Reforming the school district

Re “The mayor’s bad deal,” Opinion, June 25

Supt. Roy Romer’s discussion of Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s deal [to control the Los Angeles Unified School District] includes the usual attack on teachers. According to Romer, teachers are against reform. Not so. Many teachers are against micromanagement, of which we’ve seen plenty in the last six years. Simultaneous to the introduction of the one-size-fits-all curriculum, we introduced the 20-to-1 class-size ratio for grades K-3; those grades have made the most significant gains over the six years of Romer’s tenure. If we want to do better, the answer may be 20-to-1 at fourth and fifth grades too.

The 150% improvement that Romer mentions was attained by the students and the teachers of this district, not by district experts forcing teachers to be on Day 1 of Lesson 2 of Unit 3 on Wednesday, whether the children are ready or not. Scores go up when we teach to tests, but education is improved when well-trained teachers are in the classroom and allowed to make professional decisions.

Like Romer, I don’t approve of mayoral control, and I don’t approve of this particular deal. But vilifying teachers to make political points is counter to any kind of productive reform.

WILL OLLIFF

Teacher, Richland Avenue Elementary School

Culver City

*

Before we once again reinvent the LAUSD wheel, I ask this: Do the mayor of Los Angeles, United Teachers Los Angeles, the California Teachers Assn. and two California legislators make up the village it takes to raise a child in L.A.? Highly unlikely.

Our city’s school system and its more than half a million students deserve more than the contrived outcome of a few lobbying trips to Sacramento. We’re dealing with the future here.

STEPHEN FRANKLIN

Teacher, Sun Valley Middle School

Burbank

*

Romer proclaims that the mayor’s compromise “is about power and money, not about children -- and certainly not about education reform.” An obvious implication is that neither the mayor nor the teachers union care about children or school reform. I’m sorry, but this is humbug masquerading as wisdom. Of course this deal is about power and money -- the same two engines that superintendents use to run school districts.

Has Romer, a former governor of Colorado, cornered the caring-about-children market during his six years as superintendent? Can he wield power and oversee huge budgets and still care about children -- but others cannot?

DAN HENNESSY

Arcadia

*

I read that former school district board member Jackie Goldberg [now Democratic assemblywoman from L.A.] would consider becoming superintendent of the LAUSD (June 24). My wife and I have taught in the district for 30-plus years and, although we have not always agreed with Goldberg’s decisions, we have always felt that she keeps the interest of the kids as her top priority. The district needs someone with her leadership skills, and we look forward to the day we can welcome her back home.

REY RAMIREZ

South Pasadena