Judge strikes down California teacher tenure

[Gulo Blue]

Why would a lazy person become a teacher? This idea that you get tenure and then slack off...I'm sure it's happened, but it's so difficult for me to envision a person doing that, it seems really unlikely to me that this is a major problem. Is there any evidence that this is an issue? What's the evidence the judge was talking about?

 

[Michchamp]

easily the best argument for tenure yet. You kick ass at this.

thanks. I know.

curious what convoluted situation the plaintiffs used to convince the judge that tenured teachers in rich, well-funded school districts are great, but in poor districts they "don't give a shit" and are bad... and also how doing away with tenure will correct that.

But the plaintiffs were incredibly well-funded, so they can afford the best bullshitters on the planet. By contrast, I'm guessing the teacher's unions were outgunned in the courtroom. I love the modern face of "activism" in this country... it's the prerogative of Silicon Valley billionaires.

Maybe they'll be able to replace tenured faculty with all those experienced kids in Teach For America, or something.

 

[Michchamp]

How can you possibly know this if you haven't yet read that scholarly review? Just kidding, I know this is just mere assertion on your part.

Yes, and I have no problem admitting it's a mere assertion. Thanks for pointing it out, but I thought my wording made it clear.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Why would a lazy person become a teacher? This idea that you get tenure and then slack off...I'm sure it's happened, but it's so difficult for me to envision a person doing that, it seems really unlikely to me that this is a major problem. Is there any evidence that this is an issue? What's the evidence the judge was talking about?

You think all teachers are motivated? It's a job, it's not some noble quest to shape young kids minds.

 

[byco42]

There were dedicated teachers in my primary and secondary schools; there were lazy ones; there were completely disengaged ones; there were teachers who were angry and bitter; there were forgettable ones and there were the rare few who inspired me. They ran the spectrum of age and experience. Tenure was not a factor one way or another. But tenure protected those who should have been instead cleaning the classrooms rather than instructing in them.

EDIT: And we won't mention those who wanted to be our "pals" and "hang out" with us after class. Our have get high and/or have sex with us. Yep ... that happened as well. Not to me personally, though.

 

[Michchamp]

Why would a lazy person become a teacher? This idea that you get tenure and then slack off...I'm sure it's happened, but it's so difficult for me to envision a person doing that, it seems really unlikely to me that this is a major problem. Is there any evidence that this is an issue? What's the evidence the judge was talking about?

read the opinion like spartanhack did and then just glance at the American public school system. it's all bad... due to tenure. bad. unions. bad. nothing more needs to be explained?

 

[Spartanmack]

thanks. I know.

curious what convoluted situation the plaintiffs used to convince the judge that tenured teachers in rich, well-funded school districts are great, but in poor districts they "don't give a shit" and are bad... and also how doing away with tenure will correct that.

But the plaintiffs were incredibly well-funded, so they can afford the best bullshitters on the planet. By contrast, I'm guessing the teacher's unions were outgunned in the courtroom. I love the modern face of "activism" in this country... it's the prerogative of Silicon Valley billionaires.

Maybe they'll be able to replace tenured faculty with all those experienced kids in Teach For America, or something.

better funded than the State of California and the California teachers union? How come there's no mention of what they spent and will continue to spend on appeals? And I'll take the prerogative of engaged, concerned billionaires with the interest of students in mind over the prerogative of parasitic unions and school administrators who have their own interests and only their own interests to protect.

You will NEVER be able to make the case that tenure is good for students and whether it's good for teachers or not - i say not as it attracts and rewards bad teachers - if it's also actually bad for students like this case finds, then it has to go.

 

[tinselwolverine]

There were dedicated teachers in my primary and secondary schools; there were lazy ones; there were completely disengaged ones; there were teachers who were angry and bitter; there were forgettable ones and there were the rare few who inspired me. They ran the spectrum of age and experience. Tenure was not a factor one way or another. But tenure protected those who should have been instead cleaning the classrooms rather than instructing in them.

I don't know that I ever had a bad teacher at any of Wines, Forsythe or Ann Arbor Pioneer High.

They weren't necessarily all great; some were just okay; I don't think I remember a teacher who I felt was lazy or disengaged, or unprepared, or didn't know their subject matter..

