Teaching versus teachers unions

By Leonard Pitts

A year or two ago, I received this e-mail. The writer was upset with me for arguing that school principals should have the power to fire teachers who do not perform. As numerous educators have told me, union protections being what they are, dumping a teacher - even a bad one - is an almost impossible task.

My correspondent, a teacher, took issue with my desire to see that changed, noting that without those protections, she'd be at the mercy of some boss who decided one day to fire her.

In other words, she'd be just like the rest of us. The lady's detachment from the reality most workers live with struck me as a telling clue as to why our education system frequently fails to educate. When you can't get fired for doing bad work, what's your impetus for doing good?

Many of us seem to be wondering the same thing.

Recently, for instance, Washington schools chief Michelle Rhee, hired in 2007 to reform the system, fired 241 teachers, most of whom had performed poorly on a teacher evaluation system.

And in a speech Thursday before the National Urban League, President Barack Obama defended his Race to the Top education initiative, saying the goal isn't simply to fire bad teachers, but to lower class sizes, reward excellence and demand accountability.

Earlier this year, officials in Rhode Island fired the entire faculty of a poorly performing school

Finally, there's 2002's No Child Left Behind Act, which, while deeply flawed, at least represented an attempt to bring about critical change.

Americans seem to be rallying around a demand for education reform. Apparently, we've had enough of students failing schools and schools failing students. We know our kids are capable of better - and that in a competitive, hyper-connected world where China is rising and India aspiring, not delivering better is no longer an option.

Unfortunately, whenever anyone seeks to require better, they seem to find themselves at odds with the last people you'd expect: teachers. Or, more accurately, teachers unions.

No, I don't hate teachers. I've been one myself. Moreover, I know that whatever I've achieved in life is in large part because of what I learned from Mr. Jacobs, Ms. Sobo, Mrs. Harrison, Sister Tapanez and many others.

No, I don't hate unions. I support the right of workers to organize and bargain collectively if they choose.

And no, I don't think teachers bear sole responsibility for the failure of our kids to excel. You also have to blame those parents who are uninvolved or who live under the misapprehension that their little darlings can do no wrong.

All that said, it is troubling to see teachers unions reflexively reject anything that smacks of accountability.

Rhee offered a significant raise and big bonuses for effective teachers in exchange for weakening tenure protections. She had to fight the union.

The White House put up $4 billion in grant money to spur innovation in schools. It had to fight the unions.

Those Rhode Island officials fired (and later rehired) faculty at a school where one child in two doesn't graduate and only 7 percent of 11th-graders are proficient in math. It had to fight the unions.

Enough. It is time teachers embraced accountability. Time parents, students and government did, too.

Because ultimately, what is at stake here is not grades, not jobs and not blame. No, this is an argument about the future - and whether this country will have one. The fact is, it cannot in a world where information is currency and American kids are broke.

There is a groundswell building here. Lead, follow or get out of the way.

n Comments: lpitts@miamiherald.com