Trouble with Tenure

[verbatim]

This thread is aimed at creating discussion about the benefits, faults, and room for improvement in the American and Canadian academic tenure system.

At its heart tenure is a concept with good intentions. Good, hard working teachers should not be displaced and stranded without a job because of the elimination of classes they teach for reasons outside of their control (shrinking population, classrooms merging, etc).

The big issue with tenure is that the same roles that help protect good teachers from getting laid off also make it nearly impossible to fire bad teachers. (17 minutes long, summary here)
[youtube]tfkscHt96R0[/youtube]

I believe that this video really highlights the big issue of the difficulty of firing someone with tenure and the damage it does to the system of tenure as a whole. The purpose of this thread is to look at tenure, its faults, whether or not it is salvageable, how one would go about fixing it, things of that nature.


Also, if anyone here remembers my last thread (please respect the no necromancy rule) I'd just like to say that he survived and is currently in the process of rehabilitation (score one for the doctors).

 

[billymills]

Tenure on elementary level and high-school level teachers? I thought tenure was to protect professors from publishing things the University may not want to be associated with, which I think is perfectly valid.

Are there any arguments for primary education teachers to be tenured at all? I thought the reason the bad teachers couldn't be replaced (and I may be very wrong about this, it's probably based off the raving of conservatives) was that teachers unions fight very hard to prevent any teachers from being fired and make it extremely difficult to fire bad teachers.

 

[verbatim]

Tenure does exist in high-school and below, although it is different from that given to college professors. Unlike college tenure which is set up to allow professors to publish things that universities might not like, tenure in the high-school setting is set up to keep teachers deemed good from losing their jobs due to budget cuts by guaranteeing them that the district will always have some form of a job or other for them.

That being said, unions are generally the reason that schools have a tenure plan.

 

[WaterBomb]

unfortunately tenure and unions kind of go hand in hand, so if you want tenure to work properly the Union has to be on board with doing the right thing. The difficulty in removing a teacher depends on the strength of the union in that state. In New Jersey, for example, union leadership is very strong, making it difficult to remove teachers. This is one of the reasons it's been such a struggle between the governor and the union, and why the governor has been heavily attacking the union over teacher benefits. In a state like Virginia, on the other hand, union leadership is weaker and allows for the state government to be more involved in regulating. Though some people may not like the idea of the state controlling teachers any more than the union, it does make firing teachers easier. Unions tend to adopt a "blind defense" attitude, in the context of wrongdoing at least. They will defend their teachers tooth and nail, regardless of what they have done (to an extent, at least). Unless they commit a crime, the union won't allow them to be fired, even if they are a terrible teacher. Crimes, on the other hand, are a different animal. I don't think even the union would have the balls to stand up for the teacher depicted in this video, because they are actually guilty of a crime punishable by law.

 

[billymills]

I don't get what tenure has to do with this then. The teacher isn't being protected from budget cuts or shrinking population. None of those apply in this instance. The teacher is protected by the fact the school has promised not to fire her even if she does a terrible job. This is obviously a stupid policy, and it obviously has nothing to do with 'tenure.' 'Tenure' should remain a University and College level construct.

 

[Trax]

I thought the reason the bad teachers couldn't be replaced (and I may be very wrong about this, it's probably based off the raving of conservatives) was that teachers unions fight very hard to prevent any teachers from being fired and make it extremely difficult to fire bad teachers.

The primary reason bad teachers can't be replaced is because the kind of people who would make good teachers have no interest in dealing with punk kids who don't want to learn for a shitty income. 50k a year will not buy you quality.

 

[Kromlech]

It costs a district between 40-60k over the course of a process to fire a teacher that has tenure (anti-union articles you find will say 100-200k). This is all for legal fees, salary (in cases of suspension), substitutes (ditto), etc. Alas, I can't find any good online articles so I'm going on mostly what a superintendent told me during a teaching course.

Tenure for public schools (in new jersey) is granted to any teacher that works for 3 years and a day. After that they can't fire them like for reasons others have said. If a district doesn't want to give a teacher tenure they simply don't hire them again at the end of their 3rd year. NJEA is a pretty strong union compared to counterparts from other states, but we'll have to see how they handle this. I had the pleasure of working in the same school as the NJEA president for my student teaching (same department too!), and I really would like to know how he's handling this shit.

Kinda sucks that I can't find a job but twunts like these get to keep theirs!

Also, the 2 of the 3 teacher aides I had during my student teaching were fucking useless, but this thread is about tenure lol.

Edit:

The primary reason bad teachers can't be replaced is because the kind of people who would make good teachers have no interest in dealing with punk kids who don't want to learn for a shitty income. 50k a year will not buy you quality.

