Firing teachers shouldn't be a problem at all...It should be based,like any job,on your performance,not your tenure.
It seems to me that the task of teaching our future,meaning our children,should be paramount,and of the utmost importance!
Not some way to make a fat retirement for yourself at the expense of the children.Re-certifaction tests should be adminstered every five years to all teachers,no matter what the subject...If they fail,they're out!It's just that simple...
The union should be behind anything that will better enhance the education experience of our children.But sadly,that's not the case...So we keep doing what we're doing,and we keep getting that same old thing...Poor education.

Mr. Jolliffe is right.

We should base our teaching careers on our performance not our tenure. However, I think that performance evaluation should be done on an annual basis. A five year spread and only a test to determine qualification just doesn't seem like a way to help the teacher improve day by day. In business, performance is usually measured annually. Many companies even take steps every three months to insure that individual annual goals are set on time, realistic, and met on schedule. Each mini-review along the way then becomes an opportunity for the employee to find what is working and seek out help with what isn't.

If our administrators took that kind of approach, I think we would have many more great teachers and a lot fewer failures. It would also be a great opportunity for the administration to make sure that mentors and department heads were well matched to those who wanted help.

In business, the idea is to surpass the goals and make more money for doing it. Yet, I'm not sure that a great teacher will respond that well to the cash incentive approach. I think that the best teachers will relish the opportunity to self-reflect and improve.

The regular review sessions would allow the administration to track the common problems the teachers are having. This would make it possible to appropriately match mentors with those who need guidance. That is truly proactive intervention at its best. If it doesn't help improve the entire staff, it should at least leave a clear paper trail to the pink slip for the teacher who needs to find a place more in tune with her or his personal educational philosophy.

In business, if you are not performing well and you are given an opportunity to improve, you usually get between six and 18 months to make it happen. Every step is documented. That gives the employee a map to success. It also gives management a map to the next safest exit strategy if the employee doesn't improve.

In order to avoid getting forced to a "safe" exit point, I'd like to add my reflections drawn from over 20 years of employment and many hard learning experiences.

Don't take a teaching position just because it is available and you need the work.
Always look closely at the administration's style. If it doesn't match your teaching philosophy, personality, or learning style, then you won't be comfortable or find it easy to do the quality work you want to do. Don't sign a contract if the administration's style doesn't fit.
Try to find a talkative teacher from your target school. Learn what the faculty emotional environment is. If it is something that puts you off, go looking for another school. Janitors, secretaries, and professional staff members can also help you know if the student population will accept you before you stand in front of your first class.
Remember that desperation can be the mother of disaster. Take the time to find the school that you will fit into well. It will help you be a better teacher in the end. Why? You will learn patience, be more reflective, and do your up-front work better for each class once you have learned how to do it for your own survival. You will also learn to persevere. Now that is a good habit to be able to model to your students.
Patience is something we need to teach ourselves. We were designed to wait and learn from listening, observation, practice and reflection. Therefore, why should we rush into a new job just for security or money?

We don't take the time for the investigation and reflection today. Out society is going too fast and we are often asked to multi-task beyond reason. In the end we just react. We need to learn to respond instead.

If you managed to read through this posting, you are already doing well. You have shown patience. You have been willing to listen. Your are likely to reflect on what you just read. I think you have just what it takes to find the right school and become a super teacher. Good luck!

There is a good reason for tenure protection--good teachers shouldn't be fired for protesting bad working conditions (mold in the classroom) or because a particularly aggressive, well-connected parent complains constantly because his little darling isn't getting an A in class. However, keeping lousy teachers ruins everyone's reputation, and these days teachers have lost enough public respect--we need to solve the problem. One promising solution is peer evaluation--where teachers sit in on each others classes, perhaps engage in common lesson planning, evaluate each other's lesson plan, presentation, classroom management skills, etc. Teachers who are struggling could benefit from the expertise of more capable teachers, and perhaps improve their teaching. But there remains those who just don't care (they got into teaching because it's "easy,") or who genuinely lack the necessary skills to teach competently. After a year of help from their colleagues, those who still can't teach should be fired. The students deserve better. Those of us who are competent teachers deserve better. The community deserves better.

