Discussion in 'General Education' started by TechGuy, Dec 29, 2010.
Dec 29, 2010
Not sure how true it is. Thanks for sharing.
I started reading it, but didn't want to invest any more time in it...truthfully, I don't work with any incompetent teachers. Tenure should be carefully awArded...it shouldn't just be given freely to anyone who lasts 3 years..and despite what many think, tenure does not mean a job for life...the cartoon flowchart posted may represent reality in NYC, but tenure does mean that there is due process which must be followed before termination...many administrators are hesitant to start the detailed paperwork process, but my feeling is that it is administration's job to ensure that learning is optimized for students and if that means jumping thru some hoops to get rid of dead weight, they should.
Getting rid of incompetent teachers in my district is definitely not THIS difficult. It is more difficult than a non-tenured teacher, but not this hard. My administration hasn't actually done anything, but I know that the principal at my last school did get rid of two or three tenure teachers while I worked there.
I hate articles (???) like this. There are ways to get rid of a teacher that is not doing their job, but that just means that the administration must do their job. I hate the misconception that tenure keeps someone in a job forever...no, administrations keep bad teachers in jobs.
I glanced at it, but I didn't read the entire thing.
Yes, there are multiple steps involved in dismissing a tenured teacher. However, that is to protect the teacher from inappropriate dismissals due to the whim of an administrator. It is not there to protect incompetent teachers.
I've worked with teachers who I don't feel did the best job they could be doing. However, I have only worked with one teacher who I truly believed was not competent to do the job. That teacher was dismissed mid year. It was not a complicated process.
I didn't read the whole thing, but I can tell tell the process here is not that difficult. I have known of a few cases of tenured teachers being let go and it was a lot simpler than that article.
But, I know squat about the process in NY.
And, of the hundreds and hundreds of teachers I have worked with in the last 37 years most have been dedicated professionals. I can count on the fingers of one hand those teachers who shouldn't be in the classroom.
WOW, I don't live NYC
NYC has a very strong teachers' association..the city can and does have ways of getting stagnant teachers to 'move on', but certainly in such a large and diverse district, there are teachers who are past their best days and administrators who aren't willing to go thru the process.
Has NYC finally done away with "rubber rooms"?
There's a teacher at my school who is, I'll have to be honest, horrible. I've seen her in action and if I were an admin, I would begin the process of getting rid of her in a heart beat. Unfortunately, the school's former principal was a buffoon and dropped the ball. Plus, this teacher keeps threatening to sue, stating that they only want to get rid of her due to her health issues. It makes me so mad that someone like her who really should NOT be in the classroom is still there, while people like me are stuck in part time jobs just HOPING to get our foot in the door.
Dec 30, 2010
The gist of that article seems to be a fairly clear victory for the teachers. Requiring arbitrators to make decisions more quickly simply means they will choose the route to enforce, which will most likely be returning the teacher to the classroom with instructions for admin to implement intervention/improvement strategies or suspending the teacher for a certain period of time rather than terminating him/her.
The process for actually terminating a teacher was not made any easier, the decision made was that more arbitrators should be hired to handle existing cases and should make their final decisions more quickly.
It IS a positive step for the teachers to be reassigned to administrative or non-classroom duties while awaiting arbitration rather than sitting in a room doing whatever they want while getting paid for a full day of teaching. At least the new system will allow NYC to get some type of productive work from the teacher while going through the arbitration process.
According to Chicago and Colorado teachers from another board, if you have 2 years worth of "bad test scores" out of 5 years not only will you be fired, but your license will be revoked. That is complete and utter INSANITY.
So obviously 'tenure' or due process rights as a unionized govt. worker is fast becoming a thing of the past and it's a brutal witch hunt against all teachers. And I'd bet my camera that nothing is going to improve with these harsh tactics that ignore the root of the problem.
eta: It's a movement in the works but the bill hasn't passed.
Not true about Colorado.
The poster said it was a smiliar issue to the Chicago bill. Here's her post in its entirety, she can explain it better:
Perceptions are different than the "legal" reality. I don't doubt that the CO poster had experience with that scenerio, but I would bet that the situation is an individual circumstance. I work with the Colorado DOE and that's not the legal case, though it certainly might be true to an individual case.