New Jefferson County (Louisville) Collective Bargaining Agreement Makes Small Advances but Leaves Much To Be Desired

Last week the Jefferson County Teachers Association’s (JCTA) voting members approved a new contract with the Jefferson County Public Schools (JCPS). Centerpieces of the new agreement include a) no annual raise for JCPS teachers, and b) slight changes to flexibility in hiring for JCPS principals.

According to JCTA president Brent McKim, teachers are willing to forgo the annual raise because they understand the difficult budget situation the district is in. JCPS will, however, provide an additional $5 million to compensate teachers for working ‘extra hours’ and for participating in professional development. Other changes include providing early childhood and elementary school teachers with an additional 10 minutes for their planning periods, and permitting teachers to take a personal day to attend their child’s graduation—rules currently prevent teachers from taking personal days during the last five school days. I applaud the district for providing additional planning time early childhood and elementary teachers. Generally, teachers are not provided with an optimal amount of time for planning. Providing teachers with additional time during the school day for planning and collaboration must be a part of school reforms. Planning time is not a luxury for teachers; rather it is absolutely necessary for high quality instructional planning. Without high quality instructional planning there can be no high quality instruction.

There are changes in the new contract to regulations around
hiring flexibility for principals, but the changes are slight and leave much to be desired for giving principals the flexibility they need to hire the best possible candidates for teaching positions. Under the previous contract, principals were prohibited from hiring a teacher candidate from outside the school district if a JCPS teacher requests a transfer to the school for the opening. The three most senior transfer applicants were given preference for the position. Under
the new contract, the pool of transfer candidates for positions will be expanded to eight. If fewer than four teachers request transfers for the position, principals will be permitted to interview candidates from outside of the district to reach a total of four candidates for the position. The change provides principals slightly more flexibility in hiring, but not much. Even with the new contract, the hiring restrictions on principals in JCPS are unnecessarily burdensome and do nothing to ensure that the best candidates are chosen for teaching positions. The interests of children would be served by
allowing principals the flexibility to hire the best candidate for a teaching position, regardless of whether the candidate comes from inside or outside of JCPS and without regard to how many years of experience a candidate has. Principals factor in teachers’ years of experience when making decisions about the best candidate for filling a vacancy. Giving a teacher preference for a position
simply because he or she has been doing the job longer, not because he or she is a more effective teacher, is ridiculous and it is part of the adult-centered, traditional teachers union ideology that we must break free from in public education. That ideology puts the desires and security of adults before the needs of children.

Although not nearly as big a problem as hiring flexibility for principals, I believe it is time we engage in conversations around the idea of paying teachers to attend and participate in professional development. Asking teachers to attend professional development that takes place ‘after-hours’ is not sufficient justification for needing to pay them to attend. The ‘after-hours’ concept itself is problematic for non-hourly, salaried employees like teachers.
Further, the idea that teachers must be paid to attend professional development which is both required for continued certification and/or equips them with the tools to do their jobs well just doesn’t sit well with me. Regulations pertaining to the maximum number of hours per month that teachers may be asked to stay ‘after-hours’
for professional development and the fiscal reality of having to pay for both trainers and attendees puts unneeded burdens on principals and school budgets. I am a supporter of paying teachers a salary commensurate with their abilities. Effective teachers should be paid well. Highly effective teachers should be paid very well—at a salary that differentiates them from average teachers. But with that
salary the expectation should be that teachers will meet all professional obligations, including attending meetings and participating in professional development after school. These are not foreign concepts. In fact, for teachers in Kentucky
school districts without collective bargaining agreements this is how
professional life works. It is time to revisit these ideas in Jefferson County as well.

Building a New Teaching Profession in the USA

I recently returned home after
spending nearly two weeks in Finland. After meeting with dozens of Finnish
education officials, administrators, and teachers, one of several recurrent
themes was trust. Finnish educators said repeatedly that trust is a hallmark of
their educational system and their relatively recent success on the Programme for
International Student Assessment (PISA). They talked about trusting a lot of
people; education officials trusting school principals, principals trusting teachers,
teachers trusting students and parents, etc. But most often the conversations
centered on how much trust the Finnish people have in teachers. As a former
teacher and a teacher advocate, I think that is awesome!