How about the teachers that have tenure but are unfit to be around children, but they cannot be fired because if the union? How about the building in New York where unfit teachers go to spend 8 hours a day relaxing and getting paid for it because they cannot be around children?

I'd like to point out that School Pricipals have at least a year to evaluate a new teachers performance and can choose not to renew a new teachers contract for any reason. Also don't forget that it is the Principals and Vice Principals who make the hiring decisions and so some of the responsibility for teacher performance at a school should go to those to do the hiring and firing in the first place.

I've been noticing that there is a large focus on teacher performance but no one seems to be talking about the performance of school management. Principals, Vice Principals and District Supers, wield great power in the school system and it can be even more difficult to remove a bad administrator than a bad teacher. A Principal with a bad or incompetent management style will effect the academic performance, tone and overall moral of the entire school or school district, not just one or two classes.

The assertion that there is time to make a judgement prior to "tenure" is right on--when that window of opportunity is squandered, an administrator has only herself or himself to blame. But what about 14 years down the road an life's turmoil takes its toil on the spirit and effectiveness of a teacher? All too often the teacher teaches to a "C" or "C-" level, a level that all union abitrators will sadly uphold. And most teachers in this situation know they cannot be removed for incompetence.

Thought I agree wholly with Jon's suggestion that public school management is weak, the second assertion--"it can be even more difficult to remove a bad administrator than a bad teacher"--is preposterous. It may feel that way when dealing with a lousy boss, but should a Superintendent/School Committee become aware of poor performance of an administrator, and be aware of the ramifications that Jon details, that person can be eliminated with almost no fanfare. It happens more frequently than with teachers, at least in Massachusetts where I work.

It is definitely difficult to be fired in California- our union is very powerful and vocal. This can be very helpful, but also allows subpar teachers to stay in classrooms.

In the last few years a rigid program called "Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment" (or BTSA) has been implemented for the first two years of a teacher's career. This program must be completed in order to receive tenure. It consists of frequent supervised visits, submission of lesson plans, teaching reflection and mandatory professional development seminars.

BTSA helps prepare better teachers, but it doesn't completely solve the problem about not being able to fire teachers. Someone can have all the preparation and assistance for those first two years and then become apathetic and lazy their third (and tenured) year. Not to mention the thousands of teachers who did not go through BTSA.

While administrators tend to not fire, they do try to force out by changing grade levels or schools, giving more responsibilities, filing poor evaluations, etc... And it works.

Am I thankful for tenure and my union? Absolutely! Have I questionned the effectiveness of colleagues? Definitely. There is no clear, easy answer. We just have to hope that the desire to provide quality education will prevail.

We should get of the concept of tenure for teachers. Very few other jobs have protection against getting fired for political reasons. When it happens, it's unpleasant, but then you just find another job. In addition, principals who continue to fire for political reasons usually end up getting fired themselves and then the problem resolves itself.

To summarize: the cons of tenure greatly outweigh the benefits and it should be scrapped.

Just wondering, Mr. Glass, but are you a teacher?

I agree that there are some tenured teachers that are probably burnt out and not putting in any effort - but most teachers that I know are extremely dedicated and work very hard to do the best they can for the kids in their rooms. I understand that many people think we have this special protection against politics and management. What most people don't think about is that most school districts are always in financial need (they are not businesses run for profits) and teachers salaries are the biggest chunk of the budget. Without tenure it would no doubt become common practice to replace more expensive and experienced teachers with new faces that cost much less.

Also, by the way Mr. Glass, it is not that easy for a teacher to just "go out and get another job". Do you have a job that only hires once a year? If you don't have a job in August you most likely won't have a chance for a job until the next year. Teaching jobs are not really that easy to come by unless you want to work in an inner city. That is a whole other topic of conversation.