by the Mayor and for development of appropriate language by the Corporation Counsel. Respectfully submitted. WILLIAM R. MANNING, Hon. WILLIAM B. SPONG, Chairman, Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs, Committee on the District of Columbia, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR SPONG: On February 14, 1968, in the course of hearings before subcommittee on S. 2659 and S. 2679, bills increasing the salaries of District teachers and school officers, the Superintendent of Schools proposed the inclusion in the teachers' salary schedule of the position of Associate Superintendent. This proposal was in accordance with a recent reorganization of the top administrative functions in the school system, recommended in the Columbia University Study of the District of Columbia Public School System. The Commissioner of the District of Columbia, in recognition of the fact that this aspect of the reorganization of the school system meets with the approval of the Board of Education, accordingly recommends that the position of Associate Superintendent be included in teacher pay legislation. The District is informed that your subcommittee has incorporated both the teacher salary schedules of S. 2659 (effective October 1, 1967) and S. 2679 (effective July 1, 1968) in pay legislation for police and firemen, H.R. 15131. Therefore, the District recommends that Class 2 in the first phase salary schedule for teachers in H.R. 15131 be amended to read as follows: "Class 2: A. Deputy Superintendent B. Associate Superintendent.. 28,000 25,000" In addition, the District recommends that Class 2 in the second phase salary schedule for teachers in H.R. 15131 be amended to read as follows: "Class 2: A. Deputy Superintendent. 30, 000 27,000" THOMAS W. FLETCHER, Assistant to the Commissioner. (For Walter E. Washington, Commissioner). The Board's request has been reviewed and adjusted by the District Government to fit the salaries in H.R. 14526. Phase one salaries were approved by the District Government at $28,000 for the Class 2A, Deputy Superintendent, and at $25,000 for the Class 2B Associate Superintendent. Phase two salaries provided $30,000 for the Deputy Superintendent and $27,000 for the Associate Superintendent. The Superintendent salary was left as presently in this bill, which closely approximates the Board of Education request. We urge this Committee to amend the legislation before it to include these new salary classifications. I would like to point out that the biggest problem we have had in the reorganization is that about 30 positions report to a Deputy Superintendent who then reports to a Superintendent. This is a totally unmanageable method of control. We would be grouping the management of the school system under five positions and they would report to the Deputy Superintendent. We feel that this is an important action which is necessary if we are going to be able to give the kind. of organization and direction which the school system, frankly, just has not been able to achieve in the past. The need for reorganization was strongly recommended by the Columbia University Report and was placed in high priority by Dr. Passow in his advice to the Board and in his public statements to the community. We need to have support for this reorganization effort at all levels, and thus we request the assistance of this Committee in the development of appropriate salary legislation. In closing, I would like to thank this Committee for its attention and consideration. The Superintendent would have like to have been here to present this personally but he has confidence that you will help us to get the salaries we need to be able to bring the school system to the point which I know you want us to achieve, also. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. DowDY. Thank you. Is there any other statement? TEMPORARY TEACHERS Mr. Dowdy. I had a question or two. There is some information which was given to our Committee hearing I believe it was two years ago-which indicated that 43.3 percent of all teachers in the District of Columbia schools were temporary. What percentage of the teachers are temporary now? Dr. CARROLL. At the present time it is about 30 percent. I think I have the exact figure 32 percent. The number of temporary teachers hit 48 percent shortly after that figure, in 1967, the following year. Mr. DowDY. I knew it later went above 43 percent. Dr. CARROLL. So a new system of becoming probationary was introduced-which what we call a contract-a teacher would sign a contract promising to complete the requirements to become probationary within a two-year period and so this really does not change much. I would say 45 to 48 percent is still the realistic figure. Mr. DowDY. Around 48 or 50 percent of them still really are temporary? Dr. CARROLL. Certainly over 40 percent are still in that category. Mr. Dowdy. Then the 32 percent of the total number of temporary teachers really has not been reduced? Dr. CARROLL. Not in any appreciable amount, no, sir. Mr. DOWDY. I believe the number in 1965-66 