The Trouble With Tenure
 

The article below properly addresses part of a major hindrance in education, which is teachers who essentially work only to exploit their students as a means to a pay check.

The larger issue is that so many parents have no idea and perhaps no desire to encourage their children to excel. Lazy unproductive children become lazy unproductive adults, some of who become teachers, and so the process repeats.

I do agree that eliminating tenure or at the very least putting a much higher standard to permit it would be a good step. A 2nd step would be to increase teacher’s pay but only if they show they are the top, say 5% or 10% measured by their students test achievements.

It is a ridiculous that so many teachers have to essentially take a vow of poverty to do their job and endure it for years or decades before they can make a half reasonable wage.



DENVER — Mike Johnston’s mother was a public-school teacher. So were her mother and father. And his godfather taught in both public and private schools.

So when he expresses the concern that we’re not getting the best teachers into classrooms or weeding out the worst performers, it’s not as someone who sees the profession from a cold, cynical distance.

What I hear in his voice when he talks about teaching is reverence, along with something else that public education could use more of: optimism.

He rightly calls teachers “the single most transformative force in education.”

But the current system doesn’t enable as many of them as possible to rise to that role, he says. And a prime culprit is tenure, at least as it still exists in most states.

“It provides no incentive for someone to improve their practice,” he told me last week. “It provides no accountability to actual student outcomes. It’s the classic driver of, ‘I taught it, they didn’t learn it, not my problem.’ It has a decimating impact on morale among staff, because some people can work hard, some can do nothing, and it doesn’t matter.”

rest of the article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/opinion/frank-bruni-the-trouble-with-tenure.html

Shocking. Guaranteed jobs doesn't give incentive to improve. Whoda thunk it? Only reason to have guaranteed jobs for a select few like the justice department to ensure that they aren't beholden to an individual, party, etc, etc for their job but not sure what else has good reason to have it still

No tenure here. Never has been.

I don't know who would really want to be a Teacher. Pay is Poor and in Public Schools the working conditions are appalling because there is no discipline in the Class Rooms anymore

Lets say a High School Math Teacher is still going to be a Math Teacher when the retire; pay raises are not good. What I mean by that is it there is not a promotion for your unless you move up to Administration.

School District Administration extremely bureaucratic and political. Who you know is more important then what you can do or how well you do it.

You can watch the Los Angeles School District Meetings on TV and what you see is that the try all kinds of things but nothing they do works for any but a few Schools.

In a way Tenure is sort of an award for being in continuous Combat and surviving the Students, Parents and the Administration and no other meaning needs be attached to it.

Think of the Infantry Combat Badge = Tenure; it does not matter if you were a good Soldier or not.

The problem isn't tenure, it's getting high quality teacher candidates early in the process. In my experience, the best students are rarely education majors. Part of the reason for that is that there is very little content in EDU classes to challenge a serious student. You never see groups of EDU students in the hallways sweating bullets over whether they are ready for the exam the same way you see CHE or BIO students.

As I have said to my mom who was a teacher, those who cannot do, teach.

Politely, and on behalf of many others, that statement is repulsive and speaks volumes of one's experience, insight and character.

^^^^^^ this

While it might not be all encompassing, my experience has shown some truth to it. Should it change, my opinion will too.

Now that I'm a teacher I know what it's like. I'm pretty sure I don't ever get tenure since they did away with it. What I do get is low pay and students that aren't disciplined well. I'm hoping I can keep their attention with the projects I'm planning on doing.


I do wish the govt would spend more on education than aid it sends to other countries or heck the national defense fund. We need it, pay the teachers more, given the schools more money. I'm only allowed two reams of paper a month. Any more and it's out of my pocket! I found a half used ream in a random box in my room and I was ecstatic! I shouldn't be. But I was.

Federal money to fund education is a small part. Mostly it is locally funded. The budget for education nationwide is a huge number. I bet it dwarfs the expenditure on foreign aid by at least 100 to one. Foreign aid is a nice target but last I heard it was less than 3% of the federal budget.

Teaching is doing, and if you can't learn because you think the above is true then maybe you should teach.

I've see a lot of teachers who teach the subject matter but outside of academia, can't actually do. IOW I'd rather be taught business from someone who is actually running a business as opposed to someone who can spout theory but hasn't shown to run a successful business. So no, I don't consider teaching a subject ability to do more than in the academic world. My mother was the first female agriculture graduate in the young country. The illiterate farmers grew acres of crops. She tried her best but after 3 years and many dollars later, gave up on her flower garden. A poor example but there it is.

I can see tenure at the University level. It allows a Prof to explore new theories without being held back by a Dean that does not agree with their views.

