Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

HISD hires its defenders for the teacher evaluation lawsuit

I have to say, I’m a bit uncomfortable with this.

Earlier this year, seven teachers sued the Houston Independent School District in federal court over their evaluation system.

That system uses a statistical formula and student test scores to grade teachers.

At its meeting this week, the Houston school district decided to hire a high-profile law firm to fight that case.

The board will pay those legal fees with a grant from Houston billionaire John Arnold, who helped created that same system to grade teachers.

With a 6-2 vote, the trustees approved hiring the law firm Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, LLP, to defend Houston’s teacher evaluation system in federal court.

“I think there’s the potential for this to be a high-profile case and I think it’s important for the district to have the best representation possible in this and any situation that we confront through the legal system,” said HISD Trustee Anna Eastman.

See here for the background. I have no issue with HISD being represented by top-notch counsel, and I can certainly see the merit in having what is likely to be an expensive legal bill covered by someone other than the taxpayers. But this raises an important and uncomfortable question: Whose interests are being represented by Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher – HISD’s, or John Arnold’s? If the HISD Board of Trustees finds itself in disagreement with John Arnold over the legal strategy employed by Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher, who will the lawyers listen to? If the Board decides they want to negotiate a settlement, but John Arnold insists on pushing through to a verdict, whose opinion carries the day? What if Arnold threatens to cut off the spigot and leave HISD with the remaining bills if they don’t do things his way?

Maybe I’m being overly dramatic here, but my point is that lawyers represent clients, and this arrangement has the potential to complicate that relationship. Perhaps the Board has thought all this through and gotten an agreement in writing from all relevant parties about who gets to approve the decisions that will need to be made during this process. If they haven’t however, then all I can say is that billionaires tend to think they’re in charge, especially when it’s their money being spent. I just hope everyone went into this with their eyes open.

One more thing:

These particular outside lawyers just won a groundbreaking case in California.

There a judge ruled that California’s teacher tenure, firing and discipline procedures are unconstitutional.

That decision was controversial, to say the least, and there’s a good possibility it may not survive appeal. That doesn’t really have anything to do with the main point of this story, I just wanted to mention it.

Related Posts:

2 Comments

  1. joshua ben bullard says:

    most of the people that are suing the district are members of anne sungs group and her friend ruth= houston community voices for public ed=i tried to engage this group with honest questions=anne sung and ruth denied me all access=apparently anne sung and ruth will stop at nothing so that teachers are not tested at all,they even argue that 20% is excessive,they want the 1980 pay scale and the 1970′s tenure plan to stay in tact and dont care if they cost the rate payers millions in the process= you know i wish ruth and anne sung and community voices for public ed would be transparent- instead of concealing their core members and group agenda.

    i remember the houston chronicle endorsed harvin moore over anne and now it all fits. written by joshua ben bullard

  2. Momma Bear says:

    The issue isn’t CVPE, it’s the flawed evaluation system that will now be defended by a Foundation whose self-serving motives don’t benefit families or students either way. The variables used in the evaluation’s algorithm simply does not and cannot account for each school’s mutually exclusive attributes but it is these distinctions that create the unequal system we have today. To hold teachers and school districts accountable for nuances in their district that are out of their control is completely asinine. Worse yet, to close a public school or withhold its funding for those same reasons is grossly neglectful.

Bookmark and Share