Hirin’ and firin’
I don’t always agree with Jay Mathews, but he has written an excellent column this morning. The crux of his argument is particularly well put:
This is a difficult choice and a hard time for D.C. teachers. They are fine people who have chosen a tough profession and put their hearts into their work. Many fear being judged by principals who, unlike Hayes, were not skillful teachers themselves and have little clue as to what helps kids learn and what doesn’t. But I don’t see any way the city’s children are going to get the instruction they deserve — the imaginative, fun-loving, firm teaching found at schools like KEY — unless principals are given the power to hire and fire teachers based on demonstrated skill and improved learning in class.
Rhee is likely to pick a few principals who fail, much as Hayes erred in hiring the two teachers. But the great virtue of the approach used at KEY and similar charter schools, the approach Rhee wants to adopt, is that achievement results — not friendships, not union rules, not inertia — would determine which principals and which teachers keep their jobs. If Hayes and other KIPP principals don’t show learning gains, they are out. Rhee says her principals will also be gone if they don’t show good results. (my emphasis)
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
September 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Teachers would be likely less fearful of being judged by principals if those principals were being judged on the same criteria as the teachers.
September 29th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
People lauding charter schools and their teachers fail to mention the one very critical difference between charter and public schools: admission and retention of their students.
Schools like KIPP take only those students who apply, and whose families agree to abide by all the extra strictures of the KIPP schools. Note that the great proficiency numbers posted in this article for KIPP only apply to those students who remain at KIPP for all four years. Of the students who are motivated enough to apply to KIPP, many drop out before 8th grade.
It’s not surprising that a school which hand-selects its students from a pool of those motivated enough to apply, and then can expel students who do not live up to the rules and expectations, would be left with relatively high-achieving students at the end of the day.
The success of some charter schools to post successes with the subset of their pre-selected students who are not expelled or asked to leave has NO bearing on firing DC public school teachers. Mathews should know better than to make this kind of specious cause and effect argument.
September 29th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
What is true is that bad teachers are not tenure’s fault. It lies at the feet of administrators who won’t fight to fire a teacher and the system that makes it so difficult to do so. Like in private industry, bosses need the power to create a successful team that shares a vision of success. Tenure makes sure that due process must happen, but the system is set up to wear down an administrator with good intentions. Unfortunately, the union as well is set up to protect an individual teacher at times at the expense of the staff as a whole. Well intended, but off-target. I’ve chronicled the staying power of a fire-able teacher on my website, http://www.tweenteacher.com. This particular teacher controls the tone of the staff and brings down the reputation of the school. A principal must be given the control to do put positive reform in place.
September 30th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Heather: As a former teacher, I just can’t support the idea that it’s a few “bad” teachers that are the cause of a school’s academic problems. In schools with motivated students and involved families, students do OK even with less-than-stellar teachers. The real problem occurs when low-performing and misbehaving students come head to head with a teacher who has problems maintaining discipline or teaching effectively.
But this is as much the fault of the students and the principal as the teacher. One summer I taught in a high school military academy: There were no discipline problems b/c they were all handled by the ex-military administator assigned to take care of such problems. Without any significant disciplinary issues, even the novice teachers were pretty successful teaching the students. Point being: We can’t blame the teachers for all the problems in a school without looking at all the other factors influencing each teacher’s ability to perform effectively.