Is Teacher Tenure Still Necessary?

[tonysam]

More lies about what "tenure" is, which is only the "right" to a heavily rigged hearing, which almost ALWAYS favors asshole prinicpals:

Tenure is under attack. The century-old system of protecting experienced teachers from arbitrary dismissal — long viewed as sacred — has triggered hot political debates in several states.

"Teacher effectiveness" has emerged as the biggest buzz phrase in education policy circles. Because teachers have such potential for affecting the quality of children's education, some people are starting to argue that it must become easier to get bad teachers out of the classroom.

"There seems to be a lot of drive to do away with tenure," says Sandy Kress, who helped write federal and state education laws as an adviser to George W. Bush and other policymakers. "Tenure has proved to be just a horrible barrier to getting rid of that small percentage of teachers who are just not effective."

NPR

The problem isn't with "tenure" but with a system that doesn't hold principals accountable for their actions. Teachers can easily have their careers destroyed, they can lose EVERYTHING, because of an asshole or negligent principal.

It's ISN'T "hard" to get rid of teachers--it is EASY--but the way school districts typically get rid of them is to force them to "voluntarily" resign, with the teachers thinking this helps them in future job searches. It doesn't. All resigning does is save the districts money on hearings and unemployment insurance.

Teacher resignations in lieu of firings are FAR more common than outright firings. Or they simply deny tenure to probationary teachers, which is another form of firing. School districts typically lie and say they very rarely "fire" teachers, thus creating more outrage from the public, who in turn have NO idea the office politics of public education.

Just think if "tenure" didn't exist--teachers would be at the total mercy of not only principals, but parents who try to throw their weight around to principals and other administrators. Working conditions, already horrible in public schools, would be worse.

Abolishing or "reforming" "tenure" is just another way to deskill the teaching profession.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. It is if the goal is to attract some of the brightest minds and to discourage them from leaving

the teaching profession for more lucrative employment and opportunities.

[tonysam]

2. Yep, and to discourage principals from acting even worse than they already do.

Just think if it didn't exist. There would just be a revolving door labor force, but this is what the World Bank and the privatizers want.

Education to them is a waste of money.

[teenagebambam]

3. Speaking as an untenured teacher at the college level -

- tenure seems to be a means by which the tenured faculty can sit back, defy the administration, and get paid for doing little to nothing. Certainly not advance the art of teaching in any way. Meanwhile, the untenured faculty bust their ass to recruit and retain students, build programs, and have no avenue to criticize or encourage their tenured colleagues, because if they do, they risk not getting tenure themselves. I would LOVE to see tenure done away with, at least at the University level. If I could be evaluated on the quality of my work alone I would be golden.

[tonysam]

4. College tenure isn't the same as public school tenure

So let's quit trying to create confusion between the two. Don't you dare say that because public school teachers have "tenure" they are lazy fucks while the cheapo bimbos, who in theory eventually could get "tenure," are better teachers when their contracts aren't renewed. And unlike colleges and universities, being denied tenure--which is by a group of colleagues and NOT one person, as in public schools--isn't a career killer. A college instructor can go to another college and be hired and eventually get tenure. Being denied a continuing contract--tenure--IS a career killer in public education. In colleges, you have the right to appeal your denial. In public education, you are an at-will employee and are tossed out and can be for any fucking reason at all or no reason. There is NO appeal at all for a nonrenewal, unlike when you are postprobationary or "tenured." Never mind school districts almost always rig the hearings for "tenured" teachers by committing criminal acts in order to "defend" an asshole principal.

College tenure ISN'T THE SAME THING AS PUBLIC SCHOOL "TENURE." Do you understand that?

[teenagebambam]

5. I guess I do now.

Thanks for your civility.

[mzteris]

8. don't you DARE

question anything, got it??

:spank:


er - welcome to DU....

you might want to back slooooooooowly out of the room. :rofl:

[tonysam]

6. By the way, since this thread is about public school tenure, not college,

there will be no more responses from me about college tenure.

People who conflate the two are engaging in dishonesty.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. Actually using the term "tenure" with high school teachers is a misuse of the term

[Catshrink]

7. The big banks who caused the financial debacle pay retention bonuses

to keep "good" people. I'll take some of that, please. :rofl:

[Smarmie Doofus]

9. There is a "lot of drive" to do all sorts of idiotic things.

>>>>>There seems to be a lot of drive to do away with tenure," says Sandy Kress, who helped write federal and state education laws as an adviser to George W. Bush and other policymakers. "Tenure has proved to be just a horrible barrier to getting rid of that small percentage of teachers who are just not effective.">>>>>

For example: start a war with Iran, start a war with Venezuela, escalate the wars in Pakistan and Afghanistan,block stem-cell research, teach creationism , ban marriage equality laws, redistribute public moneys in ways that benefit an economic elite at the expense of the vast majority.

The regime in which Ms. Kress served was characterized by " a lot of drive" to achieve a veritable plethora of idiotic ends. Eliminating tenure for public school teachers was one of them. That regime succeeded in many of an assortment of idiotic initiatives. The country... no, the WORLD... still reels from that fact.

The wonderfully republican idea of eliminating teacher tenure has fans in the White House, in the DEM party, and on this board. Just as some other Bush era idiocies have fans in what would otherwise seem unlikely places.

This is the truly disturbing aspect of this question. I'll most likely be gone ( retired, I hope) before tenure/no tenure hits me in a material way. What really bothers me is the question of who and what is guiding this Democratic Party of ours. That is... *which* people and *what* ideas.

Whenever I look really closely at that question these days, I feel *really* uncomfortable.

[tonysam]

10. The neoliberals are driving the Democratic Party, and they are following the World Bank script.

n/t

[adnelson60087]

12. This small quote tells me the whole debate about tenure is a sham.

"Tenure has proved to be just a horrible barrier to getting rid of that small percentage of teachers who are just not effective."

SMALL PERCENTAGE OF TEACHERS WHO ARE JUST NOT EFFECTIVE. Small percentage...my goodness, to hear the popular press and enemies of public education, you would think the ineffective teachers were along the 50% or so of those practicing. Look at Obama's plans of closing schools and reconstituting them with no more than 50% of the existing staff. Small percentage. I wonder if that small percentage is comparable to the ineffective doctors, attorneys, cops, nurses, ect in any profession? I'm willing to bet these numbers are likely similar and this entire tenure discussion is just another way to influence public opinion to the meme "public school teachers suck and are the reason the schools fail".

[tonysam]

13. The truth is "competence" or "good" has nothing to do with why a teacher is sacked

Political reasons, age discrimination, administrator vindictiveness, administrator neglect dressed up in bogus "firing for cause" nonsense have everything to do with it.

The vast majority of teachers who are sacked "voluntarily" resign from their jobs in lieu of being fired long before any due process hearing happens. Therefore, they are not technically fired although resigning really doesn't help the teacher in future employment. After all, a resignation in this circumstance is really an admission of guilt for "misconduct," whatever the stupid reason the administrator claims it is. All it does is save the districts money on lawyers, lawsuits, and unemployment compensation (since a resignation is a quit and a teacher resigning can't collect it). Of course teachers who don't have tenure are routinely sacked by principals as being nonrenewed which is the same thing as being fired but districts don't call it that. Districts can then brag to the public about how "rare" it is for a teacher to be "fired" for "cause," and those who go through the due process garbage and "lose" these fake hearings deserved what they got.

That's why these articles are so full of shit to somebody who has been through this garbage of being terminated can tell you.