But at the hight school level? What does it accomplish? What purpose does it serve?

Or held accountable by the dean that doesn't agree with the lack of any real work? Just like why Venkman got fired from the college in Ghostbusters?

Keep a warm body in place because few worthwhile people will want to be around?

It'd be interesting to see the accounting of where all the money's going then, in that school system. No paper doesn't sound acceptable to me.

Tenure, to me, sounds like something the Government created.

One of my 'slacker' Brothers sweated getting 'tenure' for years with his Gov't. job. Once you get it, it's the greatest thing there is. If you don't, in many cases there's nothing worse - is what I'm reading here.

The private sector's parallels would be; vested, or unionized.

Come to think of it, the Government has Unionized PORTIONS too.

I agree, and appreciate that. Those who can do neither, spout cliches.

Actually Aklim, the precise quote is, "He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches." by George Bernard Shaw in "Maxims for Revolutionists". You could have perhaps come up with something a bit more original with which to needle your mother. ;)

I always heard it as "Those who can't, teach. Those who can't teach, administrate".

I keep hearing about the low pay teachers get, but according to salary.com, public school teachers in Carson City, NV have a median income of $54,288. Even the tenth percentile is $41,075. I didn't make that much when I was an engineer. The numbers for Reno are a tad lower, but still in the same ballpark.

If the University sets up the rules as to who gets tenure and why then that is their business. No Deal can come along and say they don't like the deal that was made in the past and just change it; that's what tenure is really all about.

One aspect of tenure, and the reason it exists, is to allow a Professor the freedom to teach new things. Things the Dean might not be smart enough to ever understand.

Einstein understood, from a math standpoint, that a nuclear device was possible. Edward Teller told everyone how to make a real bomb. To almost everyone on Earth, including the Deans of the schools they taught at, they sounded like crazy men who just wanted to blow billions of dollars on research that maybe 100 people in the entire world understood. None of these 100, by the way, were the Deans of a University.

Then Einstein moved on and Oppenheimer showed up and finally the world knew what a total Loon looked like. But even though no one could keep up with those wacky guys in New Mexico they knew enough to stay out of their way and let them work.

And this is the reason for tenure. No second guessing, no micromanaging. Just, hopefully, results.

The University of Texas is big on Tenure. It is one of the reasons their Professors are always picking up science awards.

The Bible warns us to not muzzle the Ox while it is treading out the oats, so why would anyone want to stop basic research? Because they don't understand it?

If you don't think tenure is necessary at the high school level you're not familiar with the controversies about what gets taught in biology and history classes.

that saying is not exclusive to the public or private school teachers. My wife is a teacher and she nor I find it unaccurate or repulsive.

It's SOP in many schools- even the ones with money.

That's more of a problem in some areas of the country than in others. IOW, I don't think it's much of an issue outside of the bible belt.

I wasn't needling. Just telling her what I have seen in general, not that she agrees with me. I would love to see people being able to do, in the world outside academia, what they teach. Once in a while I might run across it but it is so rare, it is much easier to assume you won't see it except once in a blue moon. Besides, if it is true, why bother with being original or not? No need to reinvent the wheel, so to speak.

I'm not sure I follow. I'm not suggesting going back on the agreement. You made a deal, it is a deal. Just don't go making any more stupid deals and honor the past deals.

So your Math teacher can't add, your Physics teacher can't tell the difference between mass and density, and the English teacher can't spell? Your programming teacher can't code and your Music teacher can't read music?

I think you are somehow not following what I am saying. Not sure why. English, I don't really know what the real world application is. Math and Physics, are they merely able to teach the text or are they able to work in the real world OUTSIDE the school and know what the industry is like. Sure, my programming teacher can code. Can he hold a job in a company doing coding? If not, all he has is theory. In nursing, can the teacher really hold a job as a floor nurse and teach me how the floor is run or just out of a textbook and experience from 20 years ago?

Bottom line is, if academia closed up today, would they be able to use those skills they teach and get a job or would they be having a PhD stock shelves? I took a class where my instructor was a network administrator who actually worked in the real world. OTOH, I had many instructors that teach us theories but have not had a job in the outside world since who knows when. One I respect, the other, WGAS.

No kidding....

I would love to see what it is these English professors do, not can do, do, other than teach.

Not always....

Thomas H. Maren - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

True. While there are a few who DO exceed, it is a safe bet that most won't. I myself have see a couple where they didn't follow the usual, most do. Safe bet. For every crack whore that changes for the better, there are hundreds more that don't. Which is the safety bet?

Not your fault but I have always thought that statement was sarcastically simple in implication. But, at the same time it is a good measure of how much Society values Teaching.

