Get Schooled

By Lanette Ward

June 21, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Teacher tenure was created to insure academic freedom. It protects against the vicissitudes of ever-shifting political winds. It allows a teacher to speak the truth when the truth does not align itself with any current political administration. And if you don’t think that is important, you don’t have a clear vision of the country in which we live.

By Dan

June 21, 2005 12:19 PM | Link to this

Well there are too issues here. First should teachers have tenure. While I don’t begrudge individuals who have that benefit any time an employer loses the ability to remove an underperforming employee it hurts the end product whether it is educated students or cars. Second part is political. Teachers are a huge voting bloc, based on the US census the number of teachers as a profession is exceeded only by retail sales people and cashiers. (Gives you an idea as to why there are so many bad teachers) so taking benefits away regardless of the wisdom in doing so could be politically dangerous

By Dan

June 21, 2005 12:23 PM | Link to this

Lanette it is just as effective in allowing them create a truth that suits them without fear of retribution. Your scenario assumes a pollyanna-ish world where all teachers have the childs best interest at heart when an optimistic reality would be hoping that most of them do.

By Brian

June 21, 2005 12:28 PM | Link to this

Tenure,as we look through our rose colored glasses, may have been created to ensure academic freedom, but reality shows us that it is used by unions to keep some otherwise unemployable people on the payroll.

By CD

June 21, 2005 12:38 PM | Link to this

All would be wise to understand the reality of tenure. It does not protect bad teachers. There is, and has always been, a process for removing such teachers. Tenure only ensures that a teacher have a fair hearing to be fired. The absence of this protection would allow administrators to remove a teacher for ANY reason, including simply not liking them.

By Amada

June 21, 2005 12:43 PM | Link to this

Political dearth is imminent at this point in the teacher shortage crisis. Finding and retaining teachers is a national problem, Arnold has not been paying attention! Eliminating tenure for who?

By PrettyPinkToes

June 21, 2005 12:55 PM | Link to this

Is tenure still available in Georgia? If Barnes was booted after one term, was this one of the reasons? He ticked off the teachers and they gave him the boot?

By Kathy

June 21, 2005 01:07 PM | Link to this

I agree with Brian and June. Teachers should not have to have the protection of tenure in order to do their jobs. Corporate executives making much more than teachers don’t have that protection. The protection that most of us working folks have is simply DOING OUR JOBS WELL, in order to keep it! The same should be for teachers; it will at least give them the incentive to perform better or get out of the field. Tenure also keeps a bad teacher from being fired on the spot( as us regular folks can be) without going through a lot of red tape at taxpayers expense. If teachers are awarded tenure, I agree with Gov. Arnold, make it 5yrs or more. That way, we can weed out the bad ones sooner than later. Afterall, it’s the end product (our children) that should the first thought for protection.

By Scooter

June 21, 2005 01:45 PM | Link to this

Tenure… I think that I should have tenure, afterall I too feel underpaid and underappreciated (like 340 million other people). Also, my boss can fire me for whatever reason he wants to. I just don’t think that I can make it in this mean old world unless government rescues me. Tenure… wrap it up with a bow and it is still job security that some will use to ensure their complacency and underperformance, like unions.

By James McCoy

June 21, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this

May I ask what planet did some of the above posters drop off of? One poster said that heads of corporations don’t have tenure so why should teachers. And that statement was correct except they forgot to add most CEO’s have contracts that would protect them. Teachers next to doctors are the most important occupation I can think of. They are responsiable for training our children to become responsiable members of our society. If any thing we should be up in arms over the pittance we pay our educators. Teacher’s jobs and pay need to be protected in today’s rambling political enviroment. If if wasn’t for tenure and unions most people would still be working 75-80 hours a week with no benifits to speak of. Some people are so hard up for any type of work they are willing to give their last ounce of dignity to hold on to that job. More power to the teachers you have a hard job.

By Sly

June 21, 2005 02:51 PM | Link to this

Tenure - what a joke. You go 2-5 years in a job and they can’t give you the boot. No wonder our school system is a mess nationwide. You got a bunch of wannabes with a guaranteed job in control instead of the profit and production incentive ruling - like the real world. I’ll bet 50% take advantage of this situation. My kids are in private school for a reason. Plus I teach them way beyond what the school does. Especially in the work ethic standard and earning everything you get. Not just expecting a reward because you can hang on.

By GC

June 21, 2005 03:09 PM | Link to this

Part of the problem with the idea of teacher tenure is that it has been surrounded with so many half-truths and lies. Tenure for teachers is granted to COLLEGE teachers in Georgia, and it is usually only after request and review. It is not automatic in most situations.

In spite of the lies told about it over and over, public school teachers have NEVER had true tenure. They had the right to due process in cases of questionable firings. Even while Governor Barnes was railing about the “impossiblilty” of getting rid of “tenured” teachers, principals statewide were removing teachers who they thought were deserving of termination by using a well-defined set of rules requiring documentation and proper procedure. My own principal removed two teachers that same year, and neither one tried to fight it because the principal did his job and had all of the documentation that he needed. The teachers being terminated knew that they were caught dead to rights. If an administrator was too lazy do document wrongdoing, or if there was not actually anything there to document, there should be no reason to fire that teacher.

Even before Barnes’ changes were pushed through, teachers could be fired in the first three years without need for charges or documentation. That is enough time to weed out many who need it. For the rest, there have been effective procedures to remove teachers who were incompetent or guilty of wrongdoing in place for years.

Anyone who knows schools knows that performance is not why teachers want protection. It’s very common to have parents raising cain about a teacher because the teacher DID the job right and failed a student who has influential parents. Too often, parents have demanded teachers’ heads because their students were disciplined for what they actually did, and this problem is getting worse and worse. It’s not unusual for teachers to be thrown to the wolves because of political pressure or an administration that doesn’t want to take the heat for its own misdeeds.

It’s not that hard to remove an incompetent teaher or a teacher who is guilty of misconduct. It wasn’t hard when Barnes was pushing for the abolition of reasonable due process. It takes administrators with the guts to do what’s needed, and there are plenty of them out there. Don’t blame “tenure”. Parents who demand a teacher be fired are often right, often wrong. Just try convincing one that he doesn’t see the whole picture.