This however... is complete and total ignorance, no offense. ^_^;

 

[phirre]

I don't post much, but this is something I have some very strong feelings about. Teacher tenure does go hand in hand with the teacher unions, and I honestly believe the unions are responsible for a lot more harm than good. University tenure positions are less numerous, less guaranteed, and are received after a far longer period of time and theoretically, heavy review. Secondary education teachers typically get it as long as they've showed up for a couple of years. It has little to do with a teacher's efficacy.

The issue is that changing tenure, and the majority of issues relating to education, is that the level of involvement between teachers unions/school boards and politicians is so great. Reformers that want to make large changes have a hard time finding people that will even hear the ideas. While Race to the Top is changing some responses to educational reform, it's still challenging. A few years ago in California, they attempted to raise the number of years it took for a teacher to obtain tenure from two to five years. The teacher's union raised over fifty million dollars to fight the bill.

The process to fire a teacher is ridiculous, and I believe I read one study that asked principals if they had ever refused to try to fire a teacher based on the amount of effort it would take. An overwhelming majority said yes.

And if you want to laugh/cry, go read up on New York's 'rubber rooms.' They were closed a few years ago, but it was essentially a holding pen for teachers under review for incompetence or inappropriate behavior. They would have to report to that room every day to do... precisely nothing. While still receiving their full salary and benefits.

 

[Layell]

Adding a little something else to this topic. My theatre department tries to show itself to all students, to allow them to know right from first year the profs and subjects they can learn about later.

One of my profs has been here for years, she is a world class theatre set and costume designer. One of the best in Canada, and dare I say the world over. The design courses offered at the undergraduate level bring students up to graduate levels of design compared to other schools (and to keep bragging our new MFA program looks terrifying in its scope).

However amazing she is the tenure process has only begun for this year. It should have happened 5-10 years ago.

For those who have been through university, how many of your profs held tenure while you were studying under them? Talent does not always mean tenure, and that ought to be fixed.

 

[mattj]

At its heart tenure is a concept with good intentions. Good, hard working teachers should not be displaced and stranded without a job because of the elimination of classes they teach for reasons outside of their control (shrinking population, classrooms merging, etc).

Respectfully, why shouldn't teachers be laid off if the number of students decreases? If sales drastically decline for our company I will undoubtedly be laid off. I won't be happy, but its just sensible business. Why should it be any different for teachers?

 

[Trax]

This however... is complete and total ignorance, no offense. ^_^;

You seriously think you're going to be able to find enough people who

A) Want to be teachers
B) Will be good teachers
C) Don't mind being massively underpaid relative to what they could earn in another sector

To provide education to the entire population?

I'll have some of what you're smoking.

 

[Ace Emerald]

I can attest to what Trax says. My current Latin teacher is brilliant and a great teacher, but he's leaving to become a doctor in about 3 years. At least where I am, the pre college education system is terribly screwed up, I think tenure the least of their problems.

 

[ButteredToast]

 

[WaterBomb]

You seriously think you're going to be able to find enough people who

A) Want to be teachers
B) Will be good teachers
C) Don't mind being massively underpaid relative to what they could earn in another sector

To provide education to the entire population?

I'll have some of what you're smoking.

For what it's worth, I'm one of those people because I actually have a passion for teaching and would rather do something I love for less money than something I hate for more. Now, you said finding ENOUGH people so that doesn't solve the problem, but I'm sure there are many others out there like me who want to teach and don't care as much about the money.

 

[San_Pellegrino]

tenure doesn't mean you can't be fired

get your facts straight

 

[Kromlech]

You seriously think you're going to be able to find enough people who

A) Want to be teachers
B) Will be good teachers
C) Don't mind being massively underpaid relative to what they could earn in another sector

To provide education to the entire population?

I'll have some of what you're smoking.

You're speaking to someone who actually has a teaching degree and teaching license in New Jersey, pull your head out of your ass, please. There is no shortage of good dedicated new young teachers out there. If there was a shortage I'd have a job by now. :U

 

[WaterBomb]

Also, having worked for a company that staffed substitute teachers at various districts, I can also tell you that there are an absolute TON of certified teachers out there who are jobless. I can't even count for you the number of kids fresh out of college that came into my office looking for a job as a sub because they really wanted to teach but none of the districts were hiring.

@Kromlech: What type of cert (CE, CEAS, Standard) do you have, and what subject? If it's in a field other than Elem K-5 or Social Studies then you might want to try substituting. With a company like Source4Teachers you can sub in any district they service, which as of 6 months ago was 25. Long Term assignments are frequent in more concentrated subject areas, and many times a sub has been hired directly off the roster as a full time teacher. It's all about getting your foot in the door, I suggest you try it out. Check the website (source4teachers.com) first to make sure they have districts near you.