Teacher-Tenure Row Reheats

[proud2BlibKansan]

Educators Labeled 'Ineffective' Could Lose Job Protection Under Colorado Bill

A bill that would drastically curb the tenure rights of Colorado teachers is expected to reach the state House floor this week, re-energizing the national debate over the sacrosanct protection.

The bill, which passed the state Senate Friday, would grant tenure to novice teachers only after they boost student achievement and received positive evaluations three years in a row.

Tenured educators could lose job protection if they are deemed "ineffective" two straight years.

The legislation isn't as revolutionary as the one proposed in Florida, which Gov. Charlie Crist vetoed. That legislation would have done away with tenure for new teachers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704093204575216440097018112.html

[Catshrink]

1. How are they defining "student achievement"?

Is it a statewide standardized test? Content area test? Are there tests for every subject area? Here we go again.... there's no test for the band teacher, the art teacher, etc.

Are all schools treated the same? Are there provisions for sped kids? Somehow politicians never consider these variables.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. Only 20% of teachers teach a subject that can be tied to a standadized test

One in five.

[FBaggins]

21. I doubt that very seriously.

Even at the high school level I would find this hard to believe... unless what you're saying isn't that they can't be tied to such an assessment because assessments are not given in those subjects.

Regardless, far more than 20% of teachers teach an entire grade's curriculum.

[donco6]

5. It's based on growth on the CSAP standards-based measure.

We can track one student's RIT score from year to year - so if he/she shows growth, then you're OK.

But yeah, there's only reading, writing and math, then science at 8th and 10th. That's it. How the other disciplines are measured I have no idea.

[Smarmie Doofus]

14. They don't consider them because they have no idea what......

... they are talking about.

And, yes, I specifically INCLUDE the current POTUS.



>>>>>>>Is it a statewide standardized test? Content area test? Are there tests for every subject area? Here we go again.... there's no test for the band teacher, the art teacher, etc.

Are all schools treated the same? Are there provisions for sped kids? Somehow politicians never consider these variables.>>>>>>>>>>

[YvonneCa]

3. California is pushing this...

...too.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/may/03/the-hard-part-layoffs/



Every time I read it, my blood pressure goes up...especially the 'raw power' crap.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

4. CA is looking at doing away with senority as the predominate factor in retention

Some of us agree with that

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. How will you decide how much of a bonus to give the Art teacher?

Counselor?

Kindergarten teacher?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. What does that have to do with retention by senority?

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. How are you going to pay your teachers?

Seniority drives the pay scale.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

9. Once again, that has nothing to do with seniority for retention

Its becoming clearer to more and more people that the industrial/assembly line model for compensation and retention is not working in education. That is not surprising, since it is designed for assembly line workers not white collar, intellect focused jobs. Not all teachers at the same education and seniority level in a district perform at the same level. To pay them the same is madness. The vast majority of professionals get individual reviews and are compensated based on them. To say that can not be done with teachers is specious.

The reality is that some from of merit pay based on a mix of evaluations and student performance is coming. The NEA and other education organizations need to get out front on this or teachers will get steam rolled forcing some Arne Duncan approved approach. The current defend the status quo at all costs rear guard action will fail in the long run. If the teaching professionals do not come up with an answer, one will be imposed upon us.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. So you can't answer the question

Not surprised. No one can.

In other words, you are endorsing a system that pays some teachers better than others and keeps some teachers from ever being eligible for bonuses.

If you don't see the problem I don't know what to tell you. :shrug:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. The changing tide is upon us. We either get out in front or we will get overwhelmed

by the Arne Duncan mob. Sticking your head in the sand will not stop it and many including senior NEA leadership are in just such denial. They pinned their hopes on the new administration and it has been betrayed. If we, the professionals in the field, can not come up with a suitable replacement approach to the antiquated one currently in use, perhaps we deserve what happens to us.

Your false strawman is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. It's not a false strawman; it's a real life scenario

If we want to change the way teachers are retained and paid, then we need to have a plan for ALL teachers. Only 20% of teachers teach a subject that can be tied to student achievement as measured by a standardized test. How do we pay the other 80%?

My head is definitely NOT in the sand. Neither are the heads of my union leadership. In fact they have developed several workable solutions. Unfortunately, the officials in the Obama administration are unwilling to include union leadership in their plans and have not even invited them to the table.

