Shaun Johnson, an elementary school teacher, explains the attack on tenure and details what reformers would do of they really cared about teachers or children or the quality of education.
He writes:
“Obsessions with teacher tenure, or tenure in any academic profession, is all about union busting, and flipping the teaching profession into an unprofessional, short-term, part-time, scab workforce. It’s also about taking control of a largely “feminized” profession, one that few in the education policy community actually understand. That frightens them.
“Eliminating teacher tenure is education reform on the cheap. It’s a low-cost, no frills, low-brow maneuver. It rearranges the deck chairs without doing anything to the ship. Eliminating tenure shuffles control over who gets to teach, and nothing else. No prior or future investment necessary.”
He lists what teachers and children really need. Read it. It is focused and clear.
“Until then, don’t get cheap on me/us.
“Don’t be cheap with students.
“Until these glaring deficiencies are mitigated, not one single teacher is going to take VAM, testing, merit pay, or any other such nonsense seriously. There will be no buy-in, and all you’ll meet is either outright resistance or malaise. Every time you enter a school or classroom, or invite teachers for professional developments, all you’ll meet dear reformer are folks who check their email when you’re talking, who roll their eyes with every sentence you speak. You’ll meet those who smile and accept your free totes, and then talk viciously behind your back.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“Eliminating teacher tenure is education reform on the cheap. It’s a low-cost, no frills, low-brow maneuver. It rearranges the deck chairs without doing anything to the ship.”
Worse than that – it actually sinks the ship. Education “reform” is the iceberg.
And, yes, education “reform” is all about making education “cheaper”. That way, there’s more profit for the privatizers to skim off. That means, of course, that it’s not cheaper for taxpayers/citizens, but who the heck cares about them anyway?
LikeLike
Let me preface my question by stating that my wife is a retired teacher of 33 years. What was the original intent of establishing tenure and are there abuses which make citizens want to modify or eliminate it?
LikeLike
There are no abuses of tenure, there are abuses against tenure. Tenure just means that a teacher gets due process and is not unfairly ousted from her/his position. I could flood this web site with instances of teachers being falsely accused of things that they never did. Even if they were cleared of all charges, their lives and reputations remained ruined. The teachers don’t hire themselves, the teachers don’t observe or evaluate themselves, that’s all up to the administrators and principals. Let’s stop this silly game of blaming tenure and seniority.
LikeLike
I merely asked the original intent of tenure. I did not blame anyone for anything. There are other honest people asking honest questions.
LikeLike
George, the original intent of tenure was to prevent politicians from firing teachers and giving their jobs to cronies and friends.
LikeLike
I agree that some of the reason for public school regulation is to prevent local politicians from using school employment as patronage positions. This is especially important when the public school is the largest employer in the locality.
LikeLike
Tenure protects academic freedom, provides teachers with due pro cess rights, and provides one of the few practical benefits in what has been a traditionally low paying profession: job security
Tenure prevents political reprisal, administrative vindictiveness, school board vendettas, teacher churn for strictly economical reasons, personal attacks by emotion driven parents, or even false accusations by students. To do away with tenure would produce a constrained and timid teaching workforce. Without tenure, teachers will be much more likely to appease students than challenge them.
More likely to appease crazed, egotistical power tripping principals than stand up for what is in the best interest of students. Coaches will be more likely to appease demanding and unreasobable parents rather than field the best players.
Citizens who oppose tenure believe it is the main reason that truly bad/lazy, “grossly ineffective” keep their jobs. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Never blame a bad teacher for their own existence. They did not hire themselves, they did observe and evaluate themselves, they cannot fire themselves, and they did not grant themselves tenure.
Behind every really bad teacher stands a lazy, incompetent, nepatistic, unqualified, or clueless principal/supervisor/administrator.
Bad management produces bad teachers. That is the end of the story; it is an inarguable fact of life in public education.
Eliminating tenure will open a can of worms that we will deeply regret. If the Vergara decision is upheld, there will be no getting this toothpaste back in the tube.
LikeLike
“Tenure prevents political reprisal, administrative vindictiveness, school board vendettas, teacher churn for strictly economical reasons, personal attacks by emotion driven parents, or even false accusations by students.”
Tenure doesn’t prevent any of these things. It just means that accusations have to be substantiated through due process procedures. Even so, having had more than my share of experience as a probationary teacher, I know I would have appreciated some protection from administrative malpractice. I could not have been terminated after two excellent and one satisfactory rating.
LikeLike
Thanks NYS teacher for the answer about the reasoning for tenure. I saw the difference in administrative incompetence during my wife’s 33 years. She worked for good, bad and ugly administrators. For the most part they were good.
We keep blaming the administrators for hiring educators when we should also blame the process and the school boards (or maybe the makeup of boards) for hiring both.
