Can any of the "NO" voters explain to me how tenure realistically helps students?
I believe most teachers are hardworking and have their students' best interests in mind. There are others, however, that know that tenure keeps them employed and allows them to put much less than 100% into their job. "What the hell, I get paid no matter what".
Even in other union jobs unproductive/poor performing members are not protected to this extent.
I think there are some misconceptions about what tenure really is. Tenure does not give teachers immunity to being fired, it just requires evidence and a hearing before they are let go. It may be a long drawn out process...I wouldn't know, but I absolutely support expediting that process if the teacher has done something wrong or is incompetent. However: some level of protection is needed. In the past teachers would be replaced by the administrators "good ol' boys" or be let go because senior teachers cost too much to employ. It is also important for teachers to be able to stand up to administrators when they do not have the students' best interest in mind. As a teacher, I was once in a situation where I was asked to do something on the down low that could have negatively impacted my students...I refused and since I am rated as a "highly effective" teacher, and have a long history of good evaluations...I was not afraid to stand up for what was right. If anything, administrators need to set a higher standards for their evaluations...because with any job there is always going to be someone who is not pulling their weight.
Sarah, I thank you for being a teacher and applaud your rating.
I do submit to you that regular union membership would provide the protections you mentioned - without tenure. Good teachers as yourself need no tenure - it's the below average ones that do.
Simple..If you are a bad teacher and not doing your job you are let go..Same with school administrators....Why isn't there anything in any other job sector that has the protection of tenure as it does for school employees..The teachers already have the protection of a union to make sure they aren't fired for no reason at all....Tenure should be done away with..
As Sarah noted, tenure does not necessarily mean what you think it means. It actually varies by state/jurisdiction. California's tenure was what folks traditionally (and detrimentally) think of when they think of tenure - "you can't fire me, I've got tenure!".
In the real world, it's different in different locations. Here in North Carolina, the teabagger/GOP coalition in government is trying to get rid of tenure - even though all NC tenure is for K-12 is the right to a hearing. That's it. But they have idiots who fall for the lie of "tenure is forever employment", and take advantage of that to push state resources towards their buddies who run charter and private schools as a way to "improve" NC education....
Oh, and independent studies have shown that NC charter schools are no more effective than public schools... even though the charter schools can select their students, whereas public schools MUST accept all.
"In the past teachers would be replaced by the administrators "good ol' boys" or be let go because senior teachers cost too much to employ."
If you're correct that the administrators are as nasty as you say, I suggest getting your kids out of public school and away from these people as quickly as possible.
Thats a great question. If Sarah is correct then unfortunately due to the government monopoly on education ours kids' education will be administered by these less than ethical public employees.
This is a more complex issue than anyone really wants to deal with, but it is one which does require dealing with.
Tenure is not the real problem here. It's how it has been manipulated by special interests over the years. If you doubt my position, please explain how tenure came to be something that magically was bestowed upon young, inexperienced and untried teachers at the 18 month to 24 month range in California...
This is what happens when special interests leverage their tame politicians to further their interests both in contract negotiations and by legislation. One or the other of these has to go: Unionized educators or tenure. As it is, you have no governor on this motor and it will over-rev until it explodes.
Can any of the "NO" voters
Can any of the "NO" voters explain to me how tenure realistically helps students?
I believe most teachers are hardworking and have their students' best interests in mind. There are others, however, that know that tenure keeps them employed and allows them to put much less than 100% into their job. "What the hell, I get paid no matter what".
Even in other union jobs unproductive/poor performing members are not protected to this extent.
I think there are some
I think there are some misconceptions about what tenure really is. Tenure does not give teachers immunity to being fired, it just requires evidence and a hearing before they are let go. It may be a long drawn out process...I wouldn't know, but I absolutely support expediting that process if the teacher has done something wrong or is incompetent. However: some level of protection is needed. In the past teachers would be replaced by the administrators "good ol' boys" or be let go because senior teachers cost too much to employ. It is also important for teachers to be able to stand up to administrators when they do not have the students' best interest in mind. As a teacher, I was once in a situation where I was asked to do something on the down low that could have negatively impacted my students...I refused and since I am rated as a "highly effective" teacher, and have a long history of good evaluations...I was not afraid to stand up for what was right. If anything, administrators need to set a higher standards for their evaluations...because with any job there is always going to be someone who is not pulling their weight.
"In the past teachers would
"In the past teachers would be replaced by the administrators "good ol' boys" or be let go because senior teachers cost too much to employ."
I can get of a couple of private sector jobs in my past where I wish there was a tenure system.
Sarah, I thank you for being
Sarah, I thank you for being a teacher and applaud your rating.
I do submit to you that regular union membership would provide the protections you mentioned - without tenure. Good teachers as yourself need no tenure - it's the below average ones that do.
Simple..If you are a bad
Simple..If you are a bad teacher and not doing your job you are let go..Same with school administrators....Why isn't there anything in any other job sector that has the protection of tenure as it does for school employees..The teachers already have the protection of a union to make sure they aren't fired for no reason at all....Tenure should be done away with..
As Sarah noted, tenure does
As Sarah noted, tenure does not necessarily mean what you think it means. It actually varies by state/jurisdiction. California's tenure was what folks traditionally (and detrimentally) think of when they think of tenure - "you can't fire me, I've got tenure!".
In the real world, it's different in different locations. Here in North Carolina, the teabagger/GOP coalition in government is trying to get rid of tenure - even though all NC tenure is for K-12 is the right to a hearing. That's it. But they have idiots who fall for the lie of "tenure is forever employment", and take advantage of that to push state resources towards their buddies who run charter and private schools as a way to "improve" NC education....
Oh, and independent studies have shown that NC charter schools are no more effective than public schools... even though the charter schools can select their students, whereas public schools MUST accept all.
"the teabagger/GOP coalition
"the teabagger/GOP coalition in government is trying to get rid of tenure"
Obviously an objective, fact filled post.
"In the past teachers would
"In the past teachers would be replaced by the administrators "good ol' boys" or be let go because senior teachers cost too much to employ."
If you're correct that the administrators are as nasty as you say, I suggest getting your kids out of public school and away from these people as quickly as possible.
terry, how would a parent go
terry, how would a parent go about and follow your advice?
Actually Bob even a broken
Actually Bob even a broken clock is right twice a day so that sentence you highlighted doesn't mean it isn't fact.
Thats a great question. If
Thats a great question. If Sarah is correct then unfortunately due to the government monopoly on education ours kids' education will be administered by these less than ethical public employees.
This is a more complex issue
This is a more complex issue than anyone really wants to deal with, but it is one which does require dealing with.
Tenure is not the real problem here. It's how it has been manipulated by special interests over the years. If you doubt my position, please explain how tenure came to be something that magically was bestowed upon young, inexperienced and untried teachers at the 18 month to 24 month range in California...
This is what happens when special interests leverage their tame politicians to further their interests both in contract negotiations and by legislation. One or the other of these has to go: Unionized educators or tenure. As it is, you have no governor on this motor and it will over-rev until it explodes.
.
.