re: #313 Dark_Falcon

No, I just disagree with most the union’s premise.

“The associations/unions ensure that teachers cannot be fired because a principal get a stick up his/her butt and simply doesn’t like a particular teacher.” I object to that, for one. I actually think it’s OK if management fires someone they simply don’t like, or lack confidence in, and I say that as someone who was once let go from a job for being the hire of someone who was fired after quarreling with upper management.

“Unions/associations take care of certain things so teachers can focus on their jobs and students.” In many cases, though, they also defend teachers who have clearly proved themselves incompetent, as well as oppose any measures intended to provide for greater teacher accountability. And while it can well be argued that the union serves its members by doing so, it is also true that those who favor such additional powers for school districts are not ogres, but rather see increased accountability and removal of underperforming teachers as the best way to ensure that students learn.

Schools are about their students, after all. Teachers, like other types of employee in private businesses, ought only to be employed by the school so long as they continue to generate sufficient value for the school. Those who cannot produce the needed value should be dismissed.

Teachers don’t have a problem with being held accountable. What they do have a problem with is being held accountable for things that are beyond their control, and that is what most of the non-educators don’t seem to understand. There are already systems in place to get rid of rotten teachers. It does require some effort on the part of the school administrator, however. Just like in any major business, there is documentation required and progressive discipline before one can be fired. The fact is that many principals simply can’t be bothered. Additionally, there aren’t as many “bad” teachers out there as some would have us believe. It’s much easier to blame the teacher than it is to blame the parents and/or students.

My husband was part of a “turn around” school in our district. His school was deemed extremely low performing. They had to remove at least half of the staff and required the rest to reapply if they wanted to stay. He chose to stay. I find that to be a ridiculous way to go about things. Instead of pretending that replacing all of the staff will turn a school around, they should have simply switched the staff from the highest performing school with the staff from the lowest performing school and see what would happen. I could guarantee you that the students at the highest performing school would still be the highest performing and the students from the lowest performing school would still be the lowest performing.