Eradicate Tenure in Primary Education
As M. J. Stephey of Time magazine wrote, “It’s been called the holy grail of the teaching profession—academic freedom plus job security all rolled nicely into a union contract.” Tenure was first introduced to the American work force for teachers in the early 1900s. This policy does a great job of protecting teachers from personal or political attacks. For example, it was common throughout the suffrage movement for women to be fired due to events such as marriage and pregnancy.
With this being said, tenure in primary education has brought about many problems in schools across the country. “What really makes a difference, what matters more than the class size or the textbook, the teaching method or the technology, or even the curriculum, is the quality of the teacher,” said Evan Thomas of Newsweek. The problem is not so much the style of teaching but rather the involvement of the teacher. Professors of higher education such as universities and private institutions can spend close to 10 years teaching before receiving tenure. They often provide research and, in my mind, earn the right and trust to receive the benefits of tenure. Yet teachers of public middle schools and elementary schools generally earn tenure in two to three years with little to show for their work, not necessarily demonstrating their reliability and consistency as an instructor.
Tenure’s security has the ability to induce complacency among instructors, which correlates to America’s decline of academic success compared to other nations. Don’t believe me? Just ask Arne Duncan, the United States’ Secretary of Education. “In a knowledge-based, global economy, where education is more important than ever before, both to individual success and collective prosperity, our students are basically losing ground,” he said. “We’re running in place, as other high performing countries start to lap us.”
CNN’s Aadina Balti, an 11-year Boston public school teacher said, “I’ve been at one school my whole career, and I’ve seen that, over time, many teachers tend to burn out or become resistant to change.” The tendency to burn out is understandable, especially for teachers having to deal with the madness of young children at school. But when a teacher loses that innovative drive to inspire future generations of students, I believe that it is time for him or her to take a step back from the classroom. To have teachers not be held accountable for their performance impairs the results of students who spend nearly half their day learning in preparation to do great things as America’s future leaders. It is well known that more often than not, younger teachers are much more effective in primary school as they are able to change and connect with children. Balti iterated the point best, stating, “Our job is too vital to allow ourselves to ever rest on our laurels. It is our responsibility to be innovative and relentless in our pursuit of excellence for the sake of our students, not just in our first year in the field, not just in our first few years, but always.”
One may argue that tenure embodies “academic freedom” and is essential for preventing false accusations from dismissing a teacher. However, with modern employment rights, the majority of these concerns are alleviated and at the same time money is saved. According to the Wall Street Journal, it costs close to 250,000 dollars to fire a teacher in New York City. So while the law already protects primary school teachers, cities have to pay millions to release these incompetent instructors.
Can tenure be a very beneficial policy? Absolutely. But it should be well earned and not just thrown around to any such teacher who sticks around long enough to get it. That’s how you get some grumpy old woman pretending to teach kindergarteners when the school could be providing classrooms with inspired young adults that can help better the country’s academic success.