By Dan

June 21, 2005 03:17 PM | Link to this

James Unions had their place and certainly helped all of todays workers. However they have become a detriment and a drain on the ecomomy. Now while teachers are clearly important, you have to look at the big picture, just as with goods and services a jobs monetery value, is based on supply and demand. Teachers are one of the largest professions right behind sales clerks and cashiers. (I am counting elem middle and HS) So while the position is indeed important there are not enough people that merit that importance. There jobs and pay are overprotected and it isn’t a matter of pay or training the simple mathematics of school age children (age 5-18) to working adults (age 18-65) require that about 2.5% of the working population become teachers. You compare teachers to doctors which is a far cry since they are at different ends of the educational spectrum. No one ever went to med school because they didn’t get accepted in the education program. I will instead compare to nursing, certainly a noble and important profession requiring a similar amount if not level of education. Nurses represent about 1.9% of the population. Things can’t improve unless they are examined logically. It needs to be looked at differently increasing the number of teachers is simply not an option worth pursuing, we need to keep the good ones and improve the recruiting process while at the same time figuring out how to benefit more children with fewer better paid teachers

By James McCoy

June 21, 2005 03:17 PM | Link to this

I choose to believe that 90% of the people who call themselves educators are in the business for the love of teaching. Two members of my family are teachers and I can say with a big yes that their love of teaching is the reason for them being there. No doubt there are some in the business for the money and perks,some are only there until a job comes available in a profession that they desire. But what line of work don’t have hanger-on’s? For you folks who are able to afford private schooling,I say see ya don’t let the door hit ya. Because if you really cared about the conditions of the public schools you would stay and try to improve them. Just like the school board members who have children in private schools I wish you all would put up or shut up on public schools. Until you are willing to fight for every kids right to get a decent education,you are not being a responsiable member of society.

By SET

June 21, 2005 03:38 PM | Link to this

The Governor’s proposal is not to get rid of tenure in the primary and secondary schools. His proposal is to take more years for tenure to attach. I’ll vote for it but to me it’s like debating adding an extra horn section to the Titanic’s orchestra.

The public schools in California are unsound. They are nuthouses. Unless you live in a “sheltered” area - like Piedmont CA - sending your child to a government school is child endangerment. The schools are physically unsafe, unsanitary, and do not “teach” the fundamentals except by accident. Their curriculum is mainly political indoctrination. And I don’t like the politics.

Most families with decent IQ couldn’t do worse by homeschooling combined with supplemental programs for lab sciences.

Working people here are spending $6,000 to $18,000 per child per year to send their children to Catholic and other non-government K to 12 schools.

Those teachers don’t have tenure. I believe those schools with all their faults are much better places.

So the teachers union can go to hell.

I will vote with Arnold on this one.

By James McCoy

June 21, 2005 03:46 PM | Link to this

Gee,I wonder how those schools got to be that way? Some little Angel came down and sprinkled a little bad luck on them I guess? How about benign neglect by the leadership of the state and people simply not caring.

By Dan

June 21, 2005 03:55 PM | Link to this

Even if it is true that 90% are in it for the love of teaching, and I think that is a bit optimistic, that doesn’t mean they are good at it. Education should be viewed as an opportunity and privilege, it is the very perception of education as a right that has caused the system to fail. Now every child should have the opportunity, but they and their family bear the lions share of the responsibility for taking advantage of that. You speak of a responsibility to society. While your blind loyalty to a system that doesn’t work may be well intentioned, fighting for every kids right in the same flawed way is like banging your head on the wall and every bit as irresponsible as keeping on a teacher who despite their love of the job can’t get it done.

By Robert

June 21, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this

First, do not compare Corporate jobs with teaching. I have done both, and no one can compare the two on any level, period.

Second, there should be teacher tenure. How a teacher gets tenure can be debated…. is it only from years of service? is it a combination of years of service and superior ratings? other???

Teacher SHOULD have tenure in Georgia. There is too much politics in education already and there needs to be SOME Educators with the sole purpose of looking out for the education of our children. Trust me - it is not the school system administrators nor the State politicans.

Teachers without tenure must turn away from the best interest of the students and go with whatever BS there may be in order to protect our jobs.

By Anita

June 21, 2005 04:07 PM | Link to this

After reviewing Arnolds comments, I would vote for tougher immigration laws!! Its so easy for people to come to this country and pretend they ‘pulled themselves up by their own merit/bootstraps’ without acknowledging the harsh reality of what happened by OUR forefathers prior to their arrival. Its not about providing bad teachers with security. Teachers are written up, suspended, and removed very easily in most states. Whoever thinks they are not has not worked for the school system. Unions are not the problem. Bigotry, racism, nepotism, and non trained managers with their own agenda’s are the culprit. Lets start solving the problems and stop attacking the solutions.

By C.R.H.

June 21, 2005 04:16 PM | Link to this

There seems to still be a lack of knowledge about what “tenure” is and also the role of “unions”. Tenure in GA (and I am sure in CA also) doesn’t mean a teacher can not be fired. Also there are NO TEACHER UNIONS IN GA!! PAGE and GAE are basically nothing more than political & professional organizations, they do not negotiate contracts, pay or benefits for teachers. As for other people who continue to have hang ups about all these “bad teachers”, go through some of the alternative programs, get certified, get a job and you too can enjoy the myriad of “benefits” that you think teachers get. Notice no line is forming? BTW, some of us opted for teaching as opposed to medical school, looking at 6 figure student loan debt, years of low paying residency training, and obscene malpractice insurance rates didn’t make medicine as attractive as a career as it once was.

By Jake

June 21, 2005 04:21 PM | Link to this

James - The schools in many parts of California got that way because the Federal government does nothing to prevent illegal immigration, and the supreme Court ruled the schools must educate everyone who shows up on their doors, irrespective of citizenship. The schools are overwhelmed, 3800 in a high school built for 1500 in LA. And the immigrants on average tend to be young with lots of children and low incomes. They add a lot more to the school enrollments than they do to the tax base, so building new schools is all but impossible.

By Nick

June 21, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this

A big reason for people questioning teaching tenure that seems to be overlooked is that in many states, they are severely lowering the standards to become certified, thus in many cases the quality of the educators being produced are not as good as they used to be. I know in some states years ago, it was next to impossible to get hired w/ a 4 yr. degree. A master’s degree was almost neccesary to be a teacher. Today it is a lot easier to get a job as a teacher. Here in florida, all you need now is to go though an alt. certifcation program which takes two years and you get a teacher certificate w/ no college degree. There is legislation here that if it gets passed, all a person will need is a 4 yr degree in any field and to pass one test. Think about it, would you want your children to go to school with a teacher who hasn’t taken a single education course?