Do you offer any suggestions for better evaluations of both administrators and educators? Not based on NCLB or Common Core or any of these national standards.
LikeLike
Independent peer review. It require certification and places an emphasis on being objective and supportive rather than threatening and punitive.
One of the main advantages of peer review is that a teacher is observed by an evaluator who taught the same discipline. For example, the chemistry teacher is observed by a current or former chemistry teacher. Surprisingly, under the current system, administrators are unable to judge the accuracy and clarity of subject specific instruction. This is a major problem when it comes to weeding out truly ineffective teachers that can fly under the radar by putting on a flashy, dog and pony show when the principal observes. Many an administrator is baffled by BS simply because they are not knowledgeable in the content area. Peer review can use teachers from within the same school district or independent retired teachers from outside the district. Some teacher unions apparently object to this form of evaluation fro reasons that I don’t really understand. Its too bad that this idea has not caught on more because mastery of subject matter, beyond the textbook, and an ability to communicate it clearly to young people is probably what separates the best teachers from the rest.
LikeLike
I have long advocated for peer review here, but it has not proved popular by frequent posters on this blog.
LikeLike
Yes, except I would add that the above would describe many of our public school administrators–at least in New Haven.
It took me awhile to understand that once a teacher made the jump to 6-figure salary land, they wore a different hat and now they were about the system. Why? If they did not play the game the way those above them mandated, then they would no longer be administrators and the 10K per month salaries, and great pension, would be gone….not to mention probably having their career ended.
We have enemies without and within.
LikeLike
definitely.
LikeLike
Shaun, I would hope for a more mature and professional response from teachers in general.
LikeLike
Shaun’s response is quite mature and quite professional and very spot on. I applaud Shaun’s article. Too bad if it offends the pettifoggers.
LikeLike
Ah the self important “changemaker” chimes in!
You’re part of the problem changemaker, a GAGAer to boot!
LikeLike
What’s your opinion of Shaun’s comments?
LikeLike
Shaun is pretty much spot on in his comments. There is still a lot to be added but what he said is understood by true educators.
LikeLike
We are going to destroy your profession, take your job and all the things you’ve worked for, make your college degrees worthless, put you in jeopardy of losing your house and not be able to send your own kids to college. Please be respectful and mature while we immolate you just because we can. And profits, of course.
LikeLike
Duane Swacker & Chris in Florida: while compassion, good sense and decency often seem in short supply these days, there seems to be no end to the number of pearl-clutching fainting-couch stick-it-in-your-eyes types who visit this blog in the hopes of provoking much heat and no light.
They would do well to ponder on Linda’s suggestion: “Grow a heart please.”
I would only add: and some grey matter as well.
😎
LikeLike
What’s behind the attack on tenure? States obligations for civil servants retirement benefits, that’s what’s behind the attack. Remove tenure, then place everyone on renewable contracts. Once you’ve accomplished that you can replace anyone who: 1. Costs the state too much. 2. Gets close to retirement age. By doing this they will save hundreds on thousands on each teacher they can drive away from retirement benefits. Their aim is to make teaching a 5 to 10 year career and eliminate the “career” teacher.
LikeLike
“Once you’ve accomplished that you can replace anyone who:” …. 3. questions anything.
LikeLike
“. . . anyone who doesn’t have a puce nose.”
LikeLike
I oppose the war on teachers and on tenure, but I disagree strongly with Mr. Johnson’s simplistic formulation. The fact is that there are abuses of the current tenure system (Only 18 months to get tenure in California? Really?), and there are states where it is almost impossible to fire bad teachers who have tenure. It is also true that — for better or for worse — teachers tend to get set in their ways. They find the grade they want to teach in a school where they are happy, and they aren’t really interested in even discussing changing that situation. As the husband of a teacher, I say these teachers mostly have valid arguments. But to a businessman reformster guy who wants to make teaching more “dynamic,” this looks like mere bullheadedness.
As with Common Core, school choice, etc., we have a bunch of people who don’t know the first thing about education trying to revolutionize the whole system by turning it into a highly-competative, cutthroat environment like Wall Street or the military. That’s what the war on tenure and the battle against the unions is about — no conspiracy theories are required.
LikeLike
“They find the grade they want to teach in a school where they are happy, and they aren’t really interested in even discussing changing that situation.”
You’re kidding, right? Why is this a bad thing? Why should someone who has found professional happiness be inclined to change that situation? Just for the sake of “change”? So they can look “innovative”?
And if you’re going to claim that there are “states where it is almost impossible to fire bad teachers who have tenure”, then the burden is on you to back up that statement. As it is, it’s something you’ve pulled out of your, er, left shoe.
