“You’re fired!” For many New Yorkers, the chance to say those words to our next President can’t come soon enough. But barring an impeachment miracle, they'll have to wait several years for that chance.
So what say you, reader? Do you need four or eight more years to form an opinion about Trump—pro or con? How long does it really take to know if someone isn’t the right fit for a job?
Obviously, the President is a special case. Still, the question stands, and the answer matters, especially when it comes to another key role in our democracy: the public school teacher. Like the President’s performance, a teacher’s performance has grave consequences—not just for kids’ academic achievement but for their long-term prospects.
Unfortunately, as we document in a recent analysis, Undue Process: Why Bad Teachers in Twenty-Five Diverse Districts Rarely Get Fired, in most places, dismissing an ineffective teacher remains far too hard. And in New York City and state, it’s particularly challenging.
Because data on teacher dismissals are nearly impossible to come by, our report focuses on the dismissal process as it exists on paper—that is, as articulated in state and district policy. Specifically, we evaluated districts based on whether their tenure policies protect veteran teachers from performance-based dismissal, how long it takes to do so, and the vulnerability of a dismissal decision to challenge.
To score ten out of ten on our metric, districts had to clear a relatively low bar. For example, a district could earn full points even if administrators were required to formally observe a teacher five times and wait until the end of the school year before recommending dismissal.
Our results were disheartening. Across the country, tenure continues to shield ineffective teachers from dismissal, the timeline for dismissing tenured teachers is still unreasonably protracted, and dismissal remains extremely vulnerable to challenge, thanks to grievance and appeals procedures that are both time-consuming and expensive.
Of the twenty-five districts we examined, none scored higher than an eight on our metric, and most fared far worse.
New York City public schools scored two out of ten on our metric, making the nation’s largest school district one of the hardest places in the country to dismiss an ineffective teacher. Even in a best-case scenario, even after reforms by the city and state in recent years intended to judge teachers more professionally, it takes a minimum of two years and eight observations just to recommend a veteran teacher for dismissal. And those few individuals who reach this stage are entitled to multiple appeals—first to a hearing officer, and then to the court.
Put differently, if you’re a New York City principal, you’ll probably have a chance to fire Trump in 2020 before you can dismiss a teacher on your staff.
According to state officials, of the seventy-seven veteran New York City educators who have received two consecutive ineffective ratings since September 2014, fifty-seven had cases brought against them, and only nine have actually been fired. New York City public schools employ more than 70,000 teachers.
So what can policymakers and educators do to fix this process—both nationally and in New York?
The most straightforward solution would be for the state of New York to abolish tenure, the state law that protects teachers’ employment after a brief probationary period, as Florida and North Carolina have done. But politically, this is likely to be a steep hill to climb.
Less dramatically, teachers might revert to probationary status after their first or second “ineffective” rating, as they do in Colorado and Indiana, or the number of years new teachers must serve before becoming eligible for tenure (which was recent increased from three to four) might be further increased.
We are not advocating for policies that would leave great (or even average) teachers vulnerable. Nor are we suggesting that due process be eliminated so teachers can be fired like “Apprentice” contestants, or that struggling teachers be denied the opportunity and supports to improve.
We are suggesting that policymakers address the heart of the problem, which is the dismissal process itself. So long as it remains broken, ineffective teachers will remain in the classroom far longer than is healthy for students.
As for our electoral process—well, that’s a tougher nut to crack.
Editor’s note: The article was originally published, in a slightly different form, by the New York Daily News.