My point is that in my opinion our country is going the wrong way when it comes to dealing with the teacher shortages that are in many parts of the country, instead of making the field more attractive, they are lowering the standards to get hired. How would you feel if they started doing this in other fields? Would you trust a doctor who only went to college only 4 years? Heck, the military is beginning to lower standards as well to get in. Lowering standards hurts everyone involved and is not the way to solve any kind of shortage or improve anything in the long run. It is also insulting to those who take the extra schooling and/or training.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 08:44 AM | Link to this

As a matter of fact, I would push for a teacher with less education courses. That is the perfect way to address the shortage, particularly in HS scientists, economists etc. who have mastered the subject matter as opposed to someone who has mastered “education” Throwing money at the problem just won’t work

By BL

June 22, 2005 09:48 AM | Link to this

Should teachers have tenure? Yes! Why? Because teaching children is a very stressful job. If parents would start to take responsibility for their children’s behavior, maybe the idea of tenure can be done away with. I don’t see this happening any time soon. When did parents stop feeling embarrassed when their child misbehaves in school? When did parents begin to erradicate the “no” word from their child’s vocabulary? Many teachers that I know have to start the school year off with lessons on manners, just so that they can (hopefully) be treated with some respect in their classroom. This is ridiculous and a waste of time. But, it really doesn’t matter. This forward thinking state did away with the teacher’s union years ago. No wonder we’re in such a huge need for teachers…oh yeah, keep complaining about them because everyone should complain about their free babysitting and free lunch!

By Ron

June 22, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this

Let’s clear up the misconception regarding tenure. The term is grossly misapplied to teachers. All that we are guaranteed is that we cannot be let go by a school system without due process hearing and notification. Bad teachers can indeed be removed, but the process required prevents school systems from being sued by teachers who are removed. Teachers have a strict code of ethics and periodic evaluations to determine their success in the classroom. If an administrator notices a problem, and that problem cannot be fixed, then the process for termination begins. A teacher cannot be a “bad” teacher and stay in the classroom forever. All we are given is the right to proper notification and the opportunity to correct a problem without being fired for no reason. All industries, public and private, should push for due process. It doesn’t protect bad teachers unless noone complains about the teacher. Are there bad teachers remaining in classrooms? You bet—but remember, you may see a teacher as “bad”, but others may like and respect that person. I know a teacher now who is in the process of notification, and he has tried to improve. He just doesn’t have the skills to be in the classroom, and will be removed. But when he is, the decision will be carefully documented so that he can’t sue for money or his job back. I don’t expect to have my job without fear of removal. Tenure in most states won’t protect me from being fired if I am not capable of teaching, it just provides for an objective process to remove me fairly if need be. As long as Arnold is being fair about due process, let him take away tenure. But let’s at least allow teachers due process protection.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this

If your going to attempt to clear up misconceptions at least put it in context. First of all no one in any job can be fired without cause, even in a state as liberal with that interpretaion as GA. So teachers tenure are in fact additional protections above and beyond the due process provided by the government to all other workers. Again just like the complaints about being evaluated on test results teachers as a group are so worried they will be expected to perform in order to keep their job (like the rest of us) they complain about any measure that attempts to hold them accountable. Of course anyone would fight against the removal of such a benefit but the arguments against re-examining tenure are laughable

By Ron

June 22, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this

Dan, as a teacher, I have to be aware of what tenure is or is not. All tenure has ever guaranteed me, or any teacher, is the offer of a contract for the year somewhere within an individual school system provided all job requirements are satisfactorily met. If a school system downsizes, tenure only promises us a position in an available school. If the system has to lose teachers, then tenure protects us on basis of years in the system. Traditionally, tenure has indeed meant nearly total job protection, but it hasn’t been that way in many states for most of the fifteen years I’ve been teaching. We still use the word tenure, but it does not offer much protection beyond due process. And I’ve known quite a few people who were let go from jobs without any sort of due process because of buyouts and company downsizing. Teachers face some of the same threat, but let’s face it, we have had teacher shortages in many school systems that keep us from being lost to downsizing. And please quit lumping us all together as complainers. I have no problem with accountability, and those teachers who do are probably the ones who need to leave the profession anyway. 85% of my kids passed required testing this year. My administration was happy with that number, but not me. I offered to teach summer school so I could see several of those kids again and work more with them. And I am not the exception to the rule. Some teachers do complain, and veryloudly. But some of us are trying hard and loving our jobs. Bring on the accountability-I’m ready and willing. I don’t support the arguments about not re-examing tenure, but with all the scrutiny and changing politics of our times, I do appreciate having at least some small measure of protection in my job. We need to be able to get rid of bad teachers; like many, I just want to make sure we don’t become puppets of the politics of the times. Most of us are good and do care about our jobs.

By FunkyGee

June 22, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this

Ron - you sound like the exception to the rule concerning teacher performance and expectations. Don’t let the system get the best of you. I’ll bet you’re a youngin and haven’t drunk the kool aid yet.

By Ron

June 22, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this

And Dan, because we’re dealing with a very precious comodity, our children, schools simply cannot be compared to corporate systems. We’re dealing with future adults, not cars, and there are few issues in education that are simply a matter of numbers. You should become a teacher—your passion for issues and energy would give you a good start. But you would find out, as all of us good teachers do, that it isn’t easy and the constant criticism from society isn’t helping us strive to do more. Give us some credit; there are still kids making it out of the school systems of this country who go on to become doctors, lawyers, corporate professionals, and even teachers.

By Ron

June 22, 2005 11:44 AM | Link to this

I’ve taught since 1989. I’m halfway through my career and still love it. There are quite a few of us veterans around who love the job after lots of years. Some of us, some, avoid the Kool-Aid. I like that phrase—I’ll use it with my protege teacher next year!!

By Lacy

June 22, 2005 11:51 AM | Link to this

I have no problem with tenure itself—at least tenure as I understand it, which is at the college level. At the college level, a professor only acheives tenure after a long review process, and usually around 10 years. This allows for those “eccentric” old professors who may not be the most informed educators anymore, but certainly have the most flavor, and are an important part of any college faculty dept.

However, I don’t really see the need for lower level educators to have tenure. I certainly don’t understand how it can be given uniformly after 2 years. Tenure is supposed to be a sort of prestige—a rite of passage for educators. It shouldn’t just be given to anyone and everyone. And it certainly shouldn’t be given after such a short time. Maybe if primary school educators got tenure after 10 years, I’d be more accepting, but 2 years for tenure is just ridiculous.

