Your testimony is terrific.  Don’t read it.  You will be far more effective if you tell your story to the committee as you would instruct your students. 

           That’s the advice I gave to a teacher this morning after reading his testimony online. 

            Andrew Coy came to Annapolis to testify on my bill that would provide educational loan forgiveness for highly effective teachers in high-need schools and subject areas.

             He almost didn’t testify. 

             The reason why: Nobody gave similar advice to any of the people who testified on the other bills heard by my committee. 

             Witness after witness read their testimony.

              My bill was heard just before Andrew had to return to Baltimore. 

              He didn’t read his testimony, but he did scroll down on his IPad a few times. 

 — 

             My second education reform bill would streamline the dismissal procedure without shortchanging the rights of the teacher.  Only one fact-finding hearing would be required, instead of two. During this elongated process, I testified, the teacher is still paid. 

             Speaking in opposition, a teachers union representative said that teachers up for dismissal are not compensated, contrary to what I said.  In addition, she said, the bill takes away the right of appeal.

             When I questioned her, she acknowledged that my legislation did not deny a teacher’s right of appeal. 

             “I stand corrected as well,” I said.  After the local board makes a decision to terminate, I learned, it stops paying.