Evaluating the purpose of teacher tenure

I recently completed a set (OK, ten) annotations shadowing various opinions on teacher tenure, which may be one of the centerpieces of any reform movement. As one of my William and Mary professors claimed, "Change is on the way..it's going to happen." The other centerpiece is merit pay, which is difficult because it is difficult to determine how to evaluate teachers. Do we measure by test scores, student surveys, principal evaluations, etc..?  Both sides feel strongly about their views. One side suggests that the teaching profession is inundated with low-performing employees whose motivation could be summer vacation. On the other side are those who believe that academic freedom can only be achieved by teachers who have job security. Personally, I agree with the tenure concept, but see the current measuring stick (2-4 years in most states) as rather short. I also see merit pay around the corner and the distribution of money to teachers will probably be affected by all the evaluation methods suggested above, along with a few others.

I'd like to come back to the topic of teacher tenure from time to time, especially as the changes are being put into place. It will be interesting to see how the negotiating techniques of a certain Governor or two will affect the overall mood of educators. This may lead to another question entirely, that being, "Are unions relevant anymore?"

One of the most controversial topics in education today is that of teacher tenure. While a group of educators argues that teachers need to be protected with a reasonable level of job security in order to perform their duties, the detractors fire back with tales of low performing teachers who cannot be removed because they have earned tenure.

Reasons for Tenure

The two main reasons for establishing teacher tenure were to protect academic freedom for the teachers and to provide simple job security. In the 1983 book, “Critical Elements of the Employment Relationship,” legal scholar Joseph Beckham notes that tenured status is the most substantial right in employment that state statute or school board policy can convey to the public school employee. In terms of its intent, the author adds that the other purpose of tenure is to “compel procedural due process in dismissal or other adverse employment actions and thus to protect competent professional staff from unjust or arbitrary employment decisions.” (p. 10)

Does Tenure Allow for Incompetent Teachers?

Tenure is granted after the completion of a probationary period, which allows school building leaders ample time to judge the effectiveness of a classroom teacher. Generally, this period lasts between two and four years. As each teacher, regardless of tenured or non-tenured status, is observed and evaluated several times each school year, the argument against the detractors is that there are numerous opportunities to examine the effectiveness of a new teacher and to dismiss incompetent ones before they are granted tenure. In a 1982 article, Ernest Brown notes that the problem of incompetent teachers lies not from tenured status, but “is the result of administrators who avoid preparing cases for dismissal.” (p. 54)

How Do Teachers Feel?

In a 2003 article for School Reform News, George Clowes conducted a study among a group of New Jersey teachers and his findings were unique to the debate. Surprisingly, there are a majority of teachers (58 percent) who admit that being awarded tenure does not necessarily mean such teachers have worked hard and proven themselves to be adept at their craft. Fifty-nine percent acknowledge that some of their colleagues should not be teaching as they fail to do a proficient job.

In the same survey, looking at possible alternatives to tenure, most teachers were not in favor of merit pay, but 70 percent were receptive to the concept of “combat pay,” a bonus for teachers who work in rough neighborhoods at low performing schools. If the standards are changed, 93 percent believe that they should be set by educational professionals and not elected officials.

Reforming Tenure

Many questions about the usefulness about teacher tenure arose after the A Nation at Risk report in 1983. Over the past 27 years, academicians have searched for new and innovative ways to improve the system which grants continuing contract status to qualified teachers.

In a 2010 article on teacher tenure reform for www.americanprogress.org, Patrick McGuinn of Drew University and the Institute for Advanced Study raises several interesting points on the subject. The author notes that a great deal of recent research on teacher quality has devoted scant attention to the enactment and implementation of teacher reforms. While focusing on the costs and benefits of tenure, there has an absence of scholarly argument about genuine solutions to improving the tenure process. McGuinn offers nine recommendations, ranging from the Department of Education funding research and pilot demonstration programs, to think tanks and organizations such as the National Governor’s Association providing more informational resources and policy guidance to states wishing to pursue teacher tenure reform.

Suffice it to say, the argument surrounding the purpose of teacher tenure continues to be echoed throughout the halls and meeting rooms of school boards and legislators alike.