Taking Issue: Tenure for Teachers

taking issue

tenure for teaCherS

At one time, many teaching positions in large cities were controlled by political patronage. In some cities, principalships were available for a price at the ward committeeman’s office, and teaching jobs were won or lost on the basis of precinct work. In general, teachers were afraid to contradict an administrator or an influential parent. Tenure was introduced partly to stop these abuses and to give teachers independence in and out of the classroom. However, some educators now contend that the tenure system has outlived its usefulness.

Question

Should the tenure system for teachers continue? (Think about this question as you read the PRO and CON arguments listed here. What is your response to this issue?)

Arguments PRO

1. Teaching is, by its nature, controversial. A good teacher cannot help but offend someone at some level. Teachers can do their jobs properly only with the academic freedom that tenure helps to protect.

2. A tenure system does not protect incompetence. Procedures exist for removing a teacher who is clearly ineffective. The responsibility for teacher incompetence lies with lax state licensing procedures and with administrators who are too reluctant to dismiss teachers during probationary periods.

3. Teachers must cope with pressure from a bewildering array of sources, including parents, other community members, administrators, and legislators. A complaint from any one of these parties might lead to a teacher’s dismissal. For this reason, teachers need—and deserve—the special protection offered by tenure. 4. Tenure was originally a response to serious political and administrative abuses, especially in large cities. The same forces that caused these problems still exist, and they will create similar abuses if the protection of tenure is ever removed.

Arguments CON

1. Some teachers use their positions to advance personal, social, or political views under the guise of controversial discussion. Other teachers are simply lazy or incompetent.

Often these marginal teachers—not the good teachers— benefit from tenure protection. 2. The procedures for removing a tenured teacher are often so complex and arouse so much resentment among other teachers that administrators are discouraged from trying.

Furthermore, even with upgraded screening methods, many ineffective teachers will continue to slip through.

The only solution is to give school officials, like private employers, the right to fire an unproductive employee. 3. The many sources of pressure actually enhance a teacher’s security. Active parents and community members often use their influence to protect good teachers. The layers of school administration offer avenues of appeal if a teacher’s position is threatened. Thus, even without a tenure system, competent teachers will be secure in their jobs. 4. Teachers now have powerful professional organizations that shield them from undue political and administrative interference. With these organizations looking after teachers’ rights, the tenure system has become an anachronism.

Question Reprise: What Is Your Stand?

Reflect again on the following question by explaining your stand on this issue: Should the tenure system for teachers continue?

general due-process rights, but the process may be streamlined to expedite dismissal of candidates rated as incompetent.5

tenure May be eroding As the quality and effectiveness of elementary and secondary schools have become of increasing public concern, questioning of tenure policies and arrangements has grown substantially. Some state governments and school

5Mark F. Bernstein, “Delaying Teacher Tenure for Education’s Good,” School Administrator (May 2006), available at www.aasa.org; and Neelesh Moorthy, “Elimination of Teacher Tenure Faces State Legal Battle,” The Chronicle (February 4, 2015), available at www.dukechronicle.com.