Lose weight, stay fit, eat smart. Among the many New Year’s resolutions teachers can make, better teaching should be at the top of the list.
Incompetent teaching is not uncommon at Stuyvesant. All students have had their fair share of teachers with incomprehensible accents or frequent absences, or those who have lost their energy and passion for their jobs. Both students and parents have complained. Yet our school maintains its tradition of excellence and academic rigor.
Stuyvesant has been hailed as one of the best in the country, but it is just another speck in the public school system. New Stuyvesant teachers must undergo a three-year probationary period during which they can be fired for poor performance. Once the period is over, the principal can grant the teachers tenure, securing them to a job contract that does not have to be renewed annually.
Firing poorly performing teachers is notoriously difficult in the New York City public school system. The process, consisting of hearings and investigations, can take up to six years, during which the teacher is paid full wages.
The process is so burdensome, that, according to a letter Chancellor Joel Klein wrote to school principals on teacher performance, “in a typical year only one-hundredth of one percent of teachers are laid off for incompetence.”
Seniority is also powerful. Stuyvesant Assistant Principal and teacher Richard Plass was forced to resign in 1999 for sexually harassing students, but received a full pension and served no time in jail because of the reluctance to fully prosecute a teacher with such long tenure. In rare cases of misconduct, teachers are immediately dismissed, but it takes years of litigation to lay off an incompetent teacher.
Who is to blame for the unimpressive education we receive? The teachers who don’t have the experience or skill to teach? The principal for granting them tenure? Or the Department of Education (DOE) for not changing a system that promotes mediocrity? We can put the burden on all three parties, but the central figure in this issue is the United Federation of Teachers (UFT).
Labor unions hold immense power, as seen in the 2005 transit strike and the recent writers’ strike. The UFT is no different. DOE proposals to fight incompetence are often shot down by the fury of 80,000 protesting teachers. The UFT recently accepted a plan for the DOE to dole out bonuses to outstanding teachers, but has protested numerous others. In November 2007, the DOE announced the implementation of a new Teacher Performance Unit.
The Unit, comprised of five lawyers led by a former Manhattan district attorney, will aid principals in rooting out poorly performing teachers and firing them. A separate team of consultants will attempt to improve struggling teachers’ performance first.
Not surprisingly, the Unit prompted a UFT candlelight protest outside City Hall on November 26, 2007. But don’t expect a massive layoff to happen any time soon. Utilizing the Unit requires the consensus of the principal and the assistant principals and, as of now, there don’t seem to be any plans to take advantage of this new resource at Stuyvesant.
The Unit is a refreshing change from the DOE’s usual tactic of avoiding the real problem, yet its effectiveness is questionable. On its Web site, the DOE does not explicitly require attorneys to have prior experience in education. All they need is legal experience, which adds to their effectiveness to work around and interpret teacher contracts.
The DOE needs to have both experienced educators and lawyers observe classrooms more regularly to effectively monitor their performance. All too often, when under limited scrutiny, teachers attempt to appeal to external observers and move away from their usual mediocrity.
Since it is near impossible to scrutinize teachers without their knowledge, the DOE should just ask the students themselves. Surveys should be given to students periodically to help principals evaluate teacher performance.Who knows the teacher better than the students who are receiving the education?
The Unit is a resource that the principal and assistant principals should consider using in Stuyvesant. But the DOE has to push further in its efforts instead of just rounding up a gang of black-suited lawyers upon request. The team should be expanded, so they can provide their services to more schools. They should not only help fire bad teachers, but also aid in seeking out good ones and hiring them.
Our school system has a chance now to improve teacher quality and thus the quality of education. Let’s not waste it.
