Unless you’ve been living in a cave for the past few years, you know that education funding continues to be cut and teachers continue to be laid off. This year is one of the worst yet, and guess what? Being a good teacher–even a great teacher–can’t protect you.
In fact, Sacramento’s “Teacher of the Year,” Michelle Apperson, was laid off as a part of this year’s massive budget cuts. She was deemed to be among the best this year, and now she will face unemployment.
This travesty is a direct result of California’s (and many other states) seniority layoffs laws, which protect those who have seniority over those who may be newer (Sidenote: In my own district in San Diego, almost 1600 teachers are to be laid off, some with 10 years of experience. That’s how serious the budget cuts are). This law is absolutely ridiculous, especially at a time where the stakes of education are continuously being raised. Teachers are being asked to do more and more, to perform better, to yield better results, and yet class sizes are being increased while funding is being decreased.
Allowing someone with seniority to keep his or her job while someone who has fewer years of experience is laid off is not the most effective way to ensure the quality of our education. While there is something to be said for experience, it is also valid to acknowledge that 20 years of experience does not an outstanding teacher make. There are plenty of mediocre, good, or horrible teachers that have been doing their jobs for many years, just as there are many outstanding and phenomenol teachers who have been doing there jobs only a few years.
It is time to stop this ineffective way of eliminating and cutting the fat.
Why are we not fighting to keep the teachers who are most effective? Why are we continuing to expect more and more out of our schools when we are not necessarily protecting those who will do the best job? Why aren’t we running our schools more like businesses and figuring out the most effective and efficient way to see results?
I know I should be grateful that my union and the laws have allowed me to escape the past few years without receiving a pink slip, and I am. I also know, however, that there are some phenomenol teachers who will not have jobs next year while some who are less effective will continue to “coast” at their jobs. I, as an educator, would like to see people keeping their jobs based on performance, not seniority. This is what’s best for our kids and, after all, isn’t that what it’s all about?
image via WikiCommons
I’m with you on this. I was cut from my school district after my second year and have been unable to find employment because many of the districts in my home state have hiring freezes on anyone with a master’s degree. I just moved to a new state two weeks ago to be with my boyfriend because I feel defeated looking for jobs back home and know I can be a sub anywhere, right?! smh
Um. Question when you have brain surgery would you prefer the neurosurgeon who has been there for 15 years or the guy who just finished his residency?
Yeah. Think about that for a bit.
I get what your saying regarding years of experience, but I would rather have a surgeon who was the BEST work on me. Someone who was up to date on the latest and who was the most effective at his or her job. Being the best doesn’t necessarily mean one who has been there the longest.
*you’re* obvs.
Teaching is completely different. Teachers who entered the field 20 years ago have very little formal training on modern teaching methods. You can definitely tell the young from the old because one group dry lectures with tests and the other creates a rich, interesting environment for students. It’s difficult, expensive, and time consuming for older teachers to learn new techniques, whereas a neurosurgeon is paid by her hospital to go to conferences very frequently. The newer the teacher, the more likely they are to understand Learning Disabilities, autism, kinesthetic learning, and that lecture-worksheet-test is a terrible method.
I’m now concerned about the state/district you live in that doesn’t provide for professional development. No industry is the same as it was 20 years ago hence the need for continuous improvement. This is something that a district should have included in your contract.
The district does offer PD, but the reality is that teaching is an isolated profession. I have seen many great teachers continue their practice and improve over the years, but I have also seen many less-than-stellar teachers continue in their same ways for years…even with PD under their belts. Even with continued support, those teachers continue to on in their ways, and they are nearly impossible to fire. I guess the bottom line is that I feel sad that some of my colleagues who are great teachers received pink slips while others, who are not so great got to keep their jobs.
Also, this:
“Why aren’t we running our schools more like businesses and figuring out the most effective and efficient way to see results?
I know I should be grateful that my union and the laws have allowed me to escape the past few years without receiving a pink slip, and I am.”
That’s a little contradictory. You’re grateful for your union but you don’t like what your union does. Got it.
I guess it is kind of contradictory. I am grateful that I, unlike many of my colleagues, haven’t had the worry of getting a pink slip year after year simply because of the credential I hold and the amount of years I have taught. That being said, I don’t like that it is so hard to get rid of tenured teachers and that new teachers are the first to go when pink slips happen. I absolutely understand that seniority should count for something, I just don’t think it should be the end-all. If someone has been a mediocre teacher for years and continues to be mediocre, why should that person have a job over someone who is constantly growing and striving for excellence?
I agree with you, Kelli. Some of my best friends are teachers, my friends parents are teachers, etc. It is a MESS out there. I think it should be like all other jobs- you are hired or fired based on performance.
Heather B. while I agree that seniority can bring wisdom it can also bring complacency. Especially when you don’t feel in danger of losing your job.
Great post, Kelli!
Interesting. In my industry, technology, companies will sometimes offer early retirement packages to the oldest employees in an effort to reduce overall staff.
I – a teacher’s spouse – wholeheartedly agree. And you didn’t even mention how expensive experience is, when experience doesn’t equal effectiveness. In these environments, tenured teachers are getting regular raises based on years of service, not necessarily based on effectiveness. When trying to trim payroll, the private sector would (and has) thought it crazy to keep one employee instead of 2 for the same price.
However, this point does head us into fuzzy water in determining “effectiveness”. I’m not sure anyone believes standardized testing to be the best route. But I don’t have a solution to propose.
On a positive note: my husband’s district did a retirement buyout of high-end teachers to clear some space in payroll and allow room for younger (cheaper) teachers to come aboard. I appreciate their thinking on the issue – and the early-retiring teachers were treated well, a package they couldn’t refuse.
Agreed regarding the private sector and also in how to determine “effectiveness.” Such a gray area where education is concerned.
There are actually many research-based methods to determine teacher effectiveness that don’t solely rely on seniority or test scores. For example, in some schools, teachers are evaluated by their peers on an on-going basis through-out the year rather than a single administrator observing one or two lessons. However, to adopt these systems would require a fundamental change in the way we view education and the procedures that are currently in place. For some reason though it seems people are very aversive to change in education even though there may be better options right in front of their face.
Comments on this entry are closed.