By Scooter

June 22, 2005 11:56 AM | Link to this

Tenure is a regulatory measurement that reduces competition amongst teachers as well as encourages teachers to stay on the job. Encouraging teachers to stay on the job is a noble cause. We as a society have to weigh the benefit of teacher retainment against the cost of reduced competition. It is certainly true that education is not a right, but the government should provide some education for the children of parents who have made all the wrong decisions in life.

Let’s all step back and ask ourselves some questions… O.K. We all know the old “money is power” bit, but who feels that responsibility is power? Now, has the government been acquiring more and more power because people are becoming less responsible and more dependent on government to take on their responsiblities?

It currently appears that both Republicrats and Democrats just can’t seem to get enough power. Republicrats over the power of maintaining their percieved moral highground and democrats are just more than happy to make 51% of the electorate dependent on government. So, if we accept that government can’t seem to get enough power over the people, then why in the heck would we allow government to educate the overwhelming majority of tommorows leaders?

This mostly applies to all of those teachers who have allowed kids to come out of your class rooms with the mentality that they would ask me the following question. When I told a little 16 year old kid, here in SW Atlanta, that I had tried to join the Marine Corps to go fight this war, he asked me what this country had ever done for me. Being that he is a good hard working kid, I explained to him that this country has given me opportunity and that is all government is supposed to give you. What one does with that opportunity is not society’s problem.

All of you teachers out there that have done things to instill that type attitude in your pubils should be fired… tenure or not. Because they are the teachers that will replace the drive and determination of America with the complacency and pascifism of Europe. We didn’t become the world’s super power, in such a short time, by having the citizens dependent on government.

By SET

June 22, 2005 12:14 PM | Link to this

I just noticed Ron’s comment about “our children” being a precious commidity.

I believe the Los Angeles School District is down to 7% white.

Around CA it’s not “our” children. It’s Mexico’s children that have been sent here as part of the Mexican colonization of the United States. “Our” children are being sent to church and other private schools. And by that I mean nearly all the middle/upper class black kids also.

Compare this to the state of the government schools in 1960 in California.

I don’t have a magic solution to this disaster on a school board level. The decimation of the United States people is an ongoing national process conducted by both the democrats and the republicians. Follow the trends out 50 more years and see what you will have.

We have a government that has fired it’s people and brought in new ones.

By Nick

June 22, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this

As far as the 16 year old asking what this country has done for you? How do you know that it is the teacher that is instilling that attitude? Maybe this kid comes from a family that has pacifist/antiwar views.

Teachers do however need to make sure that their own views stay out of the classroom as much as absolutely possible. It doesen’t happen often but in some cases, students can become offended by something a teacher says. I have heard this happen from teachers on both sides of the spectrum. I have heard of a teacher put down a girl b/c her dad was in the military and going to fight “bush’s war” , also I have heard of a teacher tell a teenager that she was going to h* because she had an abortion.

As a teacher I try to do everytying possible to keep my views out of the classroom, but I can understand if the school taught something that i didnt agree with.

By C.R.H.

June 22, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this

Accountability is such an interesting term…how many of you are held accountable for the performance of others? If you are in a management position you probably are. If you have “problem” employees (they argue or physically fight with co-workers and their own bosses), they show up “under the influence” of alcohol or drugs, are not competent (can’t read or follow simple instructions)to do the job they are assigned, are consistantly late or do not show up at all, what course of action do you have? I guess you could suspend that employee, dock his/her pay, transfer or simply fire that person. As teachers we can not do anything like that and yet “concerned citizens” want us to be held accountable for all the things that are clearly beyond our control. I do not think I should be held accountable for a 9th grade student who has failed to successfully master the 8th grade (several times!) & has been sent to me because he is “too old” to be around middle school aged children. I should not be held accountable for the failure of a student who has been absent 64 days of a 90 day semester (but miraculously was present for all the standardized testing!). I don’t think it is my lack of teaching skills or inability to competently do my job when students who can not read on a 3rd grade level are put in a 9th grade science class. I am not responsible for the abuse, poverty or otherwise poor quality of lives that seems to distract many of my students from learning. Education can not be compared to a business. Teachers are required to work with whoever walks through the door…if a business was required to do the same, they would be out of business very soon.

By Kevin Roth

June 22, 2005 12:48 PM | Link to this

Tenure - Great in theory, but you still need responsible Principals and AP’s that will evaluate teachers and eliminate the bad teacher. Most administrator’s have the strong desire to “not make waves” and allow bad teachers to skate thru life as a teacher because it could reflect badly on them. Perhaps the teachers should be evaluated by PTA’s and other teachers at their school…even input from students can tell you who the bad teachers are, but nobody will listen. The system could use a fix, so the better teachers are rewarded.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 01:00 PM | Link to this

Funny all the teachers talking about job importance and the precious commodity that children are, yet in every other job as the importance rises so does accountability. As importance rises you are more and more reliant on the work of others along with being more and more subject too the opinion of others. The most important jobs should have the most stringent guidelines for job retention and CRH business do indeed have to work with whoever comes through the door they are called customers, do you seriously see your students as employees rather than customers as your analogy implies? and unlike what happens in school that customer has an option to go somewhere else and business don’t have the the luxury of new crop of customers to start over with next year.
Educators are supposed to aide in preparing people to be successful in life, if you can’t compare schools to real life maybe you should work on it. The lack of common sense and excuse making on this board is truly frightening

By Nick

June 22, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

Here in florida, students (rather parents) have a choice where their student goes. It is not too difficult to get a waiver to have your student attend another school within or even outside of your home school district.
As a buisness person (I have also spent several years in the supermarket industry) if a customer doesent like your product and goes elsewhere, despite your efforts to make that person happy, you can focus your energy on those customers that are yours to keep. In schools, if a student isnt happy/ putting forth the effort/not getting parental support at home, its too bad, we have to do what we can to educate every student. If that doesn’t happen, it is always the fault of the teacher, it is rarely seen as a business persons fault if a customer isn’t happy unless it happens very often.

