Reform in Board’s Hands

Four votes in favor of learning. That’s all it takes to begin improving accountability in the Los Angeles school system. At least four among the seven school board members should agree to quickly implement a set of proposed reforms that would require union negotiations to strengthen principals, improve teachers’ performance and create a system of finan-cial rewards for success and job conse-quences for failure.

Most if not all school board members are likely to agree in theory with the superintendent’s 13 general “accountability recommendations,” but implemen-tation will be the hard part, requiring four or more votes.

School board incumbents and challengers for four seats in the April 13 election are not exactly independent; some of those on the board and those campaigning for board positions are beholden to the unions for campaign support. So a four-member majority vote might be hard to come by before election day. But the board shouldn’t drag this out: Students can’t wait for better schools.

School Board President Vicki Castro believes she can count on two other votes for putting the principals back in charge: former principal Barbara Boudreaux and former teacher Jeff Horton, both up for reelection against challengers backed by Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan. George Kiriyama, another former principal, is logical as the fourth vote. But he has financial backing from United Teachers-Los Angeles in his reelection bid, as does David Tokof-sky. Valerie Fields and Julie Korenstein also received union backing, and what the union wants it usually gets from its friends on the board.

The toughest measures among the accountability recommendations would require collective bargaining. Under the approach backed by Zacarias, principals would function as leaders and executives of the schools. Indeed, each should have the authority to assemble his or her own team and to assign teachers based on the needs of the school. Principals cannot lead effectively in a district that allows teachers to both select some administrators and choose assignments on the basis of seniority. The UTLA won these rights when teachers gave up pay raises in 1993 during a bleak fiscal period for the state. The money that was cut has now been restored, new raises have been negotiated and the teachers union is seeking a second raise for this year. The district has reopened the contract; along with money, the return of power to principals should also be negotiated.

UTLA head Day Higuchi, while not in favor of more powerful principals, does support some teacher accountability measures such as teacher peer review and intervention for teachers who are not doing a good job.

Higuchi also wants more pay for teachers. Good teachers do deserve higher pay. But it would be a mistake to distribute raises across the board. Why should the best teachers be paid the same as those who get unsatisfactory evaluations? Why should fully qualified teachers take home the same paycheck as uncredentialed teachers with the same length of service? Skill and knowledge should weigh more than seniority.

When the board debates accountability, it should give the superintendent the authority to implement as much as he can administratively. He could, for instance, create a tracking system, similar to the Texas model, in which every student is tested regularly and expected to improve.

If principals regained their authority, the superintendent could direct them to assign, when possible, fully credentialed teachers to kindergarten through third grade. Research shows that skilled reading teachers, along with smaller classes, provide lasting benefits for pupils.

Students, teachers and principals should be held accountable. But so should school board members. Unless they can prove that they are working for the students and only the students, voters should give them the heave-ho--starting with the April elections.