States do a lousy job of identifying and retaining effective new teachers, says NCTQ.
States do not require sufficient support and evaluation of new teachers. They do not require (and in some cases actually forbid) teachers’ effectiveness to be considered when granting tenure, and are lagging in the development of the systems necessary for identifying effective teachers. States cling to anachronistic compensation schemes and place a disproportionate emphasis on providing pension benefits to retiring teachers at the expense of providing benefits that would appeal to younger teachers. Further, states allow far too many ineffective teachers to remain in the classroom and gain tenure, including teachers who repeatedly fail to meet the state’s own licensing standards.
Laying off by seniority is bad policy, reports Marguerite Roza at the Center on Reinventing Public Education. To cut the budget by 10 percent, a district would have to lay off 14.3 percent of low-paid junior employees.
On the other hand, if that district followed a seniority-neutral layoff policy — say by a standard of employee effectiveness — only 10 percent of the workforce would lose their jobs.
School districts may be forced to lay off young math and science teachers to keep top-scale teachers in low-demand specialties on the payroll.