There is no secret that almost all of the 4,500 annual vacancies in the New York City Public School system were filled by "newbie" teachers as the DOE's Fair Student Funding (FSF) policy and the ever increasing Leadership Academy principals in charge of schools result in the hiring of the "cheapest and not the best teachers" for their school. How does that affect student academic achievement? Let me count the ways.
First, 50% of the "newbie" teachers will not be in the New York City school system in five years and 80% will not be in the same school that hired them.With both Long Island and Westchester now hiring after a 5 year freeze, even more teachers will flee the City schools for higher pay, better behaved and academically proficient students, with lower class sizes and better working conditions. Moreover, many of the "newbie" teachers lack classroom management skills, deep curriculum knowledge, and experience dealing with different student personalities. Finally, what's left unsaid is how do the students feel when a teacher leaves the school? They feel betrayed, blame themselves, or feel undeserving enough for the teacher to stay.
In the school I am in, three teachers are leaving at the end of the semester. One for Long Island and two others are quitting the profession as they got better offers from private companies. I covered one of the classes as the teacher took the day off after telling his class he was leaving the day before. Despite my best efforts, many of the students were angry, cursed, and complained about how their school sucks. The school is a decent school and has a relatively well behaved student body. The biggest complaint was why do so many teachers leave the school? "Don't they like us"? We forget how leaving affects the physic makeup of students who look to to their teacher as an island of stability and guidance in a world of chaos.
Had this Principal hired more experienced teachers, they would be more likely to stay since they have a stake in the game, be it the pension, the TDA, or simply they are acclimated to the New York City Schools and their student population. I don't blame the Principal since as a Leadership Academy Principal she was trained to hire "newbies" and not think about whether these teachers would actually stay at her high school.
Maybe Mr, Asher, in his new position, should be bringing up this reason to the principals on why they should be hiring ATRs since these teachers are more likely to stay long-term and provide stability to the teaching staff. More importantly, these experienced teachers will not flee the classroom and hurt student academic achievement. Isn't that what education is for? Something to seriously think about if you ask me.
12 comments:
Facts: 1) The suburbs pay better than NYC. 2) The suburbs have better behaved students. 3) The suburbs have more involved parents. 4) The suburbs have smaller class sizes. 5) The suburbs have better school facilities. And here is the new biggie: The suburbs have LESS OBSERVATIONS than NYC.
Do you think Devos will be able to dismantle public education in less than two years? How many students is the charter/private/ religious school movement ready to absorb? 100,000? 200,000? Will anyone be able to start a school? How long will it take to start a school?
Like what exactly is the time line? All those new teachers who get laid off will find work in the charters. This is going to be quite a show. Better buckle up and bring a sense of humor.
I agree 100%. I've met many young new teachers who have left the profession and want nothing to do with teaching. This is what Arne Duncan and many in the DOE hope will become the typical experience and example for a new hire.
Students are the last thing they think about when hiring.
But again- it's the children last mentality. Why give the kids a stable faculty when administration can hire some cheap newbies that will be gone in a year or two?
The best meme I've seen lately is as follows:
"Teaching is like an abusive relationship. I only stay for the kids".
Let the DOE create a shortage, the only thing they know is to go after older teachers.
Children last always!
I am a tier iv, highly experienced teacher who has always had good ratings, even when Leadership Academy flunkies tried to sabotage me (thank you MOSL). I have seen so many newbie teachers come through the doors of my school. Some are so green they do not even know the subject matter they are supposed to teach! I've had such teachers come to me numerous times over the years asking the most basic questions. (Who won the Civil War? Why did America go into World War I? Who was Alexander the Great? How do I read a timeline?)
Some would be great teachers if they were mentored properly, especially since we exist in an alternative reality in the NYC DOE. Many burn out and leave. This week I had my third conversation with a newbie who wants to quit, but I am trying hard to convince her to stay because I see the teaching potential within her.
I feel so bad about how the admins and their cudgel Danielson's beat up teachers, new or experienced. It is really bizarre how the DOE, which says schools should be run like a business, actually believes that in the 'real world' employees are belittled and made to feel like they will be fired every single day. The Jack Welch cut-throat management style adopted under Klein works only for high pressure trading floors and Wall Street hedge funds. 99% of all other jobs are not set up like sweat shops with overseers cracking the whip every moment.
I really dont understand why the city mentality is to hire new and younger teachers....in the suburbs, spots rarely open up because teachers stay and retire from their schools....this is the least expensive model because veteran teachers long term cost districts LESS MONEY...yes they have higher pension costs but really, no one is going to be a cop, teacher, sanitation worker without a pension....that is why these jobs pay less than the private sector....without a pension, someone with a degree in math would NEVER become a high school teacher....or become a special ed teacher when private services can charge 60-90 bucks an hour.
For most people, the health benefits and pension are why they are in the city system, teachers and administrators alike. Really, our principals make 140, a shitty salary given their job. For that amount of stress, they can be a regional manager at McDonalds and make 250. Or be Eva Moskowitz.
The reason we have 26 year old principals is because what 40 year old wants that job when you can TEACH IN WESTCHESTER and make 120 or 130 for 10 months... tutor on the side and there is your 140....
Its nor just the DOE preference to hire younger....no one with a brain wants these jobs, and your admin are idiots and couldnt get hired anywhere else.
LEADERSHIP ACADEMY=STUPID TWENTY YEAR OLD WHO CANT GET HIRED IN THE BURBS OR SURVIVE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR BUT HATE TEACHING AND WANT OUT OF THE CLASSROOM ASAP
Namita Dwarka of Bryant HS is a dirty skank.
A trusted insider
im sick of the name calling on this forum.
lets stick to the issues.
het 640= how is dwarka a skank?
who are you mr insider?
cause im sure her aps are not blogginhg here
Dwarka likes to get rid of experienced teachers, and hire new ones.
Hopeful that this will lead to me getting a permanent spot. I have a lot to give the right school and I think you hit an important point about the relationship that develops between the kids and the teacher. As an ATR it goes further as by the time I develop a relationship, I'm gone, and to be honest it does hurt a bit.
Post a Comment