By Robert

June 22, 2005 01:12 PM | Link to this

It’s very interesting that members from all sectors of society want to decide the fate of the lowly teacher. Besides anyone can teach. I have a good idea get rid of all of the education courses, because pedagogy is not important. By the way, pedagogy is knowing how to teach a subject. That is very logical, if you know a subject then you should automatically know how to teach a subject. If this were correct then we could stop wasting money on colleges of education at universities. Wouldn’t you agree? Enough of the sarcasm, tenure is an important benenfit that is afforded to workers of a pink collar career. If you rid teachers of all of their benefits then the term teacher shortage would not be a good representation of what will happen to the profession. By the way all of the pundits that are talking about the negative images found in public schools, where do you think the children attending those schools will end up if you shut them down…thats right it’s straight to the old neighborhood private schools, but they will be federally funded. Wouldn’t that be great, all students would have those great teachers that are doing so much with children that do well where ever they attend school. I’m out.

By Rena P

June 22, 2005 02:05 PM | Link to this

Wow SET, that was a cold remark: it’s not our children, it’s Mexico’s children that have been sent here as part of the Mexican colonization�. Lets not forget where we came from. Remember the English colonization?

Only middle/upper class kids qualify as our children? That way of thinking is the problem in a nutshell. All children no matter where they come from deserve a chance.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 02:17 PM | Link to this

People wish to decide the fate of their children not the teachers, and while “pedagogy” (new word for me) is necessary it should be secondary to expertise in the subject. One of the problems with education is that the priority has flip-flopped, regardless of your proficiency in teaching, if you don’t know the subject you can’t teach it, at least not to bright students who will ask probing questions and demand real life examples. You make a wonderful suggestion regarding closing educational colleges I suspect you would find a strong positive correlation between the influx of educational colleges and the demise of the american public school system. But then would would all those students who didn’t qualify for the pre law, premed, science, or business schools go. Poly Sci I guess

By Dan

June 22, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

I apologize if I have offended any teachers, I have been a little riled up. There are many brilliant educated dedicated teachers out there who work in tough conditions. My issue is those who want to claim that because it is a noble profession that all those who choose to participate are noble and should be given the benefit of the doubt, without repercussion. Teachers are human like any other profession and like anyone else they need to be held accountable, not only to weed out the bad but to motivate the good, this is even more critical due to the important role that they play. If not testing and standards then what? Clearly something needs to change just blaming parents, pols or administrators isn’t going to help

By Nick

June 22, 2005 02:28 PM | Link to this

A trend in many ed programs in many colleges and universities is to place more emphasis on ensureing knowledge of the subject area. During my student teaching internship i witnessed a co intern totally mess her students up b/c she couldnt do long multiplication. This is a very important part of the job. It is also not that an adult is dumb if they dont know every single aspect of a subject, because many of it hasnt been seen by us since we were young ourselves, but i agree that teachers should be able to know what they are teaching very well. Pedagogy is also an important aspect in youth education.
By the way, I actually was accepted and turned down law school because I decided that I wanted to work in education more than I wanted to work in law. I know many others who could have done something else w/ their lives and chose not to as well.

By C.R.H.

June 22, 2005 02:32 PM | Link to this

Dan, if you read closely you would get the gist. My students are NOT customers, using the business model again, they are “products”. My customers are the taxpayers; which by the way are mostly businesses…walmart, burger king, etc. also include in my customer category are those of us who pay property taxes. BTW, if you want to read the whole blog on taxes & education it is the next one down!

By Nick

June 22, 2005 02:32 PM | Link to this

point well taken dan, there are a lot of great teachers out there but there are a few bad apples. It is the same way in every single profession, there are a few bad apples for thousands of great people no matter the field.

By C.R.H.

June 22, 2005 02:40 PM | Link to this

Gosh I am really liking this business analogy! If your busines is failing, it could be due to several factors; poorly trained employees (we’ll call them teachers), bad management (we’ll call them administrators), poor raw materials (we’ll call them students), or bad suppliers (we’ll call them parents). Of course we’ll have to leave out things like advertising, business location and the state of the economy for our purposes here! If you owned a business that wasn’t doing well, what would be your solution?

By Robert

June 22, 2005 03:01 PM | Link to this

I’m glad I could introduce some of you to a new word (pedagogy) so now let me introduce you to a new concept (supply and demand). I think that as a society, we tend to devalue education. What do we place emphasis on————- entertainment. I’m tired of turning my television set on and hearing an overpaid steriod junky (better known as a professional athelete or singer-song writer) complain about not being able to “feed their family” on an annual salary of seven million dollars a year. I have an idea, lets draw from the business model, what would happen if instead of following the latest fad and running poor teachers out of the profession, we replaced them by starting beginning teacher salaries off at a modest living wage say 60 or 70k? Then we would not have to worry about poor teacher quality, because we would have the best and the brightest trained in both content knowledge and pedagogy lining up to join the most noble of professions. Futhermore, it would cost less than training and retraining teachers every year and less than it cost to implement No Child Left Behind. And then you would be able to hold teachers accountable, because if you don’t perform, you get replaced. By the way if the starting salary for beginning teachers were that high who would opt to go into the corporate sector? I’m out.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 03:26 PM | Link to this

Robert a lot of good thoughts there.
Good teachers are clearly worth at least that much and I would love to see it happen. But there are two main issues First supply and demand works with wage levels as well. Teachers of elem middle and HS already comprise 2.5% of the work force, the only other jobs that comprise more of the force are sales clerks and cashiers, and teachers already make twice what those jobs pay (more if you factor the days off), the only professional job even close are nurses at 1.9% Economically speaking it would be difficult to find that many workers worthy of that wage level. Next obviously is budget since salaries and benefits comprise 90% of educ spend (that is all salaries, i couldn’t find just teachers) it would be a big pill to swallow. I believe if you gave teachers a 50% raise and increase class sizes some 25% it would be a good compormise, with minimal budget impact. I feel a good teacher will do better with 25 kids than an average teacher with 20

By T

June 22, 2005 03:35 PM | Link to this

Education is indeed big business. In my role as manager (teacher), I am expected to motivate my employees (students) and meet certain goals (read test scores). That’s fine. I love my kids and teaching. I merely wish I had the same support and privileges managers in the business world have. However, I do not have the ability to hire and fire my employees (students), nor am I given adequate supplies and support to accomplish those goals. My supply budget is generally my personal checkbook, or what I am able to solicit (read “beg”) from the parents and/or business partners. I came to education from the “real world” nearly five years ago. For those of you thinking of making the switch - be forwarned. Your 10-15 years of business experience (from which the school board clearly benefits) counts for nothing on the salary scale. You will start at the bottom of the salary scale. You can advance your salary by obtaining additional degrees and/or national teacher certification. Yes, there is some deadwood in education that needs to go, however I have found that most teachers truly want to be there and make a difference in the lives of children. Would I like to make 60-70k per year? Bring it on! Even with tenure, you can still be fired for doing a bad job - contract or not. And don’t forget that teachers are held to a much higher moral standard than the average manager as well.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this