BTW, what is the correct length of time until tenure (sic) should be earned?
I don’t know how your wife stands you or why you’re working so hard to undermine her livelihood.
LikeLike
“Why is this a bad thing? Why should someone who has found professional happiness be inclined to change that situation?”
Perhaps reading what I actually wrote, rather than ranting first, would be advisable.
As for your personal remarks, they tend to reflect the level of character I have come to expect from you. You might want to look into having that venom drained off — that stuff can kill you.
Have a nice day.
LikeLike
I quoted what you wrote and I even left out the part where you said, “he fact is that there are abuses of the current tenure system”, which was just before the part I quoted, which part seemed to be one of those “abuses” you were referring to. And you follow that by saying, “But to a businessman reformster guy who wants to make teaching more “dynamic,” this looks like mere bullheadedness”, as if anyone gives a rat’s patoot about what some businessman reformster guy thinks. If in fact you weren’t intending that quoted part to be a slam against teachers, maybe write clearer next time, mkay?
LikeLike
” As the husband of a teacher, I say these teachers mostly have valid arguments.
I believe Jack is agreeing with teachers but pointing out how businessmen see it. He is not saying the reformers are right.
I do agree that the statement about tenure needs to be supported. I come from a state where it takes four years to receive due process rights. That’s a long time to stay under the radar. 🙂 I never did run in to an administrator that would not take the easy way out if they had it. Tenure forces administrators to consider the rights of the teacher.
LikeLike
Dienne,
This is the guy who said (during a debate with Chris in Fl) that mansplaining was a canard.
Just saying.
LikeLike
I really think that it’s a myth that tenure is some big problem. NJ, MA and CT have tenure and seniority and are also highly rated school systems by almost any measure. Some of the poorest performing states don’t have tenure. NJ, MA and CT always rank in the top tier. In NJ, the probationary period is now 4 years, quite long enough. OK, you may have a point on CA’s 18 month probationary period; the solution is not to blow up tenure but to extend the probationary period to 3 or 4 years. I do not think it’s impossible to fire bad teachers with tenure (another zombie myth) if the principal or administrator is doing his job, documenting evidence and performing due diligence.
LikeLike
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Perhaps the author has painted with too broad a brush– and perhaps you as well. To your argument’s credit, CA’s tenure law seems to have needed some reforming, as perhaps do some other states’ laws. Some states have already taken such measures. My state of NJ is not alone in having tightened up tenure rules in the last few years, lengthening the qualification time, and simplifying the paperwork/ time required to provide due process to a tenured teacher brought up on charges.
However, the author’s point is supported if you zero in on the other features of teacher-tenure-reform laws. Around the nation, highly-prescriptive micromanagement of teacher evaluation is being imposed on the profession via state tenure laws, including evaluating teacher performance via two types of student performance: (a)annual measurement of year-end student performance against goals prescribed in autumn, and (b)year-to-year student improvement on state-mandated standardized tests.
(a), typical of top-down micromanagement, geometrically increases teacher & student paperwork with dubious results, and also adds assessment time; both take away from teaching time. Dubious = system encourages gaming by setting autumn goals low; unintended consequences, e.g. if top students consistently achieve top goals, there’s ‘no improvement’ & teacher grade lower.
(b)use of student scores in this manner has been recommended against by national stds boards, natl statistics orgs, & even author of Danielson method.
LikeLike
“They find the grade they want to teach in a school where they are happy, and they aren’t really interested in even discussing changing that situation.”
I hope that whenever you need dental work you have someone, whether the dentist or hygienist who is “happy, and they aren’t really interested in even discussing changing that situation.”
LikeLike
Man, you do not want an unhappy dental hygienist.
LikeLike
“They find the grade they want to teach in a school where they are happy, and they aren’t really interested in even discussing changing that situation.”
Yeah, it is a real B*&^h when some one is happy in their job isn’t it.
Heck. We NEED to stop that mess!
Move ’em to another grade or subject!
That is the business way!
LikeLike
Tenure is one of the best ways to insure taxpayers that the investment they make in their teachers stays in their communities and states.
LikeLike
And that used to be something leaders valued.
I don’t see a lot of state leadership valuing things our state has already invested in. It frustrates me. (NC)
LikeLike
You’re not an investment, you are a liability once you have taught long enough to tip their cost/benefit formula.
LikeLike
Excellent statement !
LikeLike
Interestingly tenure insures that teachers stay in their community and states by making it very costly for the teacher to leave the community or state. Like the longevity bonus that is built into the defined benefit retirement system, it reduces mobility and lowers the salary that must be paid to keep a teacher in the district/state.
LikeLike
“Some” would say that tenure and defined benefit retirement plans make staying in one place attractive.
