tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post5336193000212969444..comments2024-03-15T22:56:09.636-07:00Comments on Jersey Jazzman: David Boies's Flim-Flam on TenureDukehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16535645107179796099noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-72906264201576618452014-12-21T10:59:57.842-08:002014-12-21T10:59:57.842-08:00@StateAidGuy: Obama is a progressive?@StateAidGuy: Obama is a progressive?Robert D. Skeels * rdsathenehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07920561332154131328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-36209807953890616082014-09-23T08:59:49.925-07:002014-09-23T08:59:49.925-07:00Giuseppe,
I agree, the question was biased, but i...Giuseppe,<br /><br />I agree, the question was biased, but if a third of teachers agree with it anyway it suggests (again) that a large minority of teachers do not like tenure. <br /><br />Anyway, here is a more recent survey of teachers that shows a large minority are against the status quo on tenure.<br /><br />http://educationnext.org/2014-ednext-poll-no-common-opinion-on-the-common-core/<br /><br />(the following is a quote from the survey description)<br /><br />Teachers unions, of course, remain s teadfast in their defense of teacher tenure. Dennis Van Roekel, the outgoing president of the National Education Association, described the California lawsuit as “yet another attempt by millionaires and corporate special interests to undermine the teaching profession and push their own ideological agenda on public schools.” American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten assured her members that “this [decision] will not be the last word.”<br /><br />But, surprisingly, a majority of teachers do not favor the status quo of most states, under which most teachers receive tenure as a matter of course without explicit consideration of student-achievement data. It is true that teachers endorse tenure by a two-to-one margin: 60% in favor, with 32% opposed. Furthermore, only 31% of teachers like the idea of basing tenure on student test performance. But when responses to the two questions are combined, just 41% of teachers both favor tenure and oppose using information from state tests when awarding it. In short, when it comes to the teacher-tenure laws in most states, less than half of teachers and fewer than 1 in 10 Americans prefer the status quo.StateAidGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346914457455404884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-45309051996025277492014-09-22T18:26:23.757-07:002014-09-22T18:26:23.757-07:00What the hell kind of question is this: "Get ...What the hell kind of question is this: "Get rid of tenure for teachers?" Wow, talk about a biased, slanted question. I would have thought they would ask, "Keep tenure for teachers or not" or "Do you support tenure or not?" In any case, most of the teachers do not want to get rid of tenure and the more experienced teachers are more supportive of tenure.Giuseppehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03418801372998968620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-52855813697695249892014-09-22T13:55:11.337-07:002014-09-22T13:55:11.337-07:00Finally, Arne Duncan, and, by extension, Barack Ob...Finally, Arne Duncan, and, by extension, Barack Obama, support the Vergara decision. <br /><br />http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/statement-us-secretary-education-arne-duncan-regarding-decision-vergara-v-califo<br /><br />I don't know what parameters you have for supporting and opposing tenure, but while Arne Duncan says he supports tenure, he wants to see it weakened. His definition of "support tenure" is probably very different from yours. He doesn't buy that tenure, at least in CA, is just "due process."StateAidGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346914457455404884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-2763694097054606212014-09-22T13:22:38.531-07:002014-09-22T13:22:38.531-07:00I've seen several polls that show a large mino...I've seen several polls that show a large minority of teachers favor tenure reform. <br /><br />http://ncei.com/Profile_Teachers_US_2011.pdf<br /><br />http://educationnext.org/files/Complete_Survey_Results_2010.pdf<br /><br />When I was a teacher I knew a few anti-tenure teachers too.<br /><br />The point of this isn't to show that tenure reform is automatically good, the point is to show that being anti-tenure shouldn't be construed as being anti-teacher. Anti-tenure=anti-tenure. That's all.StateAidGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346914457455404884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-67465899582062904552014-09-22T13:20:30.142-07:002014-09-22T13:20:30.142-07:00Duke,
You didn’t make it clear that your point a...Duke, <br /><br />You didn’t make it clear that your point about non-experts was only the media attention they receive, not their actual opinions. “I suspect that celebrity lawyer David Boies -- recruited by celebrity education non-expert Campbell Brown to lead the fight against teacher tenure….” <br /><br />Even if your only objection is Brown’s media attention, well, I’m sorry, but the media always gives celebrities attention for their causes. On my drive to work today I heard an interview with Mark Raffalo on NPR about climate change and heard references to Emma Thompson and Peter Gabriel marching for action. When I turned my computer on to Yahoo news the first thing I saw was that Emma Watson was campaigning at the UN for women’s rights. I agree with all four of those celebrities on the issues and don’t care at all that none is an expert.