It's all true, but let's look at it in perspective:
1) Teachers won't have a right to a contract, but that
doesn't mean they won't get one, or the districts still
won't use one. Private schools have no requirement to
use a contract but they do.
2) True they may not get any due process, but there
are still a whole host of laws that provide employees
in general with protections and due process. A
Teacher is going to lose some rights but they won't be
any worse off than any other general employee
working for a company.
3) True they won't have any right to paid leave, but
just like private schools districts will offer some kind
of leave, and if they don't they will get teachers that
are all that much more desperate. Lots of people work
in companies and have no leave, or they get 10 days a
4) It's true there will be a lack of certification, but
that's part of the whole point. DOI's essentially want
to hire professionals without having to make
educators out of them.
5) True you won't have any rights to a duty free lunch
or prep period, but just like private schools you don't
have those rights either, and just like corporate
employment you won't have a right to it either, but
districts will still give it. There are laws that will still
apply that requires mandatory breaks, including lunch
and while it might be an "unpaid" lunch but if it's
unpaid its duty free.
6) True, but you can always send a student to the
office even if you have no right to do so. This is
what's going to happen. The teacher's going to check
out check email on their computer. If you can't get
anything done because of a student, you aren't going
to get anything done. Let's me honest the protections
in place, weren't really protections. The exception is
that all a school has to do is convene a committee to
place a disruptive student back in the classroom. At
my school that committee is the counselor, the Sp.Ed
chair and the assistant principal. Those three people
always place the student back in the classroom if
that's what the principal wants.
7) True, but what professionals are you going to get
that are going to teach a 300 day year and work 12
hours a day? These teachers are going to stay what
they consider a reasonable amount of time after
8) I doubt this will be true. Just because the district
can file a complaint doesn't mean they will prevail.
This assumes that there is a contract, that the teacher
is certified, etc. Again, the whole purpose of the DOI
is to get professionals without making them
educators, these teachers won't have any real skin in
the game. The SBEC can't sanction a certificate if the
teacher doesn't have one, and there isn't a contract
for the teacher to abandon. All that aside, if it comes
to this point and the teacher walks, they still get a
hearing and the district still needs to make a case.
9) I don't care if parents lose their right to video
taping, as a teacher this prohibition has always been
more of a problem. It's a lot easier for me to take out
my iPhone and video tape what a student is doing,
which is FAR more convincing evidence than anything
At the end of the day the DOI (and don't let the name
fool you) is nothing more than allowing a district to
hybridize itself to be more like a charter school. Sure
those districts just like charters will get some
teachers for a few years while they build experience,
and some teachers such as art and music won't have
a lot of options and will just have to take it, but real
teachers are either going to negotiate themselves a
better contract, with better conditions or the district
is going to find itself in the position of not being an
"acceptable" district and school if it doesn't.
On 1/29/17, AW back to Paris wrote:
> Regarding Districts of Innovation.
> So then what do you think of this? I came across it
> by accident when doing a little more research on
> This one here is specific about the concerns:
> Certified educators in a DOI that opts to exempt
> from TEC Ch. 21 will no longer have a legal right to a
> Certified educators in a DOI may or may not be
> due process before negative employment action is
> to an allegation against them.
> Educators in a DOI that exempts itself from TEC
> will no longer have a right to paid leave under state
> Educators in a DOI that exempts itself from TEC
> will no longer have to be certified to hold their
> position. This means that a principal in a DOI may
> education experience, and the teacher across the
> be uncertified. It also means that a teacher
> the DOI may be reassigned to a new position for
> teacher is not certified and may be required to
> certification as a condition of keeping her job.
> Duty-free lunch and planning time during the school
> will no longer be guaranteed in a DOI that exempts
> from TEC 21.404 and 21.405.
> TEC 37.002. This means that a teacher in such a
> will no longer have a statutory right to send a
> the office or request the removal of a disruptive
> There will be no set start time for the school year
> 25.0811), no set length for the school year, and no
> instructional day in DOIs that exempt themselves
> While a DOI may make it much easier for the district
> terminate an employment contract, if it chooses to
> one at all, a DOI can still choose to hold an educator
> bound by the contract and file a complaint to the
> Board for Educator Certification if the educator
> before the end of the contract
> Parents could lose the right to prohibit the
> or audiotaping of their children, if the DOI exempts
> itself from TEC 26.009.
> On 1/23/17, Paris wrote:
>> Districts can set start dates as itt is as long as
>> have the minimum number of days of instruction.
>> even districts that played with 4/10 week plans.
>> Districts can have whatever committees they want.
>> True, but there were always waivers for special
>> On 1/14/17, AW to Paris wrote:
>>> Perhaps, but it allows your district to make other
>>> such as:
>>> start date district committees curriculum
>>> As I understand it, the district had to be rated
>>> or higher to apply for the "district of innovation."
>>> On 1/08/17, Paris wrote:
>>>> Another branding of STEAM.
>>>> On 1/07/17, AW wrote:
>>>>> I have heard that some districts are doing this.
>>>> do you
Posts on this thread, including this one