Good point on the moral standard T Now keep in mind I would love for someone to figure out how to pay teachers what they are worth. Some back of the envelope calcs Avg kids per family, lets say 2 (because the math is easier but it is close. Students per class 20 (again easier math.) so this means 10 families must pay for 1 teacher, with me so far? If that teacher makes $75K after adding taxes and benefits the cost is about $112K That means those 10 families pay on average $11,200 each per year just for the teacher. There would be additional money necessary for books, buildings, supplies etc. It is a difficult problem. Many well intentioned people suggest raising salaries and lowering class size is the answer to improve our schools but those are really the only controlable cost factors (overhead factors are relatively insignificant) Some creative thinking is necessary Just some food for thought

By T

June 22, 2005 04:05 PM | Link to this

Dan - I agree that any fix will require some creative thinking. (I pay part of my own salary through the property taxes I pay each year. I certainly don’t want any additional property taxes levied.) Getting parents and the community more involved in the education process would greatly help matters. This would allow teachers to concentrate on teaching. Merely making sure the child comes to school prepared for the day will make a huge difference. This means well rested, breakfast and homework in hand. I can also tell you which parents discipline their children at home. Whether time-out or spanking, children need to know there are consequences at home for misbehavior at school. If the parent doesn’t care about homework, school or teachers, then neither will the child. No amount of “opportunity room” or “in-school suspension” will change that.

By C.R.H.

June 22, 2005 04:12 PM | Link to this

I keep reading about “teachers comprising 2.5% of the work force” and somewhere in there is a comparison to cashiers…??? Don’t make the comparison between a profession that requires years of education and OJT as well as professional licensure (which must be kept updated) to a vocation that doesn’t have these requirements. There is a very good reason teachers should earn more money than those folks, no offense, as I am sure they work hard for their money. Find the number of students enrolled in public education grades k-12, that should give you an indication of why there is such a large number of teachers! The other numbers that get thrown around…class sizes of 25 or 20??? What school is this? Most classes are filled well beyond capacity, I have personally seen classrooms that didn’t have enough chairs or desks for all of the students. If you want to increase class sizes by 25%, using the GA class limits used currently, that would be over 40 students (in some cases more) per class. Are you aware that there are actually regulations about the physical size of a classroom that is required to hold a class of that size? Are you also aware that you are asking 1 person to instruct, control, keep records, assess, develop activities (and provide the equipment/facities), as well as keep in constant contact with parents/guardians of all of these students? Lets see 6 classes multiplied by 40…if you think things are bad NOW…

By Bill Scott

June 22, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this

Of course teachers need to have due process are tenure if you want to call it that.I’m sorry that some of you have elected to send your children to private school just remember that public schools have to take everyone we do not have a way to screen students. Yet with all that, take anyone, low teacher pay , overcrowded classrooms the public schools do a dam good job.

By Dan

June 22, 2005 04:48 PM | Link to this

CRH Let me explain, my point with the number of teachers and relationship to the number of cashiers is not intended to be qualitative. Clearly there is big distincition in the required qualifications and potential ability. My point is economic, it is clear there needs to be a large number of teachers just by looking at the poulation ratios, and my example of 20 is just that an example (albeit much closer to the avg than your 40) to illustrate the economics it is unfortunate but as I illustrated above to pay teachers $75K and have a class size of 20 costs more than an average household can afford, indeed it costs more than most private schools. Now I understand there are areas that deviate from significaly from the average. My point is to bracket the discussion in reality, unless you do so, all of the grandiose and unworkable ideas cloud the picture

By C.R.H.

June 22, 2005 05:08 PM | Link to this

Dan, you are not a teacher (I am)…I can promise that 40 is a hell of a lot closer to the actual size of classes in most schools than 20! Why do you think many schools looke like trailer parks?

By Dan

June 23, 2005 08:28 AM | Link to this

Sorry CRH the numbers just don’t work out. I am sure there are some classes with 40 or even 29 (closer to 20 btw) I am talking about avgs and making a point about limited resources. I don’t think anyone will argue that almost everyone has the capacity to be a sales rep or cashier. I would also suggest that it is pretty clear the attributes necessary to be a good teacher are not so liberally dispersed throughout the population. So hiring more teachers is really not an option. Based on demographics and economics there is a strong probability that we already have large numbers of teachers that are in the wrong profession. The second point and was cost at a high level based on the last census regarding age groups and occupations to pay each teacher 75K while and have an average class size of 20 (reagrdless of whether that is up or down) would cost each family ove 10K/yr just for teacher sal and ben Seeing as the avg wage per family is in the 50K range that would be cost prohibitive.
and CRH I know this is a small sample size but I have 4 good friends who teach grade middle and hs one in private all in the atlanta area, and all in different districts. None have or even speak of classes over 30. All there classes are between 20-30. So I may have a lucky bunch of friends.

By Dan

June 23, 2005 08:36 AM | Link to this

CRH if your schools class sizes are 40 you need to change schools Check out this site http://www.eschoolprofile.com/city/atlanta.asp While presenting averages in such wide ranges is not very statistically sound. No matter how you slice it Assuming these public schools are not doctoring there stats 20-25 seems like the perfect number for discussion purposes

By Ron

June 23, 2005 09:34 AM | Link to this

While we’re discussing economics, if you know how to access public records online, you can go and see the salaries, by name, for all state employees including teachers. Thelow range will be your teachers. The closer to 60K depends on the degree level of the teacher. Those above 70 are administrators. You’ll also notice that larger counties with more money have higher salaries due to more local board supplemental salary input. Also you’ll notice the wide salary disparity between teachers and superintendents and other board level employees. I recently left a metro school system that spent roughly 1 million a year in salaries alone for superintendents and assistants. Not to say that those in higher level management haven’t worked their way to a bigger salary, but if you want to find a way to pay those of us on the front lines a little more, let’s call for some logic about paying an assistant superintendent 120+ a year plus benefits. I had a superintendent recently who was provided a Lincoln Town Car and a driver at school board expense. Even after the board voted to remove him, he still received his salary plus retirement and insurance for the remaining two years of his contract. This same school system rationed copy paper and provided no supplies for teachers or students. School PTA’s had to develop funds for basic supplies for teachers. Let’s skim a little off the top and put it where it needs to be. Pay more, require more stringent accountability, and reward those of us who perform and stick around. Then you’ll see the qualitative improvement we’re all looking for.