The problem is the dictatorial top down approach employed by Arne Duncan and Barack Obama. This is the reason for AFT's WITH US NOT TO US campaign.

In other words, the Arne Duncan mob has already overwhelmed us.

[tonysam]

13. The problem isn't with teachers anyway; it's with the administrators

There's no way to gauge THEIR "effectiveness." Anybody who supports the trash of getting rid of tenure hasn't a fucking clue how public schools operate. They are heavily political institutions. And the top-down approach in education is why such schemes as gutting "tenure" (which only protects school districts from even more lawsuits by teachers) and "merit pay" will never work. When a teacher's livelihood is dependent on ONE individual--a principal--one can see why it would never work. The principal has all the power while a teacher has none.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. That is a cop out at best

Almost every professional gets some sort of evaluation by their supervisor and it drives pay increases, promotion, and retention. That is true in companies, government and even the military. Why is that approach is not suitable for teachers though it works for just about everyone else. Do all the supervisors have all the power and the employees none in the rest of the professional world? If not how can that be true in teaching? Administrators are also are reviewed by their supervisors. You provide no reason why classroom teachers should not be treated like fellow professionals.

The so called "tenure" in high schools is a gross misuse of the term. It more like probationary vice permanent status. Its quite common in many government employment constructs. Nothing new there. The main fight over "tenure" is actually over seniority rights for assignments, raises, and retention.

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. Tenure is a guarantee of due process

It is a right all workers should have. Instead of caving in and allowing tenure to be taken away from teachers, we should be demanding it be given to all workers.

We've had this conversation way too many times, but here it goes again. Teachers don't become incompetent overnight. Districts have years (anywhere from 3 to 5 is standard) before awarding tenure. The same people who hire these incompetent teachers are also charged with firing them. But for many silly reasons, they can't do that. So no, I absolutely do NOT trust them to decide whether or not I am competent enough to continue my employment with the district.

I have taught for 30 years in more schools than I can count and I have had ONE principal who was outstanding, two who were above average and the rest were incompetent and shouldn't have been hired as principals in the first place. I agree with tonysam on this. The real problem in education lies with the administrators, not with the teachers. We hear more than I can relate about bad teachers yet bad principals are ignored. And those of us in the trenches will tell you a bad principal has a far greater impact than a dozen great teachers.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

17. Government workers already have substantive due process rights once they make permanent status

In a typical civil service construct the first year you are on probation, with no reason needed for dismissal. The next two years you are conditional, you can be let go, but some reason is needed. After three years you are permanent and it takes either long term performance issues or a serious rules violation to be let go. Sounds quite reasonable to me. I see no reason teachers should not be in a similar environment. In some school districts, when you remove the specious tenure label, that is pretty much what you have. I do not see a problem with that. I also do not see much argument about that within the NEA.

The crux seems to be that once a teacher is permanent, it magically becomes somewhere between unreasonable to impossible for a teacher to be reviewed professionally and that review be used for compensation, promotion, and retention. There is yet to be a credible argument as to why teachers are not subject to the same kind of evaluation process other professionals are. The near universal disdain for administrators by classroom teachers is not a prima facie argument. The creation of a fair evaluation process with safeguards is what the NEA and other organizations need to get out in front of NOW. Otherwise Arne's army will write the process for us and its a safe bet we will not be happy with the result.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. It is not impossible to fire a tenured teacher

Principals are too incompetent to get the job done.

[tonysam]

19. It's laughably EASY to fire a tenured teacher

I know from experience.

It's damned near impossible to get rid of an administrator.

Most teachers are "pushed out" rather than outright "fired." This makes a school district's "figures" look good; a district can claim it almost "never" "fires" teachers because they basically force them to resign in lieu of a dismissal.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. This is exactly why the NEA needs to get out front on merti pays and reviews

[FBaggins]

22. "Teachers don't become incompetent overnight. "

This is no doubt true... but also true in other professions, no? Why would the argument be different?

Also... I've read here many times that these new TFA teachers aren't worth anything because it takes more than 2-3 years to truly become competent as a teacher (even in a traditional certification environment). Those two statements seem to run at odds to one another.

I have taught for 30 years in more schools than I can count

Then let us all hope that you're not a math teacher. :)


Having said all that... yes... bad administrators are a significant problem.