News Story

Failing School Ranks Every Teacher and Principal 'Highly Effective'

State has Hazel Park schools as failing, but its teachers all get highest marks

Every teacher and principal in the Hazel Park School District's four elementary schools, junior high and high school were given “highly effective” ratings in 2011-12 by administrators despite district-wide failing grades for student achievement.

The state of Michigan gave Hazel Park High School an "F" for student achievement in 2011-12 in all four of the measured subjects — reading, science, social studies and math. Yet every teacher was given the highest rating in the new state-mandated evaluation of teachers.

A state law in 2011 ordered schools to rate teachers and administrators by using one of four ratings: highly effective, effective, minimally effective and ineffective.

Every teacher and principal in the Hazel Park district received the highest evaluation despite student achievement getting an “F” from the state in 10 of the 16 measured categories in the four elementary schools and in the junior high and high schools.

Hazel Park Junior High registered a “C” in reading and was the only school not to get a "D" or "F" among the six buildings.

Shirley Atcho, secretary to Superintendent James Meisinger, said the superintendent had no comment at this time.

Statewide, there were 42 individual school buildings that rated all of their teachers as “highly effective.” Across the state, 97 percent of the estimated 95,000 teachers were rated “effective” or “highly effective.”

Leon Drolet, chairman of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance, blamed the legislature for creating an evaluation system with no credibility.

“The legislature has allowed this to come into play,” Drolet said. “It’s probably because they can claim they did something. They can say they raised the bar. As long as the politicians can claim they voted to do that, what happens in reality doesn’t matter to them. This system suits everyone very well except the students and parents. The school district can brag that they are All Stars without having to back it up. And the politicians can crow at election time that the demanded schools be rigorously evaluated. The only losers are the kids because this system appears to suit the needs of the education class and the political class. The only class that suffers are the kids in the classroom. Unfortunately, they come last.”

Michael Van Beek, education policy director at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said the district would hurt morale among truly highly effective teachers.

“It does a disservice to the teachers themselves if the district is not going to differentiate and define what good teaching is,” Van Beek said. “It doesn’t help anyone. Think how insulting it is for a good teacher in that district. They know they are putting in the extra time but are getting the exact same rating as one who may not be good at all. That’s not treating teachers as professionals.”

The Hazel Park school board president and vice president did not respond to requests for comment.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.

Commentary

Proposal 2 Power Grab Demands Review of Government Unionism

Now that Michigan voters have resoundingly defeated Proposal 2, it is appropriate for lawmakers to review the status in this state of collective bargaining for government employees.

Most people do not realize this is a relatively recent phenomenon in the United States, only becoming common in the 1960s and 1970s (1965 was the year it decisively took hold in Michigan).

Eight states forbid government employee collective bargaining altogether for all or most government employees, while in approximately 20 others it is mandatory for the vast majority of public-sector workers. In the remaining states the practice is mostly or entirely optional for public employers — it is neither required nor prohibited.

Not surprisingly, Michigan is in the “mandatory” camp. A state statute mandates collective bargaining for all local governments and public school districts, and a ruling of the constitutionally authorized Civil Service Commission does the same for state employees.

When unions were given the privilege of imposing mandatory collective bargaining on public employers, government workers already enjoyed the substantial protections and job security afforded by “civil service” laws enacted during the Progressive era of the early 1900s. Under these laws government workers could only be dismissed “for cause” (rather than “at will”), and only after detailed legal procedures were followed.

The additional layer of collective bargaining, along with the huge expansion of government that began around the same time, greatly enhanced the already formidable political power of government employees. Over time their unions have become arguably the most powerful special interest in state and local affairs.

This excessive power has resulted in many abuses. It’s no accident that Michigan state, local and school employees receive fringe benefits whose value exceeds private-sector averages by $5.7 billion annually. Almost all school collective bargaining agreements contain provisions benefiting employees at the expense of students, such as “last in first out” layoff and recall policies protecting poor teachers with high seniority at the expense of excellent ones with fewer years on the job. Many municipal governments appear to be managed primarily for the benefit of the employees rather than taxpayers and residents. This is but a tiny sample of the many excesses that no fair-minded person can regard as reasonable and proper.

Nevertheless, in enacting some comparatively modest reforms Gov. Rick Snyder and the current Legislature have sought to tread lightly on government union perks and privileges, deliberately avoiding the more confrontational approach of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker.

The response of the government union bosses was the equivalent of a ballot initiative tantrum. Proposal 2 would not just have rolled back recent reforms; it would have all but guaranteed far greater excesses going forward. Had it not been defeated, the measure would have supercharged the power of government employee unions, converting them into a virtual fourth branch of government with powers in many areas superseding those of the democratically elected governor, legislature and courts.

Having dodged that bullet at great expense and trouble, the public interest of this state now demands a re-examination of the government employee union status quo.

Ideally, Michigan should join the states that forbid public sector unionism, embracing the position famously articulated by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who stated “(T)he process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.”

Short of banning the practice altogether, the Legislature should amend existing laws to no longer require government employees to pay union dues or fees as a condition of employment. The day after the election Senate Majority Leader Randy Richardville told Mirs News, "I think that's on the table. . . . We need to seriously consider all options."

He's right, and the sooner this step is taken the better for restoring citizens' faith that government is placing their interests ahead of a powerful special interest. 

Beyond that, public employees should be given a stronger say in which union represents them at their workplace by allowing them to recertify their acceptance of union representation every two years. (Under current law once a union is voted in, it stays in perpetuity unless the employees go through a very difficult and confusing decertification process.) Recertification votes should be held at least every two years, with at least 60 percent of employees participating in a secret-ballot vote for the election to be valid.

Other government union reforms would also help level a playing field heavily tilted against taxpayers. These include:

  • Making collective bargaining optional for local governments and school districts. A city council or school board should be able to tell unreasonable and overbearing union bosses to take a hike, and allow individual employees to represent themselves in pay and benefit decisions. 
  • Stop using taxpayer dollars to pay local union officials on government payrolls to perform union work on government time
  • Increase union transparency by requiring regular, detailed and independently audited income and spending disclosures. 

Even though it was defeated, it’s likely that Proposal 2 has already cost Michigan jobs, as investors and business owners who might have considered locating or expanding here put those plans on hold pending the outcome. The relationship between the people and the public servants employed by government is way out of balance in this state, and needs to be fixed.

##### 

Jack McHugh is senior legislative analyst at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a research and educational institute headquartered in Midland, Mich. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author and the Center are properly cited.

Michigan Capitol Confidential is the news source produced by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Michigan Capitol Confidential reports with a free-market news perspective.