I worked for 18 Years as a Mechanic till I was injured badly enough to keep Me from wanting to do that type of work anymore. So in a sense I cannot Do; but it does not mean that I have not done something.

If I got a Job as Diesel Instructor at some Trade School I would have People like Yourself trying to fit Me into the "Those who cannot do, teach" and thinking that what I have to offer has no value.

This is not a respose to your comment but I am going to add it here instead of starting another Post.

Teaching is not valued because it does not show a Profit. As an example Privet Schools show a Profit, Teachers are better, Teachers get paid more and Students do better.

But, there is more going on then just the above. When Parents pay through the Nose they insist on value for their Money so the Parents pay attention to what is going on in the Private Schools and are right in the School Directors Face with complaints.

In other Countries where someone has to Pay for the Education of Children directly the Parents are actively going to make that Kid study and get as good a grades as possible.

That even works in Public Schools where Parents and Kids come from another Country where you had to Pay for Education.
The other issue is that Private Schools have a higher number of above averages Students to begin with.

It is really pathetic that with all of Mankind’s advancements that at least in the USA we simply do not know how to educate Kids.

This is an excellent point in favor of tenure. Yet it still permits tenure to work as a shield for bad or burnt out teachers. While there should be a means to protect teachers freedom to teach, how would you solve the problem of teachers with progressively lower success teaching rates as the teacher ages?

I've had some terrible professors who clearly only come to school to collect a pay check. Some have been dept. heads. This kind of thing is a disservice to the institution and students. I'm sure the same thing happens in every level of instruction.

Teaching should be valuable for the results it brings not because someone says it is great.

My point is that if you cannot diagnose what is out there today and can only do what was, the value is far less as time goes along.

It is not that we don't know how to educate, it is that we don't know how to graft motivation onto kids. On top of that, we insist on wasting resources on those that cannot and/or will not learn. By sparing me of the full sting of the stick of failure, you are robbing of the full understanding of the consequences of failure. This lowers the need and thus the value of education.

....and those who cannot teach, teach gym.

...I have heard from time to time.



We need Supermen & Superwomen in our classrooms....not clock punching, tenured loafers.
The entire Waiting for Superman is available on You tube. Spend a rainy afternoon watching it. ..takes about 2 hours or so.. Tragic what's going on in society.:mad::mad::mad:

Waiting For Superman - Official Trailer [HD] - YouTube

My niece's husband is a middle school principal in Lower Manhattan. Naturally, he thinks Charter Schools should not exist and Geoffrey Canada is the DEVIL.:rolleyes:

Right. The current arguments against tenure skew towards the notion that bad decisions were made by management in the past so employees of the present must be made to pay for mistakes they had nothing to do with.

If a teacher was told twenty years ago that there would be a lot of hard work to start with but it would all be worth it in the end and now, that the twenty years is passed, the current management says they don't care what sort of promises were made because they are now running things and if you don't like it then take a hike.

Except that there is nowhere to hike to.

Now the new management says they want to hire a bunch of new people who think more like they do and suddenly they find that no one wants to work for a bunch of managers that cannot be trusted to keep up their end of a deal. After all, if they would throw over the old teachers what's to keep them from throwing over the new ones? Who wants to work for someone who makes it all up as they go along or changes with the wind?

It tenure is a bad thing then it needs to be addressed in the future and not in the past.

I think I read somewhere that a lack of planning on your part doesn't constitute an emergency on my part. Still, it could be said about a worker that is worthless that he gets what he deserves.

Never disagree with honoring the past deal but not continuing with the stupid decisions of the past.

I have a couple of thoughts about that. First off, tenure neither endorses nor ultimately protects bad teachers. It takes more effort to get rid of a bad tenured teacher than a bad non-tenured teacher but it is possible. I have seen it done. Tenure is an excuse for administrators without backbone to explain why they haven't done their job. :)

But secondly, in any large organization there are going to be slackers. It's unavoidable and I don't know of any method to rid a large organization of people who are less productive than others. I don't know what an acceptable percentage is. I'm guessing somewhere around 10% or so. We just have to tolerate a certain amount of it in any organization.

Teacher burn out is a problem. I know of one fairly effective way to deal with it since the organization I worked for had the policy for a short period of time and I took advantage of it. It allowed a teacher to work overtime without pay and 'bank' the extra work. Then, when the bank had enough credits, the teacher could take a long vacation. Typically, one semester. The teacher then comes back renewed. I know it worked for me and I think it would be an effective policy to combat burn out. It wouldn't take care of the 'slacker' issue because they wouldn't be motivated to work the initial overtime but it goes help a lot with burn out.

