This won't have much effect on anything. One of the great myths on the right is that "poor performing teachers" are the cause of poor performing schools. While they do exist, such teachers are rarer than you might suppose. In this state, the qualifications begin with a college degree in a recognized academic subject. If your degree doesn't match a subject which is taught, then you must pass a test in that subject. All teachers must pass the CBEST test to get into grad schools and elementary school teachers are tested every five years. The California Teaching Credential (license to teach) is a master's level degree which is renewed every five years by the state, includes a half year of working for free and may be denied for almost any reason. That happens more than you might suppose too. Unwanted teachers are quietly moved out with little fanfare... Why schools perform poorly is not a secret to those of us on the inside. The floodgates of illegal immigration present us with schools where almost none of the parents speak English. Most come from poor villages in El Salvador or Guatemala where they never learned to read or write Spanish either. America is like Disneyland to these families. Their kids get free food every day, along with free books, pencils, paper, and even backpacks if they need one. In this situation, it's very difficult to convince parents that their child is underperforming, when the kid has already attained more education than either parent by the time he has reached the 4th Grade... I'm a conservative Republican. I'm against tenure anyway, but I don't see how this will help poor kids or their parents.
Jim, your description of why kids perform poorly can be applied universally. Ironically, it's the most conservative element of society that wants to blame the public school teachers and ignore the lack of parental attention. They (hard right conservatives) seem to believe that charter schools are the answer to the "problem." IMO, there is a definite place for charter schools on the educational spectrum, especially for under performing inner-city kids, but so far in Indiana, it's been hit or miss. The "hits" are doing a great job, but the "misses" are closing doors, leaving kids in the lurch. Again IMO, they need to scale back the number of charters and tightly police those that remain. I got a little off topic, but in general, I believe public education is excellent for those who want to learn. For those who don't nothing will help, not charters, not parochial schools....nothing.
:idea: Sid, Generally speaking you're correct. We have some fantastic charter schools in this area, but they don't solve the problem of how to teach the poor kids. Inner city American kids are no different than the poor kids from Mexico or Central America. Lack of parental involvement is deadly in education, no matter what kind of school it is. Parents who don't care, raise kids who don't care...
If parents are the real problem why are teachers unions always demanding more money for schools? Seems like it won't solve the real problem just theirs.
I think kids perform poorly because teachers have lost the right to discipline and parents are generally disinterested in their kids development.
In my work with public school systems in Indiana, I witnessed egregious conduct by teachers union leaders at school board meetings. I believe that to truly appreciate the dedication of the vast majority of teachers, you need to separate the individual teachers from the behavior of their union leadership. Amen!
While I realize that there are great problems facing poor kids, the fact remains that even those with good home support are not learning at a level in comparison to the rest of the world. The problem, in my view is with the boards and administration. Our kids today are being taught what to think instead of how to think. The learn how to put on condoms instead of finding square roots. They learn more about alternative life styles than they do about the Constitution. They're being told that mankind is changing the climate and that our way of life is an insturment of distruction. Top scholars are no longer acknowledged because doing so would hurt the feelings of those not honored. In the end, kids go into the "real" world, lacking real academic education and believing that working hard for success isn't needed because everyone gets a certificate of participation. They end up living in mom and dad's basement unemployed working on campaigns to legalize gay marriage.
:idea: The teacher's unions are all about leftist power, aka vote buying with tax money. The public employee unions control entire states of the Union, not just the educational system. This situation will continue and even get worse, until the American people get angry enough to do something about it. The recent election here had a statewide turnout of around 19%. There's not much anger in that number...
Here in New Jersey we have 565 local Boards of Education in a state of 21 counties. You can drive E-W across this state in one hour in most spots and lengthwise in three hours. I pay taxes to two BOEs right here in my little town. Test scores continue to drop as the cost to educate a student rises in public schools each year and skyrockets in private school. The teachers unions in this state are like the 6th New York crime family. They were Chris Christie's stated target when he successfully ran for Governor the first time. And he was re-elected by a landslide.
I have to agree with pretty much all of the above. I don't see tenure as the problem in poor performing schools, at least in general. I believe that Jim is right in his assessment of poor performing schools. Those schools need good teachers but tell me this, with the threat of being fired if your school doesn't do well, and knowing what Jim said above is true, what teacher in their right mind would teach at one of those schools if they had a choice?