By Dan

June 23, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this

ron you are absolutly correct, during the meteoric rise of school funding I beleive admin costs or overhead has just about doubled as a percentage of the total. It isn’t only the salaries but multiple management layers invariably create inefficiencies in spending other discretionary funds so becoming leaner in that regard would certainly help on a couple of levels, although it doesn’t really address the paradigm, trading the one assitant superintendent for 2 teachers doesn’t move the student teacher ratio that much or spreading the 120K over all the teacher sal would result in maybe a free lunch. But certainly something that should be pushed, by the people

By judy oliver

June 23, 2005 10:12 AM | Link to this

Dan - You need a reality check. Send your children to public school and become a volunteer. Schools love interested people who are willing to volunteer. You also stated,”First of all no one in any job can be fired without cause, even in a state as liberal with that interpretaion as GA. So teachers tenure are in fact additional protections above and beyond the due process provided by the government to all other workers.” You obviously need to do more research. At will employees can be fired at will! Also, non-classified positions in state government do not have the due process granted to classified positions.

By Dan

June 23, 2005 11:05 AM | Link to this

I have been providing the reality check. Regardless of how “at will” is interpreted and why you can and can’t be fired (and clearly you have never had to fire someone based on your interpretation of it). Tenure is an additional protection afforded to teachers above and beyond that of any other worker. Other workers may in fact have more protections but they are provided by unions and contracts, not the government. It isn’t that complicated. Do they deserve it, not in my opinion, there are far more teachers who need to be fired than good ones who have been wrongrully fired. The demand for teachers is just too great. Regarding government positions, if there was ever a job that is hard to get fired from it’s a government one. All it takes is some minimal interaction with any government agency to tell you that.

By C.R.H.

June 23, 2005 11:51 AM | Link to this

Once again…class sizes in GA, and I am talking CORE classes like the maths, sciences, language arts, social studies/history are the classes that are bursting at the seams. I have no idea where your “friends” teach or what subject areas they teach, but I do know the class sizes ARE most certainly closer to 40! And for the 120k being paid to administrators, with that money you could get at least 2-3 teachers…and that will certainly make a HUGE difference at the school(s) that get those new positions. I know principals that work their behind off just to get an extra teacher allotment, JUST 1, because they know what a difference that can make. With 120k a school could also hire several para-pros for the SPED dept. and again the extra pair of eyes and hands in a classroom makes a world of difference! BTW… I have never complained about my salary, so the $75k that keeps getting tossed around means nothing. Most teachers aren’t complaining about salary, but the conditions we are expected to work in and the miracles we are expected to perform. We are mostly tired of “armchair quarterbacks” who have no idea what our job entails (because they haven’t been in a classroom since they were students) constantly telling us how we should be doing our job! Once again my offer stands…if you think you have all the answers and can do the job, get the credentials and step on up. I’d be happy to have you in the classroom next door.

By TTB-POTS

June 23, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this

Hi, kids - have we been having fun and playing nicely with one another??

I absolutely recommend to anyone out there trying to learn more to take a look at the different websites to see what going on at the state and local level - there is a wealth of info out there…

Take a look at the CRCT tests and see what they are all about - check out the state curriculum - check out teacher/administrator salaries - it’s all there!

One thing I would like to point out regarding class size - when a county reports is student-teacher ratio (say 20:1) it is taking its student population and comparing it to its certified teacher population. Unfortunately that number does not take into account two things: first, some populations are mandated to have lower number - Special Ed, Gifted, ESOL (not to mention numbers are lower for elementary than middle and high); second, not every teacher is in a classroom teaching position - ILTs, computer lab instructors, etc - they don’t have regular classrooms, yet their numbers are included.

In my four years teaching, my max class was 36, my smallest class was 18 (although it didn’t stay that way - new kids were put into that class as they arrived at my school). Most of my classes ran about 27. I would love a class of 24 or fewer, but no less than 18. When I had days with high absences, I felt I taught better, because kids couldn’t hide in the numbers, and I could help those who needed it better. I teach science in a very hands-on style, so 30 is difficult without another set of eyes.

Final thought - gifted students get smaller classes. Since these are students who should get things faster, how is it fair that they get more attention than a regular student in a class of 30? Before you start bashing - I’m not saying it’s bad; I’m asking if it’s fair to expect those who need more help to actually end up getting less?

By TTB-POTS

June 23, 2005 12:28 PM | Link to this

Oh, yeah - I forgot to comment on tenure!

Since I spent 20 years working at non-education jobs, not having tenure is no big deal to me. I make it a point to do my best at any job I work; hopefully, that will keep me employed.

I do like the idea of having SOMETHING to offer to good people who stay as an incentive to stay longer.

Teaching is one of the only positions where you are expected to perform on your first day like a veteran who’s been doing it for twenty years. Each year I get better - I’m much better today than I was when I started and I think that’s true for most.

We want veteran teachers who know what they’re doing in the classroom - we want them to have leadership positions and to mentor newer teachers. One problem in schools that don’t do well is that good teachers don’t stay. While you’re looking at education information, compare a high achieving school with a lower achieving school and note teacher experience. You will find a larger number of higher-educated, experienced teachers at the better schools.

So, we have need to look at ways of keeping the “best and the brightest.” Tenure (for example, after a period of ten years, extensive review, and at least a master’s degree) could be a carrot on a stick. Petitioning for tenure could be like the process of getting nationally certified.

Just a thought…

By Dan

June 23, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this

CRH I am not bashing i am taking the information available and trying to look at it rationally. How many schools are under that asst superintendent that is traded for teachers 2-3-5? I don’t know.
Atlanta has 72 elementary schools and while they claim less we can assume 30 kids per class for arguments sake. with 30000 kids that is 1000 classes. you can 10 asst superintendents and get in return 25 teachers. which is a 2.5 % increase in teachers translated into a 2.5% reduction in the class size of 30 means that change has resulted in each class being reduced by .75 of a child. Progress? a bit we certainly don’t need multiple layers of management (although some may be carrying the head Sup) but it just doesn’t create that big an impact. I am not saying good teachers don’t deserve better pay and working conditions. I am just saying the same old lines of we need more teachers and more funding aren’t working in large part because they aren’t possible. The problem needs to be looked at differently, volunteers, teacher aides, student teachers, assisting in teachers getting published I’m not sure,

By C.R.H.

