Ideas That Create Opportunities

Barack Obama’s presidency will be judged in large part by his ability to deliver on promises of a bipartisan agenda. And I think that there are a number of opportunities for him to do so, including one that is beginning to show itself in an area that I didn’t wholly expect: education.

I am in the process of reading Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope, and in it I have found that not all of his philosophical positions are as liberal as one might expect, and specifically in the area of education. Surprisingly, he is fundamentally opposed to the idea of teachers receiving tenure, and believes instead that we should replace it with a system that provides significantly higher wages that attract more qualified teaching candidates, but that allows for inefficient or ineffective teachers to be fired. This stance is quite different than what is traditionally considered to be the Democratic position, which is one that has consistently sided with teachers’ unions who predominately support tenures.

I think that Obama could leverage middle-ground ideas like this in order to broaden his appeal towards Republicans, many of whom have been calling for educational reforms for years. And, while reading the New York Times this morning I spotted a potential ally to Barack that might be able to give teeth to such an effort.

Michelle Rhee, chancellor of the Washington Public schools, has proposed an end to tenures in her district. Her plan would provide teachers with an option. On one hand, they can choose to be enrolled into the “green plan”, which would significantly increase their annual salaries. This group will see their salaries as much as double by 2010, with star teachers making up to $130,000 per year, and a teacher currently making $60,000 a year could expect an increase to at least $90,000 per year. The one catch: in return, they must forfeit their tenure. Teacher performance would be reviewed, and the ineffective ones fired.

Or, teachers can choose to be placed in the “red program”, which would allow them to retain their tenures, but allot them more moderate pay upgrades, and also result in a precipitous loss of seniority.

Ms. Rhee’s plan introduces a shockingly refreshing sense of logic to the framework of the teaching system because it accomplishes two aims at once: it increases teacher compensation, which helps to attract new talent into the field, and it creates the flexibility needed to get rid of teachers that just don’t teach. However, it has received significant criticism from many teacher union groups who have argued that tenure must be maintained in order to provide protection to teachers. But protection from what?

Unions argue that tenures allow teachers the freedom to pursue academic aims without constant input from over-politicized education boards that might push specific agendas through the threat of firing teachers that do not comply. And this is a legitimate concern, but not one that can’t be addressed by other means. We are not unable to create a system that has safeguards and oversight built into it. Independent review councils, or some other vehicle, could be established that help to prevent politically or ideologically-based firings, but that uphold good faith terminations. And, has tenure really improved the level of teaching in this country? The answer is no. While it has provided teacher’s with the ability to not fear reprisal for the lesson plans that they choose, it has all too often provided them with an equal ability to not fear reprisal or job loss when they fail to properly educate their students. In the end, we do not have an educational system that is able to prepare students for the challenges of a global economy. Relative to other modernized countries, we are largely deficient in critical learning areas such as math and science. So, no, tenures have not resulted in better teaching. They are not the entire problem, but they are at least a part of it.

I believe that our educational system needs to be retooled. Teaching is not a highly sought after profession, and we need to convince more of today’s college graduates to pursue it. When choosing between becoming a lawyer, an accountant, or a doctor, they see too great a financial disincentive to be expected to choose to be a teacher. So, not surprisingly, the most talented graduates end up picking the high paying jobs and we are left with an insufficient pool of applicants from which to draft the educators of the future. In response, we need to provide salaries that encourage growth in the teaching profession’s ranks and that attract top talent and top minds. Ms. Rhee’s plan does that, and it also allows for teachers who fail to do their jobs to be let go. Put simply, it increases benefits and encourages growth, while at the same time eliminating inefficiencies within the current system.

I understand that President-elect Obama has a lot on his table right now, and educational reforms probably aren’t registering highly on his list of priorities, but I think that there is a real opportunity here. He has already praised Rhee for her efforts in the area of educational reform and given her praise as being Washington's "wonderful new superintendant". But he can do even more. By publicly supporting Ms. Rhee’s plan, Obama could openly showcase a more moderate position that would sit well with Republicans. And, more importantly, he could provide some much needed public support for an innovative and new approach to teacher compensation that just might work.

At this point, with the state of our educational system, we desperately need something that works.