February 9, 2007

print icon

Teacher Attrition: Blame the Union for DOE Failures.

Filed under: NYC DOE by Peter Goodman @ 6:08 pm

The issue of tenure has always stuck in Bloomberg’s craw: the inability to hire and fire at will and the inability to create an aura of terror and uncertainty.

Under New York State Education Law teachers serve a three year probationary period, and, if they receive satisfactory ratings they “achieve” tenure. A probationary teacher can be discharged as a result of an administrative hearing within the Department of Education.Tenured teachers are entitled to a review under Section 3020 of State Ed Law that sets forth specific procedures, rules of evidence and testimony, representation by an attorney, and, the decision maker is an independent arbitrator. There are decades of case law that establishes precedent.

The Chancellor avers that very few probationary teachers are denied tenure. In reality, teachers vote with their feet. It is not surprising that large percentages of teachers leave teaching before completing their third year. The “new” teacher support network within the Department is almost nonexistent. If you’re lucky a principal may ask another teacher to “buddy,” colleagues may support you, perhaps you’ll have an effective mentor. For most it’s like learning to swim by being pushed off the end of the pier.

According to Klein the union is somehow responsible for inadequate teachers.

I was representing a teacher at a disciplinary hearing. The District hearing officer called me out into the hall.

“Peter, How can you represent this guy? He’s terrible …”

“Sal,” I responded, “you hired him and your principal gave him S ratings …”

The union doesn’t hire teachers, and, unfortunately the system doesn’t support them.

The only consistent city wide teacher induction system is the UFT Teacher Centers. In over 200 centers carefully selected Teacher Center staff support new teachers, working in collaboration with principals.

The Bloomberg attack on tenure is simply trying to defuse his own failures. The Chancellor’s Fellows Program and Teacher for America are highly selective programs: it is the Department that selects the candidates, yet even this highly selective program suffers high rates of attrition.

The Department still seeks the “magic bullet,” whether it be mega regions, or autonomy zones, or empowerment schools, or weighted student funding or partnership support organizations. What they fail to do is to engage in the day to day life of the principal and the teacher, they simply seek to place blame rather than look at their own failures.

3 Comments

Comments are open for registered users and do not reflect the views of the UFT. Please read our general rules for commenters.

  • Hey Peter,

    The union doesn’t hire teachers, but the union contract makes it too difficult to terminate incompetent teachers. There is a huge number of people from all political backgrounds around the country that believe this to be a major problem. While trying to protect good teachers, the contract unfortunately gives excessive job protection to bad teachers. This hurts kids and, in the process, reflects extremely poorly on the profession of teaching.

    Your anecdote with the “How can you represent this guy?” line is telling. How can teachers get the respect they deserve if people can ask this question and your only response is to blame others for a bad hiring decision? More importantly, how can we sacrifice the education of the kids that have this sort of teacher while we take turns passing the buck?

    In any case, I hope you would recognize that there are many of us that truly believe that teacher tenure and the process of terminating incompetent teachers needs to be reformed for the good of the entire system — including for the good of the teaching profession.

    Ken

    Comment by curious3 — February 10, 2007 @ 5:35 pm

  • Ken,

    I couldn’t disagree more with your comment. The UFT is not responsible for the hiring of personnel; the union is responsible for making sure that the contract is protected and enforced for the good of the entire membership. The UFT does not negotiate in a vacuum; it is an agreement between the union and the City.

    What we’re really seeing in Mr. Goodman’s editorial is that management does not follow its own rules. Getting rid of an incompetent teacher should happen within the three years of probation. If the principal fails to do his/her job properly, then he or she must have a solid paper trail that leads to a 3020 hearing. Again, the administration has to do its part. If a lawyer were to go to court unprepared, his case would be thrown out. If a teacher wants a problem student suspended and has no evidence of interventions performed, the hearing officer will send that child right back to the classroom. It’s all about preparation.

    Blame the DOE with its policy of unseasoned administrators who can’t recognize good or bad instruction when they see it. The recipe of putting a novice through the leadership academy, add water, and voila! instant principal is insane.

    While its important for us all to have good teachers as colleagues, the rules that exist are there for a reason. Please read about the history of the union and why we have the rights we do. Bring back the career ladder for adminstrators and mandate a minimum number of years teaching before granting supervisory positions. You can’t supervise what you don’t know.

    Comment by Persam1197 — February 11, 2007 @ 4:55 pm

  • I think it’s an important point that we don’t hire teachers, and it’s equally important to note that we have nothing to do with granting of tenure either. Pointing fingers at us is disingenuous.

    It’s the union’s job to represent its members. It’s as simple as that. That’s what they’re there for. The notion that anyone facing removal from a job does not merit a vigorous defense is un-American.

    Those who are so quick to condemn Mr. Goodman for doing his job ought to know that this city has had many, many opportunities to hire more selectively and has balked repeatedly, choosing to lower standards, establish 800 numbers, and conduct multiple intergalactic searches to fill those ancient wooden chairs.

    I don’t believe in hiring bad teachers, or granting them tenure. But neither I nor the UFT has any say in those matters.

    As for the comment being telling, I take strong exception to that, and those who’d stereotype teachers are bigots, plain and simple. There’s a school of thought that working conditions are bad in this country, and there’s a certain amount of truth to that.

    To make the conclusion that we will somehow improve things by worsening conditions for teachers is nothing short of idiotic. All workers, not just teachers, deserve protection and due process.

    We should be working to improve the lot of working Americans, not worsen that of teachers.

    Comment by NYC Educator — February 11, 2007 @ 7:12 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.