
Originally Posted by
Veronica
I'm just not sure how "they" think doing away with tenure will fix the problem. I'm a darn good teacher. I have parents and students telling me that all the time. I have college graduates coming back to visit me. But there's no way I would choose to teach at some of our more difficult schools. I need to have the students or the parents (ideally both) supporting the student's education. Every year I have one or two students who don't prioritize education and whose parents don't either for lots of reasons. It's frustrating and demoralizing because no matter what I do, I can't "fix" them. It takes a really special person to take on a class where that's the majority. You can't force a teacher into that situation.
I find the argument inconsistent also. Tenure is bad because when lay offs come the
new, dynamic teachers get let go first. However, tenure is also bad because the
new, inexperienced teachers are at the neediest schools. So, are the new teachers dynamically inexperienced?
Veronica
Well said. And I try VERY hard to never read the comments. Commenters are the lunatic fringe, not a good representative sample. I know you know that. The benefit/cost ratio of reading news story comments is REALLY REALLY terrible. :-P
"My predominant feeling is one of gratitude. I have loved and been loved;I have been given much and I have given something in return...Above all, I have been a sentient being, a thinking animal, on this beautiful planet, and that in itself has been an enormous privilege and an adventure." O. Sacks