Teacher tenure is under attack. Some states have already
done away with tenure through executive or legislative fiat. Other states have
severely limited tenure rights. Still other governors and legislatures are in the
process of revising tenure laws.
By now you have heard all the arguments against tenure. It
makes it too hard to get rid of “bad” teachers. Tenure creates complacency
because teachers know they are unlikely to lose their jobs. Tenure is not earned,
but virtually given away after two or three years of teaching. The process is
too cumbersome and too costly, so many administrators do not even bother to try
to remove under performers. For a good discussion of the pros and cons of the
tenure debate please see this
article.
For the education reformers, tenure is a major hurdle in
their quest to create schools in their market driven image. In order to put
children first, they say, we must get rid of tenure. This argument has great
resonance with many in the public who do not have such protections. The problem
is that the reformers have this entirely wrong.
While Walmart, Ford and Microsoft may desire dutifully
compliant workers who do what they are told and perform their functions as
prescribed by their supervisors, that is the last thing we want in education. Tenure
is a necessary component for achieving the kind of schools we all want. The
kind of schools that take to heart the interests of every child, that have a
rich and varied curriculum and that provide engaging instruction for all
children. Here’s why.
Think of the very best teacher you ever had. I am willing to
bet that that teacher was an innovator, constantly bringing new ideas into the
classroom. I am willing to bet that that teacher took risks by creating a
variety of engaging and sometimes out of the box lessons that were fun and
exciting, if a bit noisy. I am also willing to bet that that teacher was a
child advocate, going to bat for kids who might be a little different or a
little odd or a little non-compliant themselves. When I was a supervisor, I
worked with many very good teachers. The very best of these teachers were
innovative risk takers who advocated for students.
Innovation, risk-taking and child advocacy only happen in a
secure environment. One way that educational leaders can provide for this
environment is by being open to teacher curriculum ideas, supportive of risky
lessons created with student engagement in mind and by listening when a teacher
advocates for a child. The other way is by providing the protections afforded
by tenure.
Innovation is a hallmark of American education. In September
2013, the New York Times, ran an
article that discussed how China, that world class test performer, is
looking to the US to improve its science instruction through innovative and
hands on approaches. Chinese students, it seems know the right answers, but
they don’t know the right questions to ask that might lead to scientific
advancement. Secure teachers have the freedom to design curricula that will
challenge the status quo, get students out of the textbook and encourage
critical and creative exploration of a wide variety of topics. Sometimes these
topics may be controversial.
I once had my students in a Problems of Democracy class
research why the words “under god’ were in the Pledge of Allegiance. The
students’ research and their attempts to square those words with the
constitutional protections of the separation of church and state made for a lively
and open discussion of McCarthyism, the Cold War and religion in America. Some
parents were not pleased with my chosen topic and they complained to the
administration. Fortunately, my administrators handled the controversy well and
the kerfuffle passed by without much notice, but I can certainly imagine a
scenario where this did not go well and where, without tenure protections, I
would never do the lesson again.
A strong educational system also requires teachers who are
passionate advocates for the children they teach. This advocacy can take many
forms. It might be the advocacy that gets the ESL student the needed services, an abused child protections from abusive adults, an athlete a chance to
compete despite lackluster classroom performance or academic assistance for a
hard working student with a learning disability.
Often times advocating for students involves risk. Perhaps
an administrator is attempting to keep down special education costs and does not
want to add to the growing disabilities roll. Perhaps the school board is
thinking of eliminating the elementary music program and the teacher must go to
a public meeting and advocate for every child’s need for the arts. Whatever
that advocacy situation might be, it is a vital role for the educator to take
on. The classroom teacher and the coaches know the children best. They are in
the best position to advocate for the child. Tenure protections allow the
teacher to provide that advocacy without fear of reprisal.
Yes, removing an under performer should not be as time
consuming and costly to a school district as it is currently. That problem can
be solved without throwing out the needed protections of tenure. Job insecurity
breeds compliance and compliance does not lead to the best teaching. Tenure
allows the education professional to fill his/her vital role as innovator and
advocate.