There were a couple of dumbass student teachers from Michigan, but that wasn't the teachers' fault.

 

[Gulo Blue]

You think all teachers are motivated? It's a job, it's not some noble quest to shape young kids minds.

I think it's the vast majority. It's not like you just sign up to be a teacher and get a paycheck. Getting trained is a pretty decent weedout process.

...and how do I have to word the question to get an actual link to the evidence mentioned here?

 

[KAWDUP]

the decision is being appealed, so the order is stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.

this article is a little better; the writer actually concedes that the tenure system in CA doesn't make sense... tenure is awarded too early, and over a year (after 2 years in CA) before the national avg. (3.1 years). typically, it takes 2 years for teachers to get up to speed & therefore fairly evaluated. and that being said, the reasonable outcome would be to amend CA's rules to make tenure earned later in the career, not to strike it completely, and the judge's decision is far overreaching for that reason.

the basis for tenure:

Tenure has existed in K-12 public education since 1909, when ?good-government? reformers borrowed the concept from Germany. The idea spread quickly from New Jersey to New York to Chicago and then across the country. During the Progressive Era, both teachers unions and school-accountability hawks embraced the policy, which prevented teaching jobs from being given out as favors by political bosses. If it was legally difficult to fire a good teacher, she couldn?t be replaced by the alderman?s unqualified sister-in-law.​

but of course, if you're looking to gut unions so you can put charters in place, and your stupid, unsupported-by-evidence-but-well-rewarded by government-handouts-to Michelle-Rhee mandatory testing standards that allow you to fire teachers and close schools that underperform (and tend to be located in poor parts of town, heavily segregated...) this decision that ends tenure, period, is fantastic.

You pile a bunch of needling into your "if" statements. So let's see if I have this straight. The decision to end tenure is fantastic, but only if . . .

1) you want to gut teachers unions
2) you want charter schools to replace really bad public schools
3) you are stupid
4) you want mandatory testing standards that allow you to fire teachers that are too stupid to perform their jobs.
5) you want mandatory testing standards that allow you to close underperforming schools

So if all but say 1) & 3) are true, would that mean the decision is only pretty good?

 

[Michchamp]

There were dedicated teachers in my primary and secondary schools; there were lazy ones; there were completely disengaged ones; there were teachers who were angry and bitter; there were forgettable ones and there were the rare few who inspired me. They ran the spectrum of age and experience. Tenure was not a factor one way or another. But tenure protected those who should have been instead cleaning the classrooms rather than instructing in them.

EDIT: And we won't mention those who wanted to be our "pals" and "hang out" with us after class. Our have get high and/or have sex with us. Yep ... that happened as well. Not to me personally, though.

careful what you wish for... now without tenure, it'll be easier to can ALL teachers - effective or not - and close the schools they teach at so you can instead hand out taxpayer money to politically connected buddies to run charter schools like they've done in Chicago.

but, at least you got your education from unionized, tenure-afforded teachers, so who cares what kids these days have to deal with. Actually poor kids only, since in Chicago they made sure the schools in rich areas remained unionized and well-funded to better educate their own kids... you get what you pay for. and I think that shows what these lawsuits and initiatives are really all about.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Personally, I don't want the government deciding what teachers to hire or fire via national standards. I'd like the decision to be local. Testing can be national for the purpose of research into what does and doesn't work, but I'd rather see local planning and decision making.

 

[tinselwolverine]

EDIT: And we won't mention those who wanted to be our "pals" and "hang out" with us after class. Our have get high and/or have sex with us. Yep ... that happened as well. Not to me personally, though.

Unfortunately, me neither.

Don Canham's daughter was an assistant librarian at Pioneer when I went there - and she was smokin'!!!

I day dreamed about hittin' that every time I went to check out a book...

 

[KAWDUP]

careful what you wish for... now without tenure, it'll be easier to can ALL teachers - effective or not - and close the schools they teach at so you can instead hand out taxpayer money to politically connected buddies to run charter schools like they've done in Chicago.

but, at least you got your education from unionized, tenure-afforded teachers, so who cares what kids these days have to deal with. Actually poor kids only, since in Chicago they made sure the schools in rich areas remained unionized and well-funded to better educate their own kids... you get what you pay for. and I think that shows what these lawsuits and initiatives are really all about.

