Removing Poor Teachers Is An Attack On Human Rights?

Posted by on Apr 26th, 2012 and filed under Government, Nevada. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

(Victor Joecks/NPRI) – Lynn Warne is the president of the Nevada State Education Association, and she appeared on Anjeanette Damon’s “To the Point” show over the weekend, where she made the following comment about AB 225 and some other minor education reform bills passed by the 2011 Legislature. (7:30 mark)

Warne: Provisions in those bills [including AB 225], much of which we supported, really struck at the heart of what we feel are educators’ rights, workers’ rights, human rights really, and there was no compromise to be had. (Emphasis added)

Striking at the heart of “human rights” is a serious charge, so let’s consider what AB 225 did.

Now, while AB 225 certainly represented an improvement over the old system, where 95 percent of teachers received tenure after one year of teaching and became virtually impossible to fire afterwards, the new system only allows a bad teacher with tenure to be removed after three years of poor performance.

In other words, a poor teacher would be able to harm the education of 50 to 100 or more students before a school is able to remove him or her for subpar performance. The stakes here are exceptionally high for students, because students with poor teachers learn only half as much as they would with an average teacher and a third as much as they would with an excellent teacher.

So Warne, union boss of and representing NSEA, believes that removing a bad teacher from the classroom is a violation of “human rights.”

Keep in mind that having an ineffective teacher three years in a row often cripples a student academically for years or a lifetime.

In other words, union boss Warne believes ineffective teachers have a “human right” to potentially permanently harm your child’s future.

That’s outrageous.

Students vs. union. Your child vs. union bosses. An effective education for your child or dues for the Nevada State Education Association.

Those are the stakes. Those are the sides.

The political fight over education reform is about deciding which side you’re on — the side of students, like the kids in your neighborhood, or of union bosses, who want to preserve the failing status quo.

Union bosses like Warne stand with the failing status quo. W

e stand with excellent teachers committed to providing a challenging education for your children.

Union bosses like Warne stand with ineffective, dues-paying teachers.

We stand with students.

Whose side are you on?

2 Responses for “Removing Poor Teachers Is An Attack On Human Rights?”

  1. Blayne Osborn says:

    Absolutely right. When the focus in education isn’t on education, this is what you get.

  2. Reta says:

    I know a FORMER CCSD math teacher–middle school and high school. The school district PAID HER NOT TO WORK for a couple of years, and THEN offered her an early retirement–we paid for an additional five years of NON WORK. she now get a full retirement (no reduction for age) AS IF she\’d worked for 25 years. Seems she was not an effective teacher. That\’s how CCSD dealt with her–using our money to pay her as if she were effective. And she could have switched occupations–like many of us have to do because of the economy.

Leave a Reply