Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

WOOT.
http://abc7news.com/education/california-teacher-tenure-law-unconstitutional/106238/

LOS ANGELES -- A judge has ruled that California's tenure protections for public school teachers are unconstitutional.

Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu on Tuesday ruled in favor of nine students who sued the state saying tenure and seniority policies have made it virtually impossible to fire bad teachers.

Lawyers for the teachers say the changes would allow the firing of teachers on a whim. They argued that tenure laws preserve academic freedom and help attract talented teachers to a profession that doesn't pay well.

The decision could have wide-ranging impact on the way California hires and fires teachers and could spur changes in other states with strong tenure laws.

Dozens of states have moved in recent years to weaken or throw out their seniority policies.

I haven't really heard an argument for tenure that made sense to me.

Academic Freedom? What the hell is that? My kids kindergarten teacher flat out told us that it would be illegal for her to assign my son extra work to keep him occupied (he would finish to early, and then his 5 year oldness would get him into trouble), becaue it wasn't in the curriculum.

 Ouze wrote:
I haven't really heard an argument for tenure that made sense to me.

College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

Would this have an effect on public college professors or just public K-12 school teachers?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

“If you take the king’s gold, you do the king’s bidding.” Explain to me why the freedom is desirable for all involved, because I don't get it.

Excellent news. Glad to see the practice of tenure being thrownt ot he wayside.

 curran12 wrote:
Excellent news. Glad to see the practice of tenure being thrownt ot he wayside.

I'll wait till the trend is more widespread, and there isn't an appeal, before getting to excited.

 Ouze wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

“If you take the king’s gold, you do the king’s bidding.” Explain to me why the freedom is desirable for all involved, because I don't get it.

Because some disciplines require the spouting of politics? Oh, and because just because we recieve Govt money doesnt mean you have to think what the govt says is ok to think

 Ouze wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

“If you take the king’s gold, you do the king’s bidding.” Explain to me why the freedom is desirable for all involved, because I don't get it.

Who is 'the king' in your analogy here, Ouze?

 Ouze wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

“If you take the king’s gold, you do the king’s bidding.” Explain to me why the freedom is desirable for all involved, because I don't get it.

Because, The US doesn't have a king, just a body of politicians elected to serve? Basically, tenure makes it harder to axe a prof who embarrasses these folk with their research. Same with institutional politics. Tenure makes it harder to get rid of these guys discreetly.

 Jimsolo wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

“If you take the king’s gold, you do the king’s bidding.” Explain to me why the freedom is desirable for all involved, because I don't get it.

Who is 'the king' in your analogy here, Ouze?

Whomever is paying the teacher.

I see how that is problematic when the teachers are government employees, though; I hadn't considered it.

Tenure in the Ivory Tower makes complete sense. A useful buffer against "say what I say you should say or get fired" that is important for academia. In anything that isn't the ivory tower though it's never made any sense. High school teachers aren't generally professing any revolutionary ideas that stir the water, and if they are they shouldn't be. It's not their job to break new ground.

Speaking out of ignorance here...

It vaguely, kinda-ish makes sense for college and university style professors.

A normal school teacher, shouldn't they be teaching to the curriculum anyways, irrespective of their personal viewpoints on whatever it is?

Isn't tenure just an American thing? (Well, Wikipedia says Canada too) - surely other teachers in other countries (I'm British) manage to survive without it?

How do unions fit into it too? Again, speaking out of ignorance and wikipedia, but "right not to have his or her position terminated without just cause" sounds like a very union-ey thing to me...

 LordofHats wrote:
Tenure in the Ivory Tower makes complete sense. A useful buffer against "say what I say you should say or get fired" that is important for academia. In anything that isn't the ivory tower though it's never made any sense. High school teachers aren't generally professing any revolutionary ideas that stir the water, and if they are they shouldn't be. It's not their job to break new ground.

and in universities, it just means they are entitled to a review before being fire, not that they are unfireable.

 Ouze wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
College proffessors can be express their ideas more. but in college you need to be full time AND exemplary.