LikeLike
Indeed that is correct. Tenure, if not granted in the new jurisdiction is a way to discourage teachers from changing jurisdiction. Defined benefit plans, with their implicit longevity bonuses, also tie teachers to a jurisdiction, allowing the district to pay sub market wages knowing that moving to a higher paying teaching position out of state would simply be too expensive for many.
LikeLike
“Some” would say that tenure and defined benefit retirement plans make staying in one place attractive.
Do you notice the difference in tone between our two posts?
LikeLike
I am not sure what your getting at here.
LikeLike
I would like to refer you to the LA Times of June 18, the Business section, “Teacher Tenure Ruling Won’t Help Your Kids” by Michael Hiltzik. Mr.Hiltzik’s article ran over to another page and on this continuation page was given the title “Ruling is a Remedy of Pure Snake Oil” I believe this title sums up not only Mr.Hiltzik’s article but also sums up the truth about this legalized attack on teacher’s unions under the guise of protecting the constitutionality of education.
LikeLike
When I began teaching in CA tenure was earned after three years of service. When I returned to teaching in 1978, I was on a temporary contract for two years. This was after the enactment of Prop 13. After three years I was offered a contract. As far as I know when I retired in 2003 tenure was attained after three years. I am surprised to hear that today it is anywhere from 16-18 months, depending upon who you believe. I understand there is an iniative in the works to reform tenure and is supported by the CTA. I believe 18 months is too brief a time to assess the abilities of a teacher.
LikeLike
I thought that was a very good article and a great list. If you believe in the CA law, the basis of Vergara, the concept of, a state providing an equal education opportunity for all students across that state…
Then how do you achieve:
1-equitable distribution of teachers
2-equitable facilities, buildings, classroom equipment and supplies
3-equitable field trips and transportation
4-equitable after school sports and club funding
He listed providing incentives and stipends for working in low SES schools, which I think is a practical measure to improve equitable distribution of teachers.
LikeLike
Tenure “reform”, seniority “reform” and bargaining rights “reform” is all Newspeak for “elimination”.
And now the public is being told that all these “reforms” are going to make the “job” (it is no longer a profession) more attractive to the “best and the brightest”. What a sinister joke! http://teachersdontsuck.blogspot.com/ http://wsautter.com/
LikeLike
One of the arguments I hear from non-educational professionals against granting tenure is that such a benefit is not awarded to them and so should be denied to anyone. I point out that if the nature of your job requires that you make public statements and hold positions that may come into conflict with the political and/or religious beliefs of your boss, and you don’t have any guarantee that your boss won’t just fire you at will, then your job activities become quite limited.
Our society values the protection of free expressions of ideas in the education of our children and so is willing to grant tenure.
Sometimes this argument even works.
LikeLike
One reason to look at tenure is the elimination of mandatory retirement. At the post secondary levels this has changed the tenure decision from a fixed 30 year commitment to an uncertain 50 year commitment.
LikeLike
Tenure provides minimal due process guarantees that protects teachers’ academic freedom and freedom of speech. It is also important in a profession that has a large number of women workers. Others have written about the sad history of discriminatory practices that female teachers had to deal with in the past (and some still deal with today). Tenure is a way to help assure that teachers are not subject to false accusations by an angry child or parent.
Tenure also protects those of us who are older workers. Part of the lure of TFA is the idea of getting teaching on the cheap. Why pay a veteran who has a wealth of education and experience when you can pay a fraction of that amount to a fresh-faced twenty-something?
Of course, to justify this, you have to create a whole narrative and bring out the clichés about older workers. Call us “set in our ways” (as someone commented above). Call us “burned out” or “resistant to change” or even “cranky.” Then promote the idea that youth equals talent. That a five-week “training” is superior to many graduate credits and, more importantly, many years in the classroom.
Let me tell you something. I will match my stamina, energy, drive, creativity, technical skills, people skills, and GRIT against any naïve newbie who’s been fed the line that the only problem with education in an urban district, like the one I’ve been in for years, is bad teachers. I’m old enough to recognize a snake-oil salesman when he comes knocking at the door. It’s too bad so many others are ready to buy and drink that potion.
LikeLike
Well said mst. TAGO!
“It’s too bad so many others are ready to buy and drink that potion.”
And unfortunately the ones who suffer the most from the multiple bad side effects are the most innocent ones, the students.
LikeLike
I think that’s part of why there is a push for charters. Create schools that meet those underprepared teachers where they are, rather than preparing teachers to meet students where they are.
LikeLike
With you, MST!
LikeLike
I think the focus will have to really get back to the quality of the child’s day at school (read end the accountability craze as it is now) before teachers will get back the things they are losing.
In other words, we have to rebuild everything.
Scorched earth, remember? There was a fire. We have to start over.
LikeLike