Court ruling on constitutionality of teacher tenure ripples throughout California.

Just as many teachers began settling into their summer break, a California judge issued a landmark ruling that could shake the foundation of their profession.

In a June 10 decision, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu ruled in favor of nine plaintiffs – all California public school students – agreeing with their claim that the state’s teacher tenure laws violate the students’ equal rights under the California Constitution.

Among the issues plaintiffs raised was that low-income and minority students are disproportionately saddled with “grossly ineffective teachers,” a claim Treu agreed with in a ruling that minced no words.

“The evidence is compelling. Indeed, it shocks the conscience,” Treu writes. “Students in the LAUSD who are taught by teachers in the bottom 5 percent of competence lose 9.54 months of learning in a single year compared to students with average teachers.”

Teachers’ unions immediately said they plan to appeal the ruling. For now, current laws will stay on the books.

Gayle Bilek, a former elementary school teacher in Salinas, 36-year veteran of teaching and current board member for the California Teachers Association, says the ruling threatens to undermine the profession.

“The ruling is not about students. It’s really about attacking teachers,” she says. “Research has shown experience is a key factor for teacher success.”

For Jerry Stratton, assistant superintendent of business services at Salinas City Elementary School District, the decision came as a surprise.

“In the short term, I think everybody’s going to wait and see. A bunch of money is going to be thrown at it,” he says of the coming appeal. “But it was a wake up call.”

One of the statutes Treu ruled unconstitutional was the “last in, first out” policy with respect to layoffs, which mandates younger teachers leaving in favor those with more seniority.

Bill Brand, interim superintendent at Monterey Peninsula Unified School District, agrees that policy is flawed, but says eliminating it could create new problems.

“We are losing a great deal of outstanding young teachers,” Brand says, referring to the state as a whole. “But the piece I don’t want to have happen is making the decisions because [districts] don’t want to pay older teachers.”

Also challenged in the suit was the “two-year” statute, a law forcing California schools to decide whether to award a teacher tenure by March 15 of their second year of employment. There are 34 states with a three-year period to establish tenure, nine states with four or five years, and four states with no tenure at all. California is one of only five states with a period of two years or less.

Citing uncertainty about the ruling’s impact, neither Brand or Stratton is willing to endorse it. Both think it brings potential for positive change.

“I very much like the idea of bringing in things other than seniority over whether to keep a teacher or not,” Brand says. “I like the idea of bringing in test scores and tangible outcomes.”