LAUSD’s refusal to heed teachers’ concerns shows its skewed priorities

“La educación no se vende, se defiende.”

Education isn’t sold, it’s defended.

That was just one of the many signs teachers carried at Friday’s United Teachers Los Angeles rally in front of City Hall.

UTLA has been negotiating with the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education for the past 20 months about how to put unused district funding toward investing in LAs’ public primary education. The board has refused to listen to the union, and teachers have had to strike in order to demand much needed changes in the public education of Angelenos.

Failed negotiations resulted in last Monday’s impressive display of 30,000 educators marching in the rain and demonstrating in front of LAUSD offices. The school district, one of the largest in the nation, has more than 600,000 students and 1,000 schools.

UCLA students essentially attend a public school in LA, and the school has assisted the surrounding community for years through various philanthropic programs and clubs. LAUSD sends many students to UCLA, and we need to ensure that the education system they grow up with is as solid as can be.

Board members have a lot to be ashamed about. Teachers have continued to work with a contract that expired in June 2017 while the board has been unwilling to compromise. There are worryingly few school psychologists per student. And students are not receiving a quality education due to enormous class sizes.

Teachers have taken on the initiative to call to attention these concerns at the expense of themselves and their families. LAUSD board members should heed their concerns.

There are a variety of issues the teachers’ strike is bringing to the forefront. One of those is how charter schools are harmful to the sanctity of public education.

The board has not refuted the idea of converting schools to charters schools and seems to take no issue with rising class sizes. That’s a result of board members not taking their jobs seriously. For example, Austin Beutner, superintendent of LAUSD, has experience as a financial analyst who maximizes profits. Perhaps because of that, he has ignored what his position requires him to do: fully support and aid his schools to improve them.

Beutner is joined by school board president Mónica García and vice president Nick Melvoin, both of whom are prominent pushers for charter schools in LAUSD. García has also limited transparency by cutting back on public board committee meetings.

“The model the superintendent is proposing is putting schools in corporate hands … jeopardizing teachers and families,” said Diana Sintich, a teacher who has taught for LAUSD for 16 years and works at Harding Elementary School.

Under the district’s portfolio model, the board manages a variety of different schools, including public and charter schools.

Charter schools are exempt from many regulations that apply to public schools, and are nonunionized, making it easier to replace teachers. They often neglect students in nontraditional education, such as special education, and fail to offer accommodations for students with disabilities. Teacher turnover rates are exponentially higher at charter schools compared to public schools, and transparency is often severely lacking.

Board members have also neglected the lack of vital full-time staffing, such as in cases where a nurse rotates between four schools every week. Limiting schools’ funding for full-time staff severely cripples the inner workings of these institutions. It’s inexcusable to ask a teacher to double as a nurse because the on-staff nurse only gets to be at school once a week. The same goes for librarians and psychologists, who serve the needs of students outside the classroom.

These have very real effects on students. Alyssa Avila, teacher at Luther Burbank Middle School and UCLA alumna, said one of the students who attends her school has trouble taking their eye drops and getting their medicine without a nurse on site during the school day.

LAUSD needs to reinvest in LA’s future: its students. The primary concern of the board should not be to make money off its schools, but to foster positive education for all children that can lead them to succeed in higher education when they move on to community colleges, four-year universities, trade schools and their careers as well.

The LAUSD board’s neglect has rippling effects on the LA community, including UCLA. Many LAUSD students come to UCLA and the university has taken efforts to engage the district’s students – all of which is put into jeopardy with ineffective leadership.

The changes UTLA is proposing would make education more equitable for all by implementing better adult education programs and expanding on special education services.

And LAUSD has the money to meet teachers’ demands. It currently has $1.9 billion in reserve funding that can be used to expand staffing and decrease classroom sizes. To ignore that money shows the board really only cares for the money and not the children.

Teachers have spoken, and morality is on their side. Education is a primary means for social mobility, and LAUSD board members have a responsibility to enable that via their schools.

Education, after all, isn’t sold; it’s defended.