Tenure

noun: ten·​ure | \ ˈten-yər also -ˌyu̇r  \

Definition of tenure

1 : the act, right, manner, or term of holding something (such as a landed property, a position, or an office)

especially : a status granted after a trial period to a teacher that gives protection from summary dismissal

-Mariam Webster Dictionary

Tenure; what a controversial topic. There is so much to argue over this insanely coveted title. As the years have gone on, tenure has gotten harder and harder to obtain. Now, I know what some of you are thinking. Why should teachers receive such special privilege to secure their position when everyone else works hard too, whether it be accounting, telemarketing, or advertisement?

Let me start off by saying that I do understand your arguments against it.  I have worked with my fair share of dick head teachers and power-hungry fuckers who would do just about anything to get a lick of satisfaction and have their name appear on the weekly update.  I have worked with straight up alcoholics and druggies coming to work inebriated during the time in which they spend countless hours with minors. 

Having something such as tenure certainly makes it much more difficult to terminate someone who is not carrying out their responsibilities in which they signed up for.  Hell, we literally take an oath to uphold our duties and responsibilities.  We literally become mandated reporters and have to log/ identify issues of concern.

However, my qualm is not with the object of tenure. My issue is the method in which it is handed out and monitored. This past year, at the school that I previously worked at (FYI… I was tenured but CHOSE to leave my school due to the nonsensical bureaucratic bullshit that took place) I watched teachers who were up for tenure be denied it because of faulty and subjective statistics that were (for the most part) completely out of their control. Now, I cannot go in to detail, which could cause you to question the validity of my writing, but I ask you to hear me out and answer the following questions:

1. Who’s responsibility is it to make sure that students are attending school (not just class) regularly?
2. If students do not show up for their standardized assessments, should that count negatively against a teacher’s overall score?
3. Should students be allowed to walk in and out of the school building at any time during the day?

I watched one of the best teachers that I have worked with, who was also in my department, be denied tenure based upon these, I guess you could say, qualifications?  Here is the kicker though… this teacher was rated highly effective the previous year.  I find this to be slightly contradictory.  This teacher is most certainly, at the lowest, effective at their job.

What most administrators will tell you is that they need to show growth within their department.  The easiest way to do this is by showing growth throughout the school year within a teacher’s evaluations.  The administrator provides feedback on specific aspects of your profession and asks for you to improve it.  If you show minor improvements, technically they should increase your score on your next observation.  This has long been argued, and many believe that this is inherently biased.

My colleague, and dear friend, was denied their job security for the 2019-20 school year over numbers connected to a pass/ fail rate on a standardized exam that took place in June of 2018.  One exam. I want to cycle back to the questions I posed earlier.  The school in which I worked in is notorious for having MANY security problems.  For example, random people just walking in and getting all the way to the top floor without being stopped once.  The security desk is right in front of the main entrance, by the way. 

Students, when asked why they cut school so often, answered with a simple “’cuz it’s easy.”  When bringing this issue up to the interim principal, a teacher was attacked for calling into question, I suppose what they believed, the principal’s ability to run and manage the building.  A teacher only can call home, not secure a building. The biggest cut periods were, as I’m sure you will be surprised by this, period 1,2,8, and 9.  My colleague, who was denied their tenure, taught the regents level classes periods 1, 2, 7, and 8.  These classes were also filled with students who needed to repeat the course AGAIN due to failing it the previous year(s).  The biggest reason why these students needed to repeat the course; attendance and failure to hand in work.  Now, we have been told that we are NOT allowed to fail a student because they do not attend class (which is ridiculous).  We can, however, fail a student for not completing the work required for the course.  My colleague would continuously reach out to guidance, admin, and homes to try and remedy the problem but nothing got better.

The reason for tenure is to secure the position of a teacher and to protect them from unfair firing, as stated by NYSUT. Such examples of unfair firing can be seen occurring within the DOE itself.  Recently, newly appointed Chancellor of Education Richard Carranza was accused of removing people from their positions to make the Department of Education more diverse.  Here is the link to that story. 

This is a scary time to be a teacher.  In fact, it has always been scary to be a teacher.  There is literally no consistency within the DOE, whether we are talking about it on the State level or the Federal.  Curriculum constantly changing, exams being tweaked, gutted, replaced, brought back, gutted, and put back again.  It truly is a nightmare.