Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Schools in California, issued a statement today declaring his decision to seek appellate review of the Vergara decision. Torlakson is a veteran educator. His opponent Marshall Tuck immediately attacked Torlakson. Tuck, a former investment banker, was active in the charter school movement. Tenure is not the only or the most important issue that divides them. Tuck’s penchant for privatization would undermine public education across the state.
I know Tom Torlakson well. He is humble, knowledgeable, and understands schooling. I hope the voters of California are wise enough to re-elect him.
Tom Torlakson said today:
Friends,
Earlier today I issued a statement regarding my decision to seek appellate review of the Vergara case, which has drawn considerable public attention in recent weeks.
Here is the complete text of my public statement:
“The people who dedicate their lives to the teaching profession deserve our admiration and support. Instead, this ruling lays the failings of our education system at their feet.
“We do not fault doctors when the emergency room is full. We do not criticize the firefighter whose supply of water runs dry. Yet while we crowd our classrooms and fail to properly equip them with adequate resources, those who filed and support this case shamelessly seek to blame teachers who step forward every day to make a difference for our children.
“No teacher is perfect. A very few are not worthy of the job. School districts have always had the power to dismiss those who do not measure up, and this year I helped pass a new law that streamlined the dismissal process, while protecting the rights of both teachers and students. It is disappointing that the Court refused to even consider this important reform.
“In a cruel irony, this final ruling comes as many California teachers spend countless unpaid hours preparing to start the new school year in hopes of better serving the very students this case purportedly seeks to help.
“While the statutes in this case are not under my jurisdiction as state Superintendent, it is clear that the Court’s ruling is not supported by the facts or the law. Its vagueness provides no guidance about how the Legislature could successfully alter the challenged statutes to satisfy the Court. Accordingly, I will ask the Attorney General to seek appellate review.”
Best regards,
Tom
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Tom Torlakson just earned my vote.
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé and commented:
Tom Torlakson just earned my vote.
Hooray!
What is the opinion of New York state’s superintendent on this issue? Can we expect a similar reaction should Campbell Brown and her band of hedge fund deformers win in a New York lower court? Just wondering from across the border in Pennsylvania, the Fracking paradise.
Tisch and King would sell us out in a heartbeat.
Exactly the right stand. Teaching is difficult and schools often lack sufficient resources, so if we want better education for students we need to step back and look at the full picture instead of pointing fingers at teachers.
School and district leaders have always had the legal authority to remove ineffective teachers after due process was followed. Should ineffective teachers choose on their own to leave the profession? Yes. But if ineffective teachers remain in the classroom that is attributable to inaction by school and district leaders.
Torlakson gave an honorary doctorate to an undeserving superintendent who is anti-teacher. I cannot give him my vote. California’s educational system is broken. I don’t see him fixing it.
More details please, cm.
Thanks!
I am immediately reminded of the portion of Waiting for Superman which compares the number of teaching certificates lifted in Illinois with as I recall the number of lawyers disbarred, with the latter number being higher. It was a specious argument, since many of those who are not good teachers are not kept on until they reach tenure, and since they cannot get good recommendations leave the field, and since certification is not permanent, their certificates expire.
The Vergara decision was based on incorrect information, as was the decision in Zelman v Harris which legitimized vouchers in Cleveland. That unfortunately is no guarantee that a higher court will reverse – again, note that the Zelman case was at the highest appellate level in the nation, the Supreme Court of the United States.
That said, the Vergara opinion/decision is so poorly crafted that there is a reasonable possibility of it being overturned, and Tom T is totally correct in appealing the decision.
The said thing is that because of Vergara, we are seeing a spread of that approach – Campbell Brown in New York. Had Vergara turned out different, perhaps this line of attack would have died out, but only to be replaced by another.
Torlakson justified my previous vote, and will receive my vote again in the upcoming election. That’s more than I can say for most other elected officials, particularly at the national level.
BAZINGA! –Thank You for Standing UP for TEACHERS and their STUDENTS!
While I don’t agree with Supt. Torlakson when it comes to Common Core, I whole-heartedly agree with his sentiments about the Vergara case.