The article I chose was written by Sam Dillon of the New York Times.
Head Chancellor of the public school systems in Washington is raising eyebrows and causing much debate with her views of teacher tenure. "Ms. Rhee has proposed spectacular raises of as much as $40,000, financed by private foundations, for teachers willing to give [it] up". Rhee states that tenure only benefits adults by making it difficult for them to lose their jobs and has negative effects on students because it may put them in settings of learning that are taught by those who are less qualified. Rhee feels that those teachers who are in the field for the summer vacations and the health benefits are those who are protected due to tenure, making it difficult for them to be fired, even if they are not adequately teaching. But she does not want to completely abolish tenure, but her proposal involves "each teacher would choose between two compensation plans, one called green and the other red. Pay for teachers in the green plan would rise spectacularly, nearly doubling by 2010. But they would need to give up tenure for a year, after which they would need a principal’s recommendation or face dismissal." These ideas have been outvoted by many three to one.
I feel the idea of tenure is wrong, though it is comforting for those who are teachers or planning to work in the field. In most any other job, if an employee is not working to their full potential and fulfilling the expectations of the company, the employer has the right to dismiss that person. Why should it be any different with teachers, especially when dealing the issue with education and the future of students? Tenure also leaves less jobs for those who are well qualified and I feel the stability of tenure allows teachers to become more relaxed with the lessons and the quality of their teaching may decline.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree that tenure is not always a good thing for certain teachers to obtain. Teachers who do qualify for tenure don't always teach the proper ways to actually have tenure. After someone gets tenure they might drop their standards of teaching because they know that it is going to be harder for the school to fire them for not teaching to their full potential. I think that teachers should be monitored even after they receive their tenure just to see that they don't change their ways of teaching afterwards. This way that schools will know that just because someone has tenure that their students are still being given the best education possible.
I agree with Erica. More often than not, teaching standards decrease drastically once teachers reach tenure. However, it is important for teachers to have a goal to work towards. Teachers most definitely should still be monitored once they reach tenure. Furthermore, a plan could be implemented where in order to keep their tenure, they had to do a certain amount of summer school teaching or extra-curricular activities. I don't think that tenure should be done away with, but things must be changed in order to keep teachers teaching to their full potential.
Post a Comment