But we Americans would be foolish to look at the Finns
success, hear that it comes from trusting their teachers, and then therefore reason that trusting American teachers in that manner would lead us to success similar to that of the Finns. I
have likely upset some of you by saying that but it is true. We do not have
reason to have a blanket trust in American teachers. I wish things were that simple, but they are not. I argue that instead of advocating for
blanket trust for American teachers today our course of
action should be to begin building a teaching profession in the United States worthy
of such trust.

What it means to be a teacher in Finland is a bit
different than what it means to be a teacher in America. In Finland, throughout the nation’s history and even today
teachers are regarded as the candles of society, spreading light into the
darkness. Teaching is regarded as one of the most honorable and respected
professions in the country. Very many of the best and brightest students
graduating high school apply to teacher education programs in Finnish universities. Because
the profession is regarded in that manner, university teacher education
programs are able to choose from among the best and brightest of the best and
brightest students entering Finnish universities. That is not quite the case in the United States.

Over the last 10 years I have often had the opportunity to speak
to middle and high school students, and I often talk with them about
considering careers in teaching. Unfortunately, it is the very rare motivated
and highly academically capable student that tells me that they are interested
in a career in teaching. It is the current reality in the USA that our teachers
are a mixed bag. Some of our teachers were the brightest, most capable, and
highly motivated students in their high school and university classes. As students these
teachers could have chosen to major in anything. In current role as faculty
member in a college of education, I have the opportunity to work with some of Kentucky’s most
phenomenal educators. Some of these educators are outstanding in every conceivable way. They
are smart, talented, unbelievably hardworking, and passionately committed to
their students and to the teaching profession. These professionals make me so proud
to be a teacher.

Unfortunately, however, many teachers in our classrooms are
not as talented, committed, or passionate about children or about teaching as
the teachers I just described. Some teachers in American classrooms have landed
there because they couldn’t cut it in other majors or professions and teaching
was relatively easy to get into and keep a job. Some are in the classroom
because teaching has been considered a stable
profession. Some teachers are in classrooms because the hours and calendar
schedule of the profession are convenient for raising a family. And believe
it or not, some teachers are in the profession for the money. You won’t get
rich teaching, but in the right school district with the right credentials and a
few years of experience you can make a pretty decent living as a teacher.

What Do I Propose?

I propose building a teaching profession in the USA that we
can be proud of; not just a portion of the teaching profession that are
superstars, but a profession of superstars. I propose building a teaching
profession of individuals that could have chosen any career path but chose to teach. I propose building a teaching profession in America that we can trust to lead us into the future.

Building that kind of teaching profession in the USA would
not be easy. In fact, the stack is currently staked against our being able to
pull it off, but we could do it. We would have to be intentional about it and
it would take the buy-in and collaboration of some key stakeholders. First, we
would need to acknowledge that the teaching profession in the USA is not what we
want it to be, and that our current teaching force is not what we would like it
to be. The teaching profession, including salary structure, career ladders, and
accountability, would have to be drastically reformed to attract a new breed of
candidates into the profession. Colleges of teacher education would have to get
on board by actively recruiting a new, diverse breed of teacher candidates into
the profession, selecting only the highest quality candidates for entry into
programs, and holding candidates to extremely high standards; functioning as true
gate-keepers to the teaching profession. Teacher training programs would have to
embrace radical reform enabling them to better equip teacher candidates with
the necessary content knowledge, pedagogical expertise, and dispositions for
meeting the needs of the diverse group of learners in 21st century
American classrooms. Policy makers and colleges of teacher education would have
to work together to create high-quality pathways for talented professionals to
enter the teaching profession as a 2nd career, but with the necessary training and preparation for
long-term success once they get there. Teachers would have to start tapping
talented students as early as middle school to get them to consider careers in
teaching. And teachers unions would have to radically transform themselves into
high-quality professional associations that play a major role in both building
and refereeing the teaching profession. Professional associations must play a
major role in holding their members to the highest standards for professional
practice.

By the end of my career I would love nothing more than to
entertain visitors from across the world and tell them that a key to the
success of schools in the USA is the trust that we have placed in our teachers.
I would love nothing more than to say that the American people have every
confidence in American teachers and that the teaching profession is highly respected because
we know that our teachers are well-equipped for and passionately committed to preparing
our students for successful careers and lives as citizens of the greatest
country in the world. It is my hope and my prayer that we will have the courage
to own up to our shortcomings and the
will to transform teaching into the profession that it should be and can be.