Teacher Tenure

The idea of teacher tenure began in medieval times as a means of freeing teachers to lecture and learn without interference from meddling governments.  More recently, tenure has been used to protect teachers against arbitrary and unfair treatment by their supervisors.  In many school districts, tenured teachers are all but guaranteed lifetime job security.  Only gross misconduct or a schoolwide financial crisis can cause job dismissal among tenured staff. 

Academics have argued that because tenure protects them from the often-inconsistent attitudes of changing school boards, it is crucial to academic freedom. The real test of tenure, however, is how well it helps children learn and grow. 

Problems with Tenure

Tenure provides little incentive for poor teachers to improve their performance.  As a result, the tenure system has turned education into an exclusive club where mediocrity is protected and rewarded.  Ineffective teachers can spend decades delivering the same mediocre lessons because they know the school board can do nothing.                 

Tenure can also slow a school’s response time to significant changes in technology and society.  As new areas of study are created and others fall into obsolescence, tenure leaves schools powerless to shift resources quickly or force teachers to learn new disciplines.  This lag time handicaps employers needing workers who can cope with the ever-changing demands of the modern workplace. 

Clamor for change in the tenure process has even come from the National Education Association, which, until recently, has fiercely protected teacher tenure.  NEA president Robert F. Chase supports dramatic reforms in public education, including a critique of teacher tenure.  “The imperative facing public schools could not be more stark,” Chase declares. “We must revitalize our public schools from within or they will be dismantled from without.” 

An Alternative to Tenure: Limited Contracts

Instead of almost guaranteed lifetime employment provided by tenure, individual contracts could be established between teachers and administrators and their district supervisors. A board consisting of the teacher’s immediate supervisors and representatives of the local school board could conduct reviews.  Parents could also participate in the review process to ensure accountability while preventing district bureaucrats from relocating inadequate teachers instead of dismissing them. 

For teachers, criteria might include professional development, knowledge of subject matter, classroom management, and quality of instruction.  For administrators, criteria could extend to building management and frequency and rigor or staff evaluations.  Because these criteria are based on performance, a range of options could be considered at the end of the contract period, including refusing to renew the contract. 

Advantages for Teachers and Administrators

The vast majority of teachers in America work for a government monopoly.  Most are paid similar wages regardless of talent or productivity.  A more productive employee in the private sector, however, may make much more money than his or her coworker, even though both have the same level of education and have worked at the same job the same number of years.  Instead of shielding teachers and administrators from the opportunity to compete and be rewarded for their work, school boards should give them the same opportunity other workers in the private sector enjoy—the right to be able to be compensated for excellence. 

Naturally, teachers and administrators are concerned about job security and arbitrary dismissal as much as employees in any other job. Contracts, however, could also include a due process hearing before dismissal for serious breaches of conduct, giving teachers and administrators a level of job protection enjoyed by few private sector employees. 

Tenure Reform Efforts in Other States

The idea of tenure reform in public schools is relatively new in most states, yet a few have proposed legislation designed to overcome some of the problems associated with traditional tenure programs:

Alabama.  As of July 1, 2000, principals hired for the first time in any school system in Alabama will not be eligible for tenure.  All principals hired will be given a probationary period of one to two years, depending upon their previous administrative experience.  After the probationary period, principals can be terminated with or without a reason, or offered an initial contract of not less than three years.  Performance reviews will be given annually based on state Department of Education standards. 

Alaska.  In 1996, Governor Tony Knowles signed a bill reforming tenure guidelines for the state’s teachers and administrators.  The bill allows local school boards to create their own performance standards and evaluations in accordance with certain state guidelines.  Teachers and administrators who fail the review must improve within a set number of months or face termination.  The bill also lengthened the time served before tenure is granted from two to three years, and allows tenured employees to be laid off if the school board faces a financial crisis. 

Florida.  An effort to reform teacher tenure and set up a pay-for-performance system in 1996 were opposed by the state’s unions and failed to pass.  A more modest measure was enacted, reducing the time it takes to evaluate teachers. 

New York.  In 1996, two Long Island school districts began hiring teachers under renewable contracts instead of traditional tenure rules.  The local teachers’ union filed suit in one of the districts and won, despite findings by the New York State School Boards Association that three-fourths of New Yorkers favor replacing tenure with renewable contracts, and 72 percent believe such measures would increase accountability among teachers and administrators. 

For more information, contact the Center for Education Reform, www.edreform.com.