Regulations for teacher layoffs are a prime example of how interests of adults are put ahead of those of children, especially minority children. Now, that system, along with state budget cuts that set it in motion, will face a court challenge.

In a case with statewide implications, the ACLU of Southern California and other public interest and pro bono attorneys are suing the state and Los Angeles Unified, charging that teacher layoffs have savaged three low-performing, low-income middle schools. All three have been thrown into turmoil since between half and nearly three quarters of their teachers got layoff notices last year.  Most eventually did lose their jobs because of  rules that dictate that less experienced teachers must be the first to go, regardless of how good they are with students and how well they fit in the school.

The suit, filed Wednesday in Superior Court in Los Angeles, comes less than three weeks before school districts must formally notify teachers that they may be laid off  next year.  With Los Angeles Unified facing a $640 million deficit, thousands of teachers are expected to get layoff notices, including yet again, many remaining teachers at the three schools named in the lawsuit. The ACLU’s next likely step is to seek an injunction preventing disproportionate numbers of teachers from those schools from being let go. After that, it’s unclear what the ACLU and Public Counsel, its partner in the suit, want  to have happen.

The suit challenges the adequacy of state school funding, but it also argues that the latest budget cuts are discriminatory, disproportionately harming children in low-income schools. On  that point, there should be little dispute.

The plaintiffs in the case are Hispanic and African-American middle school students in Los Angeles, but they could as easily have been from poor schools in other urban districts. The problems detailed in the suit are widespread – and devastating.

School improvements reversed

Both the Samuel Gompers and the Edwin Markham middle schools have been in school improvement status, designating a chronically failing school,  for a dozen years. But both went through recent efforts, as part of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, to improve. According to the suit, the district recruited young, energetic teachers who wanted to be in those schools and spent between $200,000 and $250,000 at each school training them. (Marshall Tuck, chief executive for the Partnership, told the Los Angeles Times that the organization supported the lawsuit.) The third school, John Liechty Middle School, opened only three years ago, as the first new middle school in a poor area in 20 years. It was set up with small learning communities.

The layoffs were like a tornado, wiping out school leaders and talented teachers. At Liechty, an entire small school staff of 13 teachers is gone. Several dozen dedicated teachers returned to the three schools as substitute teachers, with a loss of pay and benefits, but now those will be first in line in the next round of layoffs. Mostly, though, the schools had trouble replacing those laid off and turned to inexperienced substitutes. The suit charges that the district compounded the difficulty of hiring replacement teachers because of larger classes and fewer resources at the schools.

By turning to substitutes, students were victimized twice, because, under state law, a sub without a credential to teach the subject can remain in the classroom only for 30 days. Some students have had nine and ten subs in one class. The suit claims that several subs gave every student C’s because they didn’t know enough about the subjects to grade tests.

“In my history class this year I had so many different teachers that it was a blur,” said Markham eighth grader Sharail Reed, one of the plaintiffs, in a statement.  “They would write their names on the board and the next day the name would be erased because the teacher would be gone.”

Struggling schools need stability, resources and a corps of  teachers committed to working in a challenging environment. “It is virtually impossible to implement school reforms with a revolving door of teachers and administrators,” the suit says, quoting UCLA Education Professor Gary Orfield. Reduction in force rules have created obstacles that schools in middle-income neighborhoods don’t face – and that parents wouldn’t put up with.

If school districts have the discretion to protect low-performing schools from the consequences of seniority rules, they should use it. If not – and the Legislature won’t act – then let judges step in to protect vulnerable students.

By John Fensterwald on February 25th, 2010