Lloyd Lofthouse is an experienced educator and commentator on the blog:

“In the Vergara trial—I think the verdict was bought and paid for in some way—the judge’s verdict was based on unproven theories that a few incompetent teachers would ruin a child’s ability to earn an education. The numbers presented in one theory were one to two percent of teachers could be incompetent—not “are incompeten” but “could be incompetent” because of classroom observations of one man over a period of years.

First, how many teachers can one person observe long enough to form a valid judgement and how long should each observation be? What if the teacher was having a bad day and the other 179 instructional days were perfect?

Anyway, let’s look at a few numbers based on the 2011-12 school year in California:

There were 6,220,993 students enrolled and attending 10,296 public schools. Another 438,474 attended 1,019 Charter schools.

There were 300,140 teachers in the public schools. If we go with the 1 to 2 percent observational guesstimate, that means 3,001 to 6,223 teachers might be incompetent, but there are 10,296 schools, so that means thousands of schools don’t have even one incompetent teacher, but the teachers in those schools risk losing legal due process rights that would allow them to challenge any accusations made against them that they were incompetence.

In other words, 292,917 to 297,139 could be fired for any reason at any time and there would be no way for the teacher to defend the accusations made against them.

If the Vergara ruling survives, every teacher in California would all be at risk of being fired at any moment by an administrator who could be incompetent or be stooge owned by the Koch brothers, Bill Gates, TFA, etc who had walking orders to get rid of as many teachers as possible and replace them with younger, less incompetent teachers.

It’s obvious that Bill Gates is in charge of deciding how many teachers should go, because it is his “rank and yank” system that is part of the Common Core agenda and all anyone has to do is look at the arbitrary numbers Bill Gates set in place at Microsoft to judge how many had to be incompetent and go to be replaced by another crop who had to prove their competence. That anal arbitrary nubmer that Gates must have pulled out of his crotch was 25% with no evidence to support the fact that so many Microsoft employee were actually incompetent.

In conclusion, it’s obvious where this is going. If President Obama’s partner in crime, Bill Gates, has his way, eventually 25% of public school teachers—not just the one to two percent who are alleged to be incompetent without any evidence to support that claim— would have to lose their jobs annually all based on standardized test scores.

If you read the recent headlines, Microsoft will lay off 18,000 workers this year in addition to 12,500 associated with the Nokia Device and Services team it acquired earlier this year. Microsoft has almost 130,000 employes across the world—the number losing their jobs is almost 24%.

How many teachers in California stand to lose their jobs annually and have to be replaced using the Gates “rank and yank” system? The answer is about 75,000 annually. At that annual rate, every four years, California’s public schools would get rid of 300,140 teachers for a complete possible turnover in every school.

This is all based on two unproven theories—with crucial evidence—that both are horribly wrong headed and when implemented they create nothign but havoc and chaos.

What are the odds of one of those 6.2 million students ending up in a classroom with one of those estimated 3,001 to 6,223 so-called incompetent teachers with no proven, accepted, valid method to judge the teacher properly?

Does anyone have an answer?

What about the odds of a teacher ending up with incompetent students who have dysfunctional, incompetent parents? Does anyone have a theory for that number? I think we could start with the number of children living in poverty and/or who have severe learning disabilities.

These numbers might help: California’s child poverty rates for Latinos (31.2%) and African Americans (33.4%) are much higher than the rates among Asians (13.2%) and whites (10.1%). The child poverty rate in families where neither parent has a high school diploma is high in California (48.5%).


In addition, it might help to compare the poverty rates with the on-time high school graduation rates in California (2011-2012):

Asian/Pacific Islander 90%
White 86%
Hispanic 73%
Black 66%