A Los Angeles Superior Court judge wrote in June that California laws governing teacher tenure, dismissals and layoffs have left grossly ineffective teachers in classrooms concentrated in poor communities, unconstitutionally depriving those children of an equal education.
When the two candidates for state superintendent of public instruction, both Democrats, discuss the case, it’s clear why voters should replace incumbent Tom Torlakson with innovative education administrator Marshall Tuck.
Torlakson panders to the politically powerful California Teachers Association by defending the status quo. Tuck advocates for immediate changes and understands what must be done.
With an MBA from Harvard, Tuck could have made big bucks running a company. Instead, he has made a career in education. Since 2007 he led a nonprofit organization that worked with former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to successfully turn around 17 low-performing schools.
Rather than embrace Tuck’s success, Torlakson demonized him with a campaign ad labeling the challenger a “Wall Street banker.” It’s a hack cliché. In fact, Tuck worked as a Salomon Brothers financial analyst in Los Angeles from 1995-97, starting when he was 22 years old. He next taught underprivileged students in remote villages of Zimbabwe and Thailand — but that doesn’t fit Torlakson’s slimy narrative.
The incumbent would rather attack Tuck than fix the state’s education system. He certainly doesn’t want to address the issues raised by Judge Rolf Treu’s tentative ruling in the Vergara case in June.
California teachers are tenured after just 18 months on the job. The tortuous process for firing ineffective teachers is so complex and costly that many districts rarely try. And seniority alone dictates who gets laid off when money is tight, no matter how superior a junior teacher or ineffective a senior teacher might be. This absurd system lowers the bar for all. Other states consider seniority but also other factors.
The vast majority of teachers here and across the country work hard for low pay, often in challenging environments. But, as Judge Treu concluded, thousands of poor performers remain, and they tend to be concentrated in schools in low income communities.
Torlakson, a defendant in the case, says he’s awaiting the judge’s final ruling before deciding whether to appeal. That’s right: Rather than working to fix the problems the judge found, he contemplates spending more public money to defend it.
Tuck promises, if elected, to drop any appeal Torlakson might file. He advocates a longer teacher review period like the ones in 41 of the 46 states with tenure; a less cumbersome dismissal process similar to other California state workers’ protections; and a layoff system that considers performance. But that’s just the beginning of the value he would bring to the office.
The superintendent has a bully pulpit for change. Only Tuck appreciates its potential. He would be a game changer for education in California. We highly recommend him.