was 2,470 and the current number is 2,426 and the 2,426 does not include the probationary teachers? Dr. CARROLL. No, it does not include the probationary teachers. Mr. DOWDY. How many are probationary teachers? Do you have that information? Dr. CARROLL. Do you have that? Mr. WEINBERG. According to a report of October 19, 1967, Mr. Chairman, there were 2,428 probationary teachers. Mr. DOWDY. What is your total number of teachers now? I have 7,511, is that right? sir. Mr. WEINBERG. Yes, this is on an actual count from data processing, Mr. DowDY. So almost 5,000 of that 7,500 are either temporary or probationary? Mr. WEINBERG. Yes. The breakdown that we have shows a little higher percentage of temporary teachers. It would be 2,426 temporary teachers, and the report that we had from school shows about 2,428 probationary. Mr. DowDY. That makes 4,854 together? Mr. WEINBERG. Right. And then the rest would be in the permanent category. Mr. DowDY. So actually that is about 65 percent are probationary or temporary? Mr. WEINBERG. That's right, sir. Mr. DowDY. In 1966 when we compared the ratio of pupils to teachers it was 30 to 1, and what is the present ratio? Dr. CARROLL. About 28 to 1. Mr. Dowdy. And during this period, as I take it, in the last two years there has been an increase in the number of probationary teachers? Dr. CARROLL. Yes, I believe that is the case because there are more probationary teachers. Mr. WEINBERG. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, I have a report of November 1, 1966, as compared to the report that I was talking to you about from October 19, 1967. In November 1, 1966, about 20.7 percent of the school system at the time, or approximately 1,313 teachers, were probationary. As of October 19, 1967, 2,428 teachers were probationary, an increase of about 14 percent, and this was a result, I believe of a change in the qualification requirements which put more teachers on probationary status. Mr. DOWDY. When a teacher is placed on probationary status, what qualifications must he meet? Dr. CARROLL. When he becomes probationary he must have met every qualification in terms of the educational credits, the course. work done, practice teaching required, everything that is required except he has to have two years-he must spend two years as a probationary teacher before he becomes permanent. So he has met every qualification when he is probationary except the time that he has to serve to become permanent. Mr. DowDY. He must meet all the qualifications? Dr. CARROLL. All the qualifications established by the Board of Education for the position he holds. Mr. DowDY. I take it from what has been stated already that there has been a transfer of a number of teachers from temporary to probationary status? Dr. CARROLL. This is correct. Mr. DowDY. And other temporary teachers were employed to take their place which keeps about level the number of temporary teachers? Dr. CARROLL. There has been a total increase in the number of teachers, so I would say that the percentage of temporary teachers technically listed as temporary has gone down because there has been an increase in the number of teachers. Mr. Dowdy. I am talking about the total number of temporary teachers, those whom you have transferred to probationary status and other temporary teachers you have employed in their place, which keeps the number to about the level it was two years ago? Dr. CARROLL. That would be correct, yes, sir. 91-434-68 Mr. Dowdy. Did you have particular means or criteria which you used to select those to be transferred to probationary status? That is, how were they selected? Dr. CARROLL. These were teachers whom we notified-all temporary teachers that if they wished to become probationary they should come to the Department of Personnel and discuss a contract to complete the requirements. Those who were fairly close to completing the requirements did come down because of the fact there was a salary advantage many of them could achieve by becoming probationary teachers. So that the individual teacher had to apply and we would not put such a person on contract if we felt he could not meet the requirement within a two-year period. In effect, it was done individually, teacher by teacher. We did not select them. They volunteered. Mr. DowDY. Did you make a change in the qualifications that were required for probationary appointment? Dr. CARROLL. No, we did not basically change the requiremen s. There may have been some adjustments, and I would like to check that for the record. I don't think there has been any major change in terms of the qualifications required. I think it was only how you you achieved the qualifications that was changed. (Subsequently, Dr. Carroll submitted the following additional information respecting transfer of teachers from temporary to probationary status:) TEACHERS CONVERTING FROM TEMPORARY TO PROBATIONARY STATUS The Board of Education on May 23, 1966, approved a change in procedure for obtaining probationary status. Any temporary teacher, a teacher who did not meet all