After the South Carolina House passed an 84-page education reform bill late Wednesday evening, state educators are still concerned about things in the bill, and things that were left out.
Paige Steele is a Lexington County teacher and board member for the teacher advocacy group, SC for Ed.
“Mixed feelings about the bill in general. We kind of heard throughout the process that this bill was going to pass, so our energy was really spent trying to make it the best it could be,” Steele said after school on Thursday.
Steele is in her 9th year of teaching in Lexington County. The high school educator attended the University of South Carolina and was born and raised in the state.
She said the ‘South Carolina Education, Career Opportunity, and Access for All Act" got some things right.
“I think the biggest thing [Wednesday] night that we saw that happened was providing that 30-minutes of protected planning for teachers. It sounds silly to a lot of people if you're not an educator then you don't really know how important that is. We want to do amazing things with our kids, but it takes time to plan amazing things,” Steele said.
Steele continued that she appreciated the legislature’s attempt to lessen the amount of standardized testing in the state.
However, the board member said the bill did not go far enough to guarantee race and culture conversations in the classroom to foster understanding among students, especially younger children.
The amendment, introduced by Rep. John King (D), was tabled Wednesday night. The amendment would’ve created a day each school year to teach children about cultural awareness and the historical experiences of minorities in the state.
Later, King, frustrated with the chamber for tabling almost all of his amendments, asked the speaker to read the entire 84-page bill right before the vote, per constitutional process.
The move, coming after six hours of debate, did not sit well with some republican lawmakers, whom threatened to re-examine the amendment mandating 30-minute teacher breaks, which had already been debated twice that same evening.
Steele said the exchange did not go unnoticed by teachers across the state.
“I was debating on saying it, but it's too true to leave out. There was a lot of discussion about respect, Representatives Ott and Moore especially talked about building respect for teachers, which I know was received very well by a lot of my colleagues, but the entire session ended on a note that made us feel more disrespected than before. I think they should remember that teachers are watching and that we are invested in this process more than ever. No one wants to feel like a pawn in someone else's game,” Steele told WLTX.
Steele added that, in her view, the bill also did not adequately address starting salaries and recruitment of teachers.
“No, I would say that's another missed opportunity of the bill. There's really not a lot in the bill that's going to address teacher retention and recruitment. It does boost the starting salary of the teacher to 35,000, but when you think that a degree in teaching costs the same as a degree in business or to become an engineer or any of these things, that tuition, that debt that people are graduating with is the same,” Steele added.
She was not the only educator with questions.
Greenville County Schools Superintendent and President of the Superintendent Affliation Burke Royster appreciated the lawmakers’ decision to raise the minimum teacher pay.
“The single greatest impact to student achievement, student attainment and preparing students is a quality teacher in the classroom. The second highest impact is a quality principal in the building. To make sure we get those individuals, we have to pay a competitive wage,” Royster said along with other superintendents on Thursday.
However, Royster and fellow superintendents questioned the mandate to give teachers protected breaks every day, saying they'll have to hire more staff.
“So, we're of course extremely concerned how will that impact our district budgets? If that’s something the legislature is requiring, then will there be funds to follow that to ensure that it’s paid for, or will that fall to districts to do that?” Royster said.
The senate is still working on its version of the bill, which is in committee.