NOOOOOOOOOOO! You mean they are about money? I never knew

 

[Mitchrapp]

I think it's the vast majority. It's not like you just sign up to be a teacher and get a paycheck. Getting trained is a pretty decent weedout process.

...and how do I have to word the question to get an actual link to the evidence mentioned here?

I hear some who became teachers for summers off. And I've had similar experiences as byco mention, outside the sex part..ooh. I had a teacher who threw a fuckin volleyball at your head if you didn't get the right answer. Why should he be protected? The good teachers are going to keep their jobs anyway..no tenure is to protect the kids from the bad ones..it's just not needed.

 

[Michchamp]

You pile a bunch of needling into your "if" statements. So let's see if I have this straight. The decision to end tenure is fantastic, but only if . . .

1) you want to gut teachers unions
2) you want charter schools to replace really bad public schools
3) you are stupid
4) you want mandatory testing standards that allow you to fire teachers that are too stupid to perform their jobs.
5) you want mandatory testing standards that allow you to close underperforming schools

So if all but say 1) & 3) are true, would that mean the decision is only pretty good?

I'm being polite here, but I think you need to re-read the last paragraph, first of all. the testing is stupid, not the person pushing it. I would've said "you're stupid" not "your stupid, ...testing."

also, I understand a lot of people in some parts of the country are not familiar with this initiative, but it's farther along in Chicago, so I've read quite a bit about it. read a couple of the links I posted above before you rush to attack me personally.

Also, the idea that you can subject schools to universal testing standards is wrong; obviously wealthier districts will do better... so the result is you have schools in poor areas losing funding and teachers. The results can be seen in Chicago, and they have a disproportionate effect on black areas, which now have fewer schools serving the same population, and kids have to walk further to get there. So while that always sounds great on paper, it leads to pretty awful consequences in practice.

As you can see, it's not about bashing Republicans either; one of the biggest pushers of this nonsense is Obama's Sec. of Education. And Duncan and Rahm Emanuel here are as anti-union as any Republican... the Unions make it hard to gift wrap education money to developers and contractors since those pesky teachers' unions can afford lawyers and courtroom fights that individual teachers could not.

 

[Spartanmack]

Why would a lazy person become a teacher? This idea that you get tenure and then slack off...I'm sure it's happened, but it's so difficult for me to envision a person doing that, it seems really unlikely to me that this is a major problem. Is there any evidence that this is an issue? What's the evidence the judge was talking about?

Tenure would be one reason. But selection bias is not the problem, the problem is that tenure makes it nearly impossible to fire a bad teacher. They basically have to beat or have sex with a kid in order to be fired. Just google NYC teacher rubber rooms, read about the $10s of millions NY pays in salary and full benefits annually to keep bad teachers out of classrooms, then check out some of the crimes and/or performance issues of these rubber room occupants have committed and still get paid to do nothign for years and years.

 

[byco42]

careful what you wish for... now without tenure, it'll be easier to can ALL teachers - effective or not - and close the schools they teach at so you can instead hand out taxpayer money to politically connected buddies to run charter schools like they've done in Chicago.

but, at least you got your education from unionized, tenure-afforded teachers, so who cares what kids these days have to deal with. Actually poor kids only, since in Chicago they made sure the schools in rich areas remained unionized and well-funded to better educate their own kids... you get what you pay for. and I think that shows what these lawsuits and initiatives are really all about.

I personally believe that the entire education system is designed to arrest the learning ability of kids.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Tenure would be one reason. But selection bias is not the problem, the problem is that tenure makes it nearly impossible to fire a bad teacher. They basically have to beat or have sex with a kid in order to be fired. Just google NYC teacher rubber rooms, read about the $10s of millions NY pays in salary and full benefits annually to keep bad teachers out of classrooms, then check out some of the crimes and/or performance issues of these rubber room occupants have committed and still get paid to do nothign for years and years.

Not what I'm asking. I'm not advocating tenure here. Tenure can be a good thing in the right places, but it's tough to get right. I just want to know about the evidence people are talking about.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I personally believe that the entire education system is designed to arrest the learning ability of kids.

That's some high-level, new world order conspiracy theory there.