qualifications, was offered an opportunity to become probationary without completing all academic requirements formerly required for probationary status. The teacher gained the probationary status by signing a contract which listed the specific individual course deficiencies and indicated that the signee was willing to correct them within a two-year period. It was agreed that any teacher who failed to complete his contract within the two-year period would be terminated. The change in obtaining probationary status was an incentive procedure designed to improve the teaching competence and encourage teachers to become fully qualified. Approximately 1200 teachers were in the first group that undertook to sign these contracts, which did not reduce the requirements for probationary status, but rather instituted a change in the procedure for obtaining it. Mr. DowDY. There was a change made in that? Dr. CARROLL. Yes. In effect, we said that if persons had only two or three courses to complete before they would have met all of the qualifications, then we would let them become probationary for a two-year period. But they had to complete those courses within the two-year period or they would be terminated for failing to do so, and they signed contracts agreeing to complete their work and thus we made them probationary teachers on that basis. Mr. DOWDY. Do I understand this correctly now? The teachers who were transferred from temporary to probationary met all of the requirements that were previously required of probationary appointment? Dr. CARROLL. No, sir. They have agreed to complete those gaps in their training within a period of time. They were transferred before they met every requirement, but they have agreed in a contract, written contract, to complete those requirements within a given period of time upon threat of being terminated if they failed to do so. Mr. Dowdy. And two years ago you did not let them do this? In other words, they had to meet requirements before they became probationary? Dr. CARROLL. Yes, sir. They had to meet requirements before they became probationary two years ago. Mr. DowDY. How many teachers were made probationary in this two-year period who did no meet the former requirement? Dr. CARROLL. I thought 1,200 to 1,400, and I could get that accurately for the record, but it was in that bracket. Mr. Dowdy. I think that is close enough. There is one question that I had. I am wondering who was responsible for the invitation to Stokely Charmichael to lecture and I use the word "lecture" with some apprehension because I doubt that it is a proper word—at Western High School a few months ago? Dr. CARROLL. Well, no one issued an invitation, as I understand it, and I am going by what I heard in some staff meetings and by memory, but I think I am correct on this. The request was made to the principal by either students-I believe they were students in the school that they would like to hear Stokely Charmichael. We do bring in speakers from all ranges of opinion and they do meet with students. Mr. DOWDY. Even a troublemaker, one who is liable to inflame the students? Dr. CARROLL. Well, I think you might be interested in the results of this. We have a choice here of a group of students-and there is a movement and actually an organization of students by black power people underway at the present time-if a student comes up and says, "We would like to have this man speak as you let other people speak before the students," and you turn them down or the principal-and the principal is the person we allow to make this choicethen, that man can meet on the street or he can meet in a house or someplace else, and the schools have kept him out. The story I get and I think I get it properly-is that when Mr. Carmichael walks into our school and stands before our students, he comes in under the rules of the game which we play, which means he has to make his statements correctly. He has to answer questions from the students. As a matter of fact, the evidence is that he got a pretty hard time from one of the students. One girl got up and said, "Just what makes you think you can represent me, Mr. Carmichael?" He had a hard time. He has not applied in too many schools since his visit. The question of what is proper open discussion and who is able to speak and the ideas of intellectual freedom and to have students to have contact with a variety of ideas in American life, is a serious one, but we feel that we have to treat students as if they do have some maturity and judgment. All we ask when people come in and talk to our students is that they abide by the rules. They answer the questions and they open themselves up to this scrutiny. I do not feel from the reports we have got that there has been any loss and possibly strength in the student maturity which appear daily in the newspapers all over. We felt that this was a necessary and proper action. Mr. DOWDY. Not that I would approve, by any means, but would you allow somebody from the Ku Klux Klan or the American Nazi Party to come into the schools and "lecture"? |