Tenure. (Yes, I repeated it just for the effect.)
Ira believes that the tenure system encourages innovation by allowing innovative teachers to flourish. Some folks have jumped in saying how they wouldn't be able to do the kinds of things they are doing in their classrooms without tenure. I cannot disagree with that. But does that really make tenure a good thing?
Sure, tenure protects good teachers. But doesn't tenure also protect a whole bunch of really bad ones? Are we supposed to wait and wait and wait until all of these new, progressive teachers finally take over by reaching tenure? I don't think that the time is right in education to be patting tenure on the back. At least not yet.
Here's a problem that a new teacher faces. Let's call him Bob:
Progressive Bob just got a new job at "Poor, Under-Served School A", after leaving teacher's college. Progressive Bob has great ideas about change and systemic implementation. Bob likes to use interactive white boards and technology, and has ideas about using social networks with teachers to improve communication at his school and to share teaching strategies. Bob talks to teachers about his ideas, and receives a lukewarm reception. Some say they'd never go near a "social network." Some teachers use Bob's social network, but the use of this network doesn't last long. Bob also receives a grant for technology, but none of the teachers want to use any of the money that Bob says he'll give them. Bob meets with the Principal, and it is decided that the money will not be accepted because the teachers feel they do not need any more teaching tools that year. Bob is frustrated because he has many new ideas for implementing change, but the teachers that he works with are not interested in changing. Even though their school is performing quite poorly on state tests, Bob cannot seem to make change.
To solve Bob's problem, he leaves School A and goes to Highly Touted School B.
School B is a school that is performing very well on their state scores. Progressive Bob likes the fact that this school has lots of money for computers and technology, but sees some areas for improvement. School B is very traditional. All of the desks face forward in the classrooms, and there is almost nothing on the walls. Teachers don't share strategies. The teaching strategies used in School B are very rote, and often Bob sees students in the hall memorizing glossaries or math tables. School B holds the State Tests in the highest regard. Bob is able to work with some teachers and shares some teaching strategies with them. Things look somewhat positive as Bob is able to get some teachers to listen to his ideas of change. Bob presents solutions on bullying and implementing technology, but more often, Bob is called into the Principal's office to "explain" how his tools are going to help the school. Bob decides to write a blog to create a "transparent" classroom, and, once again, Bob is called back into the Principal's office to explain how a blog is supposed to help students and teachers. At the end of two years, Bob has had excellent observations in his science class, but he his asked to leave his position because they feel Bob is not "fitting in."
Why can't Bob fit in?
The problem Bob faces, that many teachers face when they leave college, is that for four years, they have to play "safe" in order to be tenured. They have to take the exciting things that motivate them about teaching that might be considered "risky"- and quell those strategies. Is this the solution to fixing our broken schools? If we play it safe, will we still be ready to try new strategies when we've reached the other side and gained that tenure?
For Rich or for Poor?
Bob tried working both ends of the spectrum, and in both instances his progressive use of technology made him somewhat of a "freak," although even his superiors thought that he excelled in the classroom. In both instances, whether teachers worked for poor schools or rich schools, the complacency for trying new things or taking risks with curriculum always existed. It didn't matter where Bob worked, tenure affected the environment either way.
Solutions: How do you change the system?
Solution #1: Go Very Slow. Is the solution to systemic change in a school district a slow process, where we should methodically inject progressive thinkers into the old system, waiting, as time builds us a new system? Isn't it possible those progressive thinkers, those "risk takers," might get comfortable with their tenure and decide change isn't worth it? Can you inject change sideways into a top down model, and have the biggest change?
Solution #2: Be a leader. I'm reminded of something Chris Lehmann said at a conference in 2009. He said to a group of teachers, "if you're not willing to get fired, you're not doing your job." The message here is that to make change we need people to rise to the top, and change things from the top down. From a visual model standpoint, you're going to have a better change reaching people if you are the one dictating policy, instead of annoying people with your ideas about policy that you have little power to change from the bottom.
Solution #3: Make tenure a good thing. If you want a tenure system to work, then perhaps all teachers should really work for it. Tenure shouldn't be something that is given to you, but something that you are allow to keep. Make them be a mentor to a new teacher. Require that they not only go to Professional Development, but perform PD as well. Require they keep up with technological advances in the classroom. Of course, give them some choice as to how to do this, but I think the point of a tenure system should be that teachers not get comfortable teaching one way, but are always challenged to think in new ways and implement new strategies based on the current models of teaching.
So what did Bob do?
Bob kept on being a leader, and kept teaching the way he thought he should, trying new strategies and using new tools. Bob kept writing in his blog, gaining new readers, and sharing his strategies with educators all over the world. Bob used inquiry, questioning, tested theories, and gained a bigger voice until he found what he was looking for.
Bob's Solution: Go find a new place to work. Keep trying until you find the place that matters, and make your voice heard.