I get paid $1000 a month. Why would I make waves if I am not compensated more? Now if there was a bounty on the bad teacher of say $500, I'd get rid of them. Once again, the problem is motivation.

Percentage is higher if it is difficult to fire.

If there is no protection for poor performance perhaps in burning yourself out or getting rid of poor performers solves that problem.

Still we have to deal with the problem of poor students

Most job functions are based on performance.
Tenure is a seniority based approach that works for hierarchy purposes, i.e. Unions, organized religions etc. With respect to teaching especially at the collegiate level it is a hindrance to progress. The vast majority of university professors are tenured and have been outside of reality waaay too long to correlate their taught theories to actual reality.

Regardless of your stance on tenure in general, a primary contributor too poor education lays in the ratio of quality teachers to students. The largest single contributor to poor teacher to student ratios is cost, now mind you this is not the teachers' salaries (most are underpaid) but total cost. One needs to question the administrative side of education, why is there typically a ratio of 3:1 between administrators and teachers? The primary objective is education not administration but the vast majority of funding goes to the latter rather than the former.

If only it were that simple. :rolleyes:

Sure, the teacher that is complacent is part of the issue but why does everyone seem to think that the right teacher can motivate the entire class? On a one to one basis, sure. That isn't practical in a class of say 30 + students. If the student has poor motivation because of lack of motivation, be it peer pressure, consequence of failure, parental attention, etc, etc, how can we expect a teacher, besides in a movie, to motivate class after class into doing their work?

I believe that the Parents are 90 Percent responsible for the Education of the Kids. Kids come here from other Countries not speaking English and when the have Parents willing to put the Boot to their Arse of those Kids do better than the US Born Kids.

In short there is a good reason why Indian and Asian Kids going to the same Public Schools manage to excel in the same Schools that the US Students are barely Mediocre in and that does not have much to do with the Teacher.

Teachers have no right any more do discipline Kids and in fact the School Districts don't even want Teachers to defend themselves when the Teacher is attacked by a Student.

With no discipline at School and none at Home the Students do as little as they please.

The resources are being wasted because they keep trying what is supposed to be new innovative things that Social Workers, Psychologist and so on are pushing for that work in isolated instances.

The motivation for the Kid has to come from their Family. For other types of motivation you need an environment like the Marne Corps.

Let us say that in a large School District 30 Tenures Positions open and you have 2 Excellent Teachers to fill 2 spots and a bunch of less then adequate Teachers to fill the Positions.
Then time on the Job also counts so that means that the newest and the brightes are not going to get a chance.

The Head of the Los Angeles CA School District was on the News a few minutes ago.

2 of the things that was discussed is that there is a State Law was stayed that would allow the District Head to fire the 3,000 Teachers that He had previously said He wanted to fire regardless of time on the job.

The District Head said He wanted to get rid of any Teacher that had low performance for 2 Years in a row.

The District Head also said He welcomes and it is a District Policy to accept the Unaccompanied Illegal Alien Children and when ask about who would have to pay for them He gave a Song And Dance about those Children being here because of them fleeing violence and so on and that it would be inhumane to refuse them.

The The Head of the Los Angeles CA School District was on the News a few minutes ago.

2 of the things that was discussed is that there is a State Law was stayed that would allow the District Head to fire the 3,000 Teachers that He had previously said He wanted to fire regardless of time on the job.

The District Head said He wanted to get rid of any Teacher that had low performance for 2 Years in a row.

The District Head also said He welcomes and it is a District Policy to accept the Unaccompanied Illegal Alien Children and when ask about who would have to pay for them He gave a Song And Dance about those Children being hear because of the fleeing violence and so on and that it would be inhumane to refuse them.

The School District Head is extremely good at deflecting probing questions and giving answers that the News Caster cannot probe into without looking inhumane.

Problem is many think "some money is good, more has to be better" which is why we keep asking for more money. Basically so the parents don't have to deal with uncomfortable issues:

1. Kid has no ability for scholastic stuff and should be learning a trade

2. Kid has poor attitude

To be fair, teachers play a role but a rather small role since you cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Does it mean we shouldn't insist on making the teachers better? Not at all. However good the teacher is, we cannot make them fix all the problems of life.

I agree.

In the US People tend to think that if we throw enough Money into a problem that it will get fixed and when we do that we don't want to spend a little more Money to monitor how the Money is used/results.

We do the Same with Laws.
Los Angles County has less then 100 People to check if you are getting cheated at the Gas Station and they also have to do any sort of Scales or other measuering devices. The result of not enough Enforcement is that People right now People are getting cheated.

Why monitor the results if it gives you problems? You only want to ask a question when you know the answer and it is favorable.