“If you take the king’s gold, you do the king’s bidding.” Explain to me why the freedom is desirable for all involved, because I don't get it.

Who is 'the king' in your analogy here, Ouze?

Whomever is paying the teacher.

I see how that is problematic when the teachers are government employees, though; I hadn't considered it.

Let's see how much those snooty-tooty-facty-fruity scientists think human action is causing a global increase the tempature of the earth, once they that human action is seeing them have a global increase in the temperature of burgers... the ones they're flipping.

Tenure was a great policy when it was thought out. But like most ideas that seem great on paper, in practice it sucks dog-ass. Teachers use it as a protection to either do shoddy work or skirt the edges of misbehavior while hiding within its protective folds. If tenure disappears, teachers are held accountable for their effort and actions. Should a good teacher have allegations made against him/her, it should be the job of the school to protect its employee, not the job of a piece of paper. As a guy who went to school to be a teacher, I approve of tenure being destroyed.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:
Tenure in the Ivory Tower makes complete sense. A useful buffer against "say what I say you should say or get fired" that is important for academia. In anything that isn't the ivory tower though it's never made any sense. High school teachers aren't generally professing any revolutionary ideas that stir the water, and if they are they shouldn't be. It's not their job to break new ground.

and in universities, it just means they are entitled to a review before being fire, not that they are unfireable.

Its not that you literally cannot be fired under either system, its that under Tenure its almost impossible and the teacher can get away with almost anything.

You'd basically have to make every senior committee member pissed off at you.

Silly question How are teachers eval? Is there a standard eval they all follow or is there no eval at all? How do one know they have an "effective" or a piss poor teacher? I'm talking "teaching". Do not bring up those teachers who were prosecuted for some actions that we all would agree on we can shoot

I'm not aware of any standardized evaluation formula. Like any employee evaluation its probably based on the individual school and whose in charge at the time.

Think we need one about now. As a "consumer" I want the best in education for my ankle biters. To me an evaluation is a tool to provide that. Teachers compete for the position.

What about a parent review panel?

Have a randomly selected group of parents as well the head staff of the school be the ones who hire/review teachers?

 Grey Templar wrote:
What about a parent review panel?

Have a randomly selected group of parents as well the head staff of the school be the ones who hire/review teachers?

That sounds horrible. First, what if you have a few parents who dont like a teacher? Like what if you have a christian who doesnt like a muslim as a teacher? Or how are parents supposed to know what makes a good teacher?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
What about a parent review panel?

Have a randomly selected group of parents as well the head staff of the school be the ones who hire/review teachers?

That sounds horrible. First, what if you have a few parents who dont like a teacher? Like what if you have a christian who doesnt like a muslim as a teacher? Or how are parents supposed to know what makes a good teacher?

Well then obviously our method of selecting Jury's doesn't work.

I never liked juries either. Juries are full of people too stupid to find a way out of jury duty.

You actually make a shiny penny out of Jury duty. Free vacation damn near

Will this effect tenure of university professors? Because tenure of university professors makes a lot of sense and is pretty important.

Tenure of K-12 teachers on the other hand makes no sense whatsoever and it really probably should be gotten rid of.

Earlier this year in one of my lectures, my professor blasted our Prime Minister, Harper, and a bunch of faculty in the school for their political views, and then she finished with "I probably shouldn't have said most of that, but I have tenure so I don't care hawhawhaw".

I'm not really into politics so it didn't bother me, but tenure itself is kind of disturbing. Shouldn't it apply in only specific circumstances, like when the controversial viewpoints are seemingly umm, academic in nature and not just personal haterade? Perhaps I'm missing something.

Tenure is important because it protects researchers and allows them to do research that may be somewhat unpopular or controversial.

Since K-12 teachers don't do research as part of their job, it doesn't make sense for them to have it. Since research is a vital part of tenure-track professor positions, it is very important that they retain it.

I also don't see much reason why a professor should be penalized for their political views.

Oh, I know what tenure is intended for (as I said).

I wasn't too concerned about the political stuff, I'm not too into it. It was more of her bashing the other staff - other professors we listen to - that I was put off by.