Given the unfortunate reality that budget pressures are forcing many school districts to lay off some teachers, it’s important to realize that currently, the choice regarding who stays and who goes is based not on quality, but seniority.

A relatively new teacher, even one who’s cl

early making a positive difference in student achievement, can be let go ahead of a colleague who has been rated “unsatisfactory,” but has been around longer.

Legislation in Olympia seeks to change that perverse system in favor of one that puts students first. House Bill 1609 (and companion Senate Bill 5399) would require school districts facing teacher layoffs to consider evaluations ahead of seniority. They also would put an end to the forced placement of teachers in schools, giving principals a say over who gets hired in their building.

These are sensible ideas, and important statements about an education system that in many ways works harder to protect underperforming adults than to help children reach their full potential.

Washington voters clearly agree. A January poll commissioned by the Partnership for Learning and the Excellent Schools Now Coalition found 89 percent of voters believe that a principal should never be forced to hire a teacher they don’t think is a good fit for their school.

Eighty-one percent agree that “if a district is facing layoffs, teachers should be retained based on their performance in raising student achievement, not how many years they have been teaching.”

You’ve got to wonder about the 19 percent that didn’t embrace that statement. Perhaps they came from an education establishment that for too long has defended old ways of doing things, insisting that more money was about the only thing schools needed to improve.

To be fair, administrators, school boards and teachers are working to develop new, more robust teacher evaluation systems, under legislation passed last year. But many are using that as a reason to defeat HB 1609, arguing that it’s divisive and will divert time and energy away from a collaborative process.

We suspect parents have little sympathy for such concerns. A better evaluation system, one that does more to improve teaching across the board, shouldn’t be threatened by a bill that would simply put good teachers ahead of inferior ones on a layoff list.

Most districts today only have a two-tiered evaluation system, where teachers are deemed either satisfactory or unsatisfactory. All HB 1609 would do is potentially force out some of the unsatisfactory ones, protect the best young teaching talent, and give principals a say in who teaches at their school.

On what planet is that a bad idea?