Teachers and their unions collectively exhaled last week when a California appeals court overturned the Vergara ruling in 2014 which struck down teacher tenure in the state.
As a teacher who has struggled with the virtue of tenure, this was the right call to make at this time.
I, too, am frustrated that ineffective instructors remain on the job in classrooms, negatively impacting young people’s education.
Barring heinous criminal behavior, you can’t easily fire a teacher. The amount of energy and paperwork required to remove a bad one is monumental. However, if teachers had no job protection, it would cause harm to the entire profession.
The history of tenure in public schools dates back nearly a century when women could be fired if they got pregnant or married.
Without tenure, a personality clash between a principal and a teacher might mean dismissal.
With pressure from dissatisfied parents and students, a decent teacher might lose her job.
Teaching is not that financially rewarding to justify removing the safety net of tenure.
Teachers remain the lowest paid group of professionals despite half of them holding master’s degrees. Tenure is a kind of substitute for the lack of financial benefits other professions offer. That is the main reason it needs to remain in place.
California educators recently received a solicitation from the Educational Testing Service (ETS) to score the new Common Core assessments. Pay? $20 an hour—only $5 more than the proposed $15 minimum wage. For ETS to think that such a low sum would entice teachers is quite insulting.
Think of workers who you can hire for $20 an hour. And if you can think of any, please email me.
Actually, if administrators did their job properly, there would be fewer incompetent instructors. After two years of formal and informal observations, enough evidence exists to determine is a teacher is good enough to stay employed.
If an administrator overlooks deficiencies, then that person now has a job for life, possibly marring children’s learning for years to come.
No, tenure is not the real problem; it’s that the teaching profession looks the other way when it comes to the one thing that truly distinguishes one teacher from another, and that is quality.
If teachers are required to work without job security, then they should be compensated significantly more money.
In most other careers, people risk losing their jobs if they don’t perform well; however, with that risk, comes rewards if they do. Such an environment does not exist in the teaching field.
The system pays everyone the same, adjustments in salary solely based on units in college and years on the job.
For those educators who provide a minimum effort, teaching is a cushy job. But for those who work hard and tirelessly push themselves, teaching is quite frustrating.
No matter the “I’m here for the kids” slogan, an excellent teacher feels slighted. No bonuses, no promotions, no recognition.
Whether or not a teacher designs effective lessons, communicates well with students, properly evaluates student work and returns it in a timely manner, arrives to the workplace on time, has no bearing on the employability of that individual.
So while I am all for making it easier to fire bad teachers, what has to happen at the same time at the other end of the spectrum is that teachers should earn more money for performing at outstanding levels.
Until that day arrives (which I have been waiting for since 1989), teacher tenure must stay.
If teachers are not going to be rewarded monetarily for a job well done, then they should feel secure that their career will not be in jeopardy.