<br /><br />But I don’t want to argue about the media’s tendencies but about tenure itself. You say Massachusetts and NJ are strict tenure states and yet have high performing students. This proves is that tenure and relatively high-performance aren’t incompatible, but that’s like pointing to a low-spending district that has high performance (Glen Ridge, for instance) and saying that school funding doesn’t matter. <br /><br />Your example of tenure “working” and my example of low-funding “working” are obviously flawed arguments because there are so many other factors at work in student success. Reasonable people who want tenure reform don’t consider tenure the biggest problem schools have; reasonable people consider tenure to be one problem that is legislatively fixable. Also, who is to say that schools in NJ and Mass wouldn’t be even better without tenure? <br /><br />Is tenure a problem? I believe it is, especially in New York, where Campbell Brown is focusing most of her advocacy. As I mentioned before, the problems of tenure don’t always show up in test scores, which is the defense you used of NJ and Massachusetts. In New York and California the worst teachers are not allowed to teach but have to be kept on the payroll. If a teacher is in a Rubber Room, how would the lack of skill show up in test scores? Many teachers don’t teach tested subjects anyway. If a teacher is insulting to a handful of students, endangers students etc that doesn’t show up in scores. <br /><br />I think David Boies is right that patronage hiring and firing is less common than it was in the past.<br /><br />TENURE IS NOT A LIFETIME GUARANTEE OF EMPLOYMENT!!!!!! It just means due process.<br /><br />I’ve seen argument this many times, but come on. Obviously tenure isn’t literally a job for life, but it’s incredibly difficult, expensive, and time consuming to fire a bad teacher, even in cases of misconduct. Even when a teacher pleads guilty to child abuse (like the following example), the process takes years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. <br /><br />http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_22454531/firing-tenured-teacher-california-can-be-tough<br /><br />Also, you blame administrators for giving tenure to bad teachers in the first place. What you are implicitly stating is that more new teachers should be fired before they get tenure. If this is what you believe, then you are underscoring how tenure diminishes job security for those who do not have it while it increases job security for those who do have it. If a principal has an untenured teacher who is ok, but with some problems, in a strict tenure system that principal is incentivized to not give the teacher another chance to develop and fire him or her lest the problems grow worse and he or she be unremoveable.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />StateAidGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346914457455404884noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-81436306569990116512014-09-20T05:22:57.250-07:002014-09-20T05:22:57.250-07:00Nice job, G.Nice job, G.Dukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16535645107179796099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-87436590898132851462014-09-19T21:57:05.412-07:002014-09-19T21:57:05.412-07:00From the NYPost: "Duncan met with President O...From the NYPost: "Duncan met with President Obama and teachers at a White House event Monday, where he said he supports tenure, but California’s 18-month requirement was too easy.<br /><br />“I will always support the right to tenure. We just want that to be a meaningful bar,” Duncan said, noting that California teachers got tenure after just 18 months, adding tenure “is something that should be earned through demonstrated effectiveness.” https://nypost.com/2014/07/07/duncan-digs-at-california-teacher-tenure-during-obama-meeting/ Obama is against tenure?????????????????? StateAidGuy????????????<br />Giuseppehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03418801372998968620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-34549043084069830902014-09-19T21:44:23.375-07:002014-09-19T21:44:23.375-07:00"Lots of progressives oppose tenure, includin..."Lots of progressives oppose tenure, including Barack Obama. 30-40% of teachers themselves oppose tenure." I would also like a citation for those numbers. I did not know that Obama was against tenure? In any case, lots of progressives support tenure and 60% to 70% of teachers are pro tenure, assuming that StateAidGuy's numbers are right. Giuseppehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03418801372998968620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-60386331596129018332014-09-19T19:55:18.305-07:002014-09-19T19:55:18.305-07:00First, thank you for acquiescing to my point about...First, thank you for acquiescing to my point about tenure. As you concede, there are many other factors that contribute far more to student achievement than whether a district or state grants teacher tenure. Nice work making my point for me.<br /><br />Second: I don't have a problem with non-experts having an opinion. I have a problem when the media puts non-experts on my TV in place of people who have informed opinions.<br /><br />I have opinions about airline safety, as I have flown in planes. I have opinions on health insurance, as I have been to the doctor. I have opinions on the climate, as I live on planet Earth.<br /><br />Should I be given large amounts of media time to opine on these subjects? Wouldn't the public be better served by putting people on my TV who know what the hell they're talking about?