Class-size limits and contract rights attacked by committee
LAN Update - Archive 04/23/10
The Select Committee on School Finance Weights, Allotments & Adjustments met April 22 in Austin. The joint committee is co-chaired by Senate Education Committee Chair Florence Shapiro, and House Public Education Committee Chair Rob Eissler, and it includes Commissioner of Education Robert Scott, other members of the House and Senate, several school district superintendents and members of the public. The committee is charged with considering adjustments to the many weights and allotments that determine how money flows through the school finance system. However, with the looming multibillion-dollar budget deficit, the committee has turned its focus to identifying and cutting cost drivers out of the budget. Under the microscope yesterday were educator contract rights, teacher salaries and class-size limits, as well as many other statutory requirements.
During a presentation from an invited panel of guests, several committee members, led by Shapiro and Sen. Dan Patrick, began to discuss conversations with school administrators in which class-size limits were cited as the state's most pernicious unfunded mandate. The members claimed that the 22:1 student-to-teacher class size limit for grades K-4, which has been in place since 1984, is overly prescriptive, places an undue financial burden on districts and keeps administrators from providing smaller classes for the students who need the most attention. Next, Cheryl Mehl, a school law attorney whose firm represents school districts, testified on the need to fix supposed problems caused by educator contract rights, primarily with regard to mid-contract terminations. Mehl complained of the difficulty and expense of terminating a teacher, citing a figure of $15,000 to $50,000 for a hearing before an examiner.
ATPE testified before the committee to rebut these claims. We pointed out that the vast majority of teacher separations occur through the nonrenewal process, and not through mid-year terminations. The nonrenewal process does not require the use of a hearing examiner, and on average, the costs for any hearings that do result are a fraction of costs associated with mid-year terminations. Furthermore, the stability and predictability provided by educator contracts benefit the district as much as they do the educator. Changing the rules now would most certainly result in a host of well-settled issues being revisited. Litigating these issues in court would be far more costly than any termination case, with a substantial portion of the expense going to pay firms like Ms. Mehl's. On the issue of class-size limits, ATPE pointed out the substantial benefits to students and teachers associated with smaller class sizes while also refuting the claim that the current law is overly rigid. The law currently provides a process through which districts can obtain a waiver from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) if extenuating circumstances prevent a campus from complying with the limit. The waiver process is relatively simple and, according to reports, TEA has never denied a request for a class-size waiver.
In addition to defending class-size limits and contract rights, ATPE also brought the committee a proposal for real change that would both reduce wasteful spending and improve the educational environment for Texas students. ATPE proposed that the committee recommend funding a statewide comprehensive induction program. Mentoring and induction programs are highly effective recruitment and retention tools that can produce long-term savings with minimal upfront investment. It has been estimated that teacher turnover costs the state and school districts more than $500 million per year. By investing in quality induction programs, the state and local school districts stand to save a substantial portion of the yearly education budget through reduced turnover. National research has found that comprehensive induction programs are an effective way to increase educator retention and, ultimately, student achievement. Committee members, including Shapiro, expressed a great deal of interest in this plan.
View ATPE's full written testimony.
ATPE will continue to monitor the progress of the committee and report on any significant developments.
If you have any questions please contact ATPE Governmental Relations at (800) 777-ATPE or e-mail us at ATPE Governmental Relations.
To find contact info for your legislators go to
http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us and enter your address.
Ask your colleagues to
sign up for the ATPE Legislative Alert Network.
This is legislative advertising
contracted for by Doug Rogers, Executive Director, Association of Texas
Professional Educators, 305 E. Huntland Dr., Suite 300, Austin, TX
78752-3792, representing ATPE.
|
