimony that due process allows teachers to do their best work.
“Some highlights from her testimony:
“Due process allows teachers to do their best work: “It’s essential that the people who work with students, primarily the teachers, are able to do their best work, and that means that the conditions of their work have…to ensure that they have the resources they need, the time they need and the conditions they need to teach well.”
“Better working conditions mean greater student improvement: “When we took the data from the surveys and identified the schools that were rated as very favorable working environments, favorable working environments, unfavorables, and we linked that to student achievement using a student growth measure which is used in the state of Massachusetts, we found that student improvement was greater in schools where teachers reported better working conditions.”
“Laws around tenure, seniority and due process help retain good teachers: “Teachers remain in schools where there are strong and effective principals who deal fairly with them and with students and create environments where they can do their best work. Teachers want to be able to teach effectively, and schools that enable them to do that are schools where they will stay. And that’s regardless of the income level of the school.”
“Interestingly, during her testimony, the plaintiff’s lawyer admitted that there were other factors of inequity at play. He said, “”[T]here are other things that can contribute – like racism, etc. That is not relevant.”
“Bottom line:
“Parents, teachers and students are fed up with the inequities that too often plague our classrooms. Schools are under- and unfairly funded. Classrooms are overcrowded. Segregation is still a reality, decades after Brown v Board of Education. Some kids come to school hungry. Others leave with no home to go to.
“If those who brought this case really cared about making a difference for kids, they’d be working with trachrs and parents to find and implement evidence-based solutions – early childhood education, small classes, project-based learning, wraparound services, professional development, fair funding formulas and more.
“Blaming teachers’ work conditions for the inequities in public education is a misdirected, ideological argument.”
The Teacher Trial continues, as families fall further and further behind:
“The percentage of students receiving subsidized school lunches hasn’t budged for four years, indicating that poverty persists for Ohio children and raising doubt about the state’s economic recovery. More than 800,000 kids — 44 percent of students — are enrolled this school year in the federal free and reduced-price lunch program for low-income families, according to data provided by the Ohio Department of Education.”
I think it’s time to pour some more money into teacher evaluation consultants in this state.
With as many billionaire-funded “foundations” as we have, and thousands of paid advocates and hot-shot lawyers all working on behalf of the The Children, why the heck are children faring so poorly? Why are they taking hit after hit after hit?
Good question, Chiara! You are well named.
Where’s the US DOE on the teacher trial? Let me guess: they’re agnostics. They’re waiting to see if the teachers float or sink.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/02/brownback-extremely-unpopular-trails-for-reelection.html
As usual in every bit of polling that’s out there, even in conservative Kansas, people want public education FUNDED. It’s no complicated.
The “crisis in public education” is in funding. People know it, because their kids are in these public schools. When will politicians figure it out?
“There are a few big issues causing Brownback trouble. Only 26% of voters in the state think his much heralded tax plan has been a success, compared to 47% who feel it hasn’t been. And voters are also at odds with Brownback on education funding. 59% of voters in the state think the schools are inadequately funded, compared to 31% who think they receive enough state money, and by a 59/29 spread they want the Kansas Supreme Court to rule that funding has to be increased. Brownback’s even losing his party on this issue- 47% of Republicans want the Supreme Court to require more education funding to 40% who are opposed.”
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2014/02/brownback-extremely-unpopular-trails-for-reelection.html
Wonderful.
The oligarchs behind this trial will not be satisfied until they have the freedom to make, unilaterally, whatever decisions they wish to make about the lives of others.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Remove due process and what you have left is absolute power. If I want to fire you and give your job to my mistress or to my golfing buddy’s idiot son, there is nothing to prevent me from doing that.
History teaches that in the final stages of empire, this always happens. An oligarchy emerges. It seeks ever-more absolute power. It makes ever-more stupid, disconnected, autocratic decisions. And then everything falls apart, horribly, disastrously. Everyone suffers, but the oligarchs’ heads are the first to roll. Our oligarchs are pushing things too far. The people are awakening, and as they do, the oligarchs respond with more draconian demands for absolute authority. And by doing that, they imperil everyone, but, ironically, in the long run, themselves most of all.
Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it…
Wow, and now her testimony is part of the public record. Will her testimony be ignored by the corporate owned media, especially Rupert Murdock’s News Corp and Fox News?
Very likely. These media typically cherry-pick the quotes, rather than pay close attention to the entire public document. They don’t really care who she is after all. Haters’ got to hate. Just like the link in the post above, they channel die-hard ideological argument– i.e., public education sucks; only corporations and private foundations can fix the problem, etc.– to please their like-minded audiences around the nation.
True. The media is not into the truth. It’s into making money and manipulation public thought and opinion.
It’s no secret that investigative journalism is just about dead and that increasingly, news aggregators who distribute press releases and cooked stories, or PR, as news reports are increasingly dominant, especially online. Almost every story that I read about the Common Core is simply a slightly warmed over press release from some education deform organization. Almost no one in the media digs beneath phrases like new, higher, more challenging standards that encourage deeper thinking. The matters that ought to be at issue are taken for granted.
Where hope lies is with social media and the creation of communities online that spill over into civil disobedience, like opting out, offline.
Finally, we get our side out to the public.
I find it fascinating that the plaintiff’s attorney criticized Johnson’s testimony as too narrow per her study of only one district in California. Yet the Vergara arguments hope to dismantle ed law affecting an entire (large) state based upon the complaints of only 5 or 6 families. Right now I’m thinking about the pot and the kettle, and their oddly alike color.
Reblogged this on 21st Century Theater.