<br /><br />Third: sorry you had a bad chem teacher. There's probably a fair chance your principal knew he wasn't great. But please explain to me how removing the workplace protections of his colleagues would have put better people's resumes on your principal's desk.<br /><br />Fourth: teachers who are "great" aren't "great" everywhere. Do you think the "highly effective" teacher in Millburn will be "highly effective" in Irvington? And, again: how does removing tenure help get better teachers into places like Camden? There is no empirical evidence to support that belief.<br /><br />Fifth: give me a source for that 30-40%.<br /><br />Finally: I have no problem with changing the due process procedures -- that was the entire point of TEACHNJ, written largely by the NJEA. But Brown et al have never spelled out what they want. If you want an honest debate, let's start with that.<br /><br />Thanks for reading.Dukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16535645107179796099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-78308662169104685072014-09-19T19:47:54.510-07:002014-09-19T19:47:54.510-07:00StateAidGuy says that "Massachusetts and NJ a...StateAidGuy says that "Massachusetts and NJ are two of the best educated and most affluent states in the country. Something would be seriously amiss if kids there weren’t among the highest performing." Well, gee whiz, thanks for not giving any damn credit to the TENURED teachers. If tenure is so horrible, so uncivilized, so barbaric, so heinous, you would think that it alone would sink MA and NJ to educational wastelands. No mention about the administrators and principals who hire the teachers in the first place, who assess the teacher's performance during the trial period and who continue to observe and evaluate the teachers throughout their careers. TENURE IS NOT A LIFETIME GUARANTEE OF EMPLOYMENT!!!!!! It just means due process. Countless teachers have been falsely accused and railroaded. Tenure is needed to protect teachers from crackpot parents and petty, vindictive principals, for example. Here in NJ, the trial period has been increased to 4 years and the tenure case process has been streamlined.Giuseppehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03418801372998968620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9025948832913694345.post-71542178145110533402014-09-19T08:41:14.643-07:002014-09-19T08:41:14.643-07:00"Some of the best performing states, such as ..."Some of the best performing states, such as Massachusetts and New Jersey, have teacher tenure."<br /><br />This contradicts an argument you’ve made repeatedly regarding the (apparent) success of charter schools. You say charters only appear to outperform district schools because they serve demographically different students. Ok, point taken about charters, but surely you know that Massachusetts and NJ are two of the best educated and most affluent states in the country. Something would be seriously amiss if kids there weren’t among the highest performing.<br /><br />You call out education “non-experts” for having the audacity to oppose tenure, as if their “non-expert” status makes their opinions on education illegitimate. But plenty of bona fide education experts also oppose tenure and as a student of education, surely you realize that bona fide experts disagree on numerous issues.<br /><br />Also, for a non-expert to have an opinion on tenure or anything in education is nothing like a non-expert having an opinion on cancer treatment or bridge engineering, where the non-expert likely has zero experience and where values don’t play a role in decision making. Your average non-expert who is weighing in on this has 13 years of public school experience personally and many more years of experience as a public school parent, so an opponent of tenure has personal experience that should be accorded some respect. <br /><br />How is it different for a non-educator to have an opinion on tenure than it is for a non-economist to have an opinion on the minimum wage?<br /><br />"Where is any evidence at all that gutting tenure would help student achievement? If it exists, I haven't seen it."<br /><br />It's not just about measures that will appear in testing. It's about having teachers who are respectful of children and fulfill professional obligations. If a teacher bullies a child or demands back rubs, (like a Lopatcong teacher had children give him) that kind of problem is unlikely to appear in test scores. For me personally, my worst teacher was someone I had for two years in high school chemistry. Since high school chem is an untested subject, his ineffective teaching would not appear in any way. So, even if test-based evidence for the problems of tenure didn't exist (which I don't concede) that does not mean that the evidence doesn't exist.<br /><br />I think you also miss one argument about the disproportionate impact of tenure on low-income kids: low-income kids are disproportionately impacted by having an ineffective teacher because they learn less in their home environments. Even if the argument that ineffective tenured teachers are more common in low-income districts isn’t true, it is far from the only reason to change tenure. <br /><br />Finally, people who oppose tenure aren’t anti-middle class or anti-union. Lots of progressives oppose tenure, including Barack Obama. 30-40% of teachers themselves oppose tenure. Changing tenure isn’t about robbing teachers of all due process either and making teachers at-will employees; it’s about changing what that due process is so that the balance of power is different.StateAidGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00346914457455404884noreply@blogger.com