June 23, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this

Dan, once again you are using gross statistics to make a point without really understanding the problem! NOT EVERY CLASS IS OVERCROWDED! It is a huge mistake to think that adding teachers (if it is possible) will not have any significant effect on the quality of education in 1 or many schools. In my department we were given an additional teacher allotment, that allowed 3 of my severely overcrowded classes (all had between 31 -35 students) to be reduced to more managable numbers (under the 28 mandated for science classes)! Actually the number of students now allowed in lab science classes has been increased to, I believe 32 students! Yeah that’s not a liability issue. It really isn’t about more money, but putting that money where it will be better used! And since I have been posting here w/o addressing the original question…I am “tenured”, the process is not going to prevent me from losing my job if I am incompetent or negligent. It also doesn’t really protect me from idiot administrators like the Dacula High School Principal.

By Dan

June 23, 2005 02:42 PM | Link to this

We are talking about education in general and how tenure is or isn’t a good idea. We aren’t talking about how adding one teacher would help 3 of your classes. But in a nutshell i agree that the answer is more efficient use of money. As far as this blog goes regarding tenure, well i don’t see how that or any other union type benefit promotes efficient spending.

By C.R.H.

June 23, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this

Here is how tenure promotes more efficient use of money: 1) If a teacher is “fired” that person is free to cry foul & file a VERY costly lawsuit. (With the procedures in place, that would be VERY easily prevented…its called documentation) 2) The school system must pay a substitute instructor, who typically is not qualified to teach the subject matter. (The costs here are immeasurable!) 3) It is costly to hire another teacher who is certified/qualified to take the now vacant position. 4) You will not find a certified/qualified person to take this position in critical needs subject areas like math, science, and SPED. Now we are back to costly issue #2. The issue of cost doesn’t even begin to touch on the issue of the disruption that replacing a teacher in the middle of a school year will cause to the students who are forced to deal with it. If a teacher is truly unable or unwilling to do thier job, they need to be removed and they are! Your argument that you are discussing “education in general” is not going to float…if 1 new teacher in my department made a difference, I am pretty sure that it will help in other departments/schools that have the overcrowding issue as well! The reason is quite simple…salary isn’t the major issue for most teachers, working conditions are the problem. You are also not privy to all the politics that are involved in working in education, one more reason “tenure” is important!

By Karen Armsby

June 24, 2005 10:52 AM | Link to this

C.R.H., You are so right about politics in education. Doc Neace, a 23 year veteran physics teacher at Dacula HS in Gwinnett County, was fired over an incident arising over ambiguous wording of his syllabus as compared to county board policy. His principal could have and should have resolved the problem by just sitting down with his teacher and discussing it. But, the principal wanted the teacher gone and essentially railroaded a gifted educator with an unblemished record. All of the administrators up the chain of command failed to do an investigation and verification of the incident, and the School Board rubber stamped the termination. The appeal is at the State level now; let’s hope they are wise in their review of the matter and reinstate Doc Neace.

By Dan

June 24, 2005 01:50 PM | Link to this

CRH your argument is dependent on your faulty assertion that a termination is not warranted. Regardless of your continuing sob story, the benefits of removing a bad teacher outweigh the trouble it creates, if not then you don’t remove the teacher. Rational thought will tell you that tenure will slow down the removal of a bad teacher far more often then it retains a good one. If that isn’t the case than it is the administrators that need to be fired. Either way tenure, at least cheaply acheived tenure is useless. You my friend seem to have become bitter about this whole issue, I worry for students taught by a science teacher who cannot follow a simple line of logical thought.

By Dan

June 24, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this

and Karen BTW I agree that the firing of Doc Neace was ridiculous, tenure didn’t help him because the district was able to find a black and white line (albeit a stupid one) that he crossed. It is much more difficult to discern whether or not the day in day out performance of a teacher is up to par, and that is where tenure would make firing him more difficult. In either case the current system doesn’t work, it didn’t protect the worthy and continues to protect poor performers

By C.R.H.

June 24, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this

Dan…your idea of “logic & rational thinking” consists spewing BS stats that you pulled from some website or some unknown orifice of your body. And which part of my story seems to make you sob? The parts where I have clearly exposed all the asinine remarks, judgements and invalid points you have made? Trust me Dan, my students (as low performing as many of them are) could EASILY pick about all of the fallacies of your rather presumptive remarks. BTW, I have sympathy for any adult who tries to argue while misusing grammar that most 4th graders can use…their, they’re, there…too, two, to…maybe your former teachers should be the first on the chopping block? Make your point Dan, but until you really understand the issue you are just peeing into the wind.

By Dan

June 24, 2005 03:57 PM | Link to this

CRH The only thing you have clearly exposed is your bitterness and ability to evade the issues. My data comes from the us census bureau, the dept of education and a site that collects PS data for real estate purposes (or simply using your version of the numbers for examples). Now your experience certainly gives you a view of your world but I was talking in a more general sense, and your nitpicking at grammar in a blog won’t change the facts to suit your argument Your recommendations for fixes are perfect examples of what is wrong with the public school system. Treating the symptoms and not the disease. But you can’t reason someone out of a position they were not reasoned into.

By C.R.H.

June 24, 2005 04:33 PM | Link to this

Dan, don’t mistake passion for bitterness, I am simply stating the facts. Which issue(s) have I evaded? Since you seem to love statistics (especially the “general” ones), please post all the information and statistics you have available regarding the number of teachers who were “fired”, “reassigned”, “let go”, “encouraged to pursue other career options” or simply didn’t have their contract renewed in the state of Georgia at the end of the most recent school year, oh hey, tell you what…just pick ANY school year. I would also ask that you provide all the supporting documentation that you have: including the various informal & formal observations, as well as the annual evaluation each of these apparently incompetent or “bad” teachers have on record. How about providing some documentation that supports your assertion that there are “bad” teachers still gainfully employed with the public school systems as a result of “tenure”, once again you may do this by providing the appropriate evaluations & observations. And just for fun…Dan, without peeking at the GADOE and PSC websites, how about sharing what you know of what is required for a teacher to become “tenured” (as some like to refer to it) in the state of Georgia and what the reqiurements/procedures are for a teacher wih “tenure” to be removed. BTW, the only “recommendation” that I have made in this entire blog is that money be spent where it will be most effective, including adding positions if appropriate.