Teacher Dismissal

The Impact of Tenure, Administrator Competence, and Other Factors

The topic of teacher dismissal N provokes a strong response from educators and any number of public school stakeholders. Tenure is integral to the dialogue, but other variables significantly impact a school administrator's propensity to address the issue of unsuitable teacher performance.

In spite of the controversy surrounding these issues, the debate remains largely uninformed, at least in terms of quantifiable data regarding the number of teachers who are removed, the reasons for which they are terminated, and the methods by which they are involuntarily separated. The prevailing belief seems to be that this type of information is so sensitive that school administrators will not disclose the data.

My recently completed doctoral dissertation focused on dismissal and the factors that influence the removal of unsuitable teachers. For this research, I was able to afford superintendents the level of confidentiality necessary to procure hard data about these sensitive issues. Thirty districts (approximately one-fourth of North Carolina's public school systems) were included in the random sample, which was stratified to include high-wealth and low-wealth districts, small and large districts, districts that attract large numbers of teacher applicants, and districts that do not.

The results of the research are instructive. This article describes the proportions of teachers being removed from classrooms, the variables that impact the involuntary separation of teachers, opinions regarding tenure, administrative competence, methods used to accomplish the removal of unsuitable teachers, and implications for policy and practice.

Influential Factors

For this study, the term "involuntary separation" denotes not only the dismissal of a teacher but also those instances in which teachers resigned or retired in lieu of dismissal.

Invariably, tenure is viewed as the predominant obstacle to the removal of ineffective teachers. However, tenure, albeit a potent factor, is only one of many variables influencing involuntary separations. The variables described in research literature can be grouped in four major categories: contextual variables, situational variables, employment status, and teacher characteristics.

Contextual variables are conditions that define the general environment in which public schools operate. Such variables represent influences external to the immediate school district environment and largely are beyond the district's control. Tenure is a powerful contextual variable. In addition to tenure statutes, the literature suggests that district wealth, district enrollment, and scarcity of teacher applicants are contextual variables that are related to the involuntary separation of unsuitable teachers.

Situational variables are internal to the school district and thug subject to greater district control and influence. The impact of these variables can vary significantly from district to district, and even within a given district. Such factors include administrative competence, the willingness of administrators to pursue unpleasant personnel actions, the intervention of teacher unions or professional association, and the intervention of boards of education.

Teacher employment status impacts the incidence of involuntary separation. The literature is replete with assertions that the likelihood of removal varies according to a teacher's status as interim, probationary, or tenured.

The reasons for such variation are not complex; the safeguards of procedural due process include dramatically as a teacher moves from one employment level to the next. Thus, removal at each successive level increases the burden of proof that falls upon the district.

Teacher characteristics I represent the final category of variables influencing the propensity to remove ineffective teachers. Subject-area certification is an example of such a characteristic. The present study found disproportionate rates of involuntary separation by race and gender, suggesting that these characteristics also may impact the incidence of involuntary separation.

The specific performance problems demonstrated by an individual teacher represent yet another teacher characteristic that can influence the likelihood of removal; cases involving certain performance problems--immorality, for example--are often easier to document and act upon than others.

Small Numbers

This research covered a three-year period from July 1989 through June 1992. During this time 170 probationary teachers (those in their first three years of teaching) were involuntarily separated in the 30 randomly selected districts in North Carolina. Forty career (tenured) teachers were involuntarily separated. The number of teachers employed in the 30 districts averaged 12,297 annually for the period investigated.

The research findings confirm what many suspect already--relatively few teachers are being separated for poor performance. The average annual proportion of teachers dismissed or persuaded to resign was 0.64 percent, less than 1 percent. This figure is consistent with the national data that can be inferred from a 1991 study by Sharon A. Bobbitt for the U.S. Department of Education that examined the reasons why public school teachers left their positions.

This study corroborated assertions in the literature that employment status affects the likelihood of teacher dismissal. Probationary teachers were removed at a much higher rate than tenured teachers. The involuntary-separation rate for probationary teachers was 2.7 percent, while the rate for tenured teachers was 0.15 percent, or 1 out of every 670 tenured teachers.

While probationary teachers made up 21 percent of the total teacher population in the sample districts, they accounted for 81 percent of the involuntary separations that occurred during the period studied. Conversely, tenured teachers, who made up 79 percent of the total teacher population, accounted for only 19 percent of the involuntary separations.

Tenure's Impact

What accounts for the difference in the proportions of probationary and tenured teachers who are removed? The short answer, in the minds of many school administrators, is tenure. Two major survey findings appear to support such an assumption.

One survey question asked superintendents to estimate the proportion of probationary and tenured teachers who should be involuntarily separated in their districts. Superintendents responded without prior knowledge that the actual proportion of involuntary separations was being calculated for each of their districts.

The proportion of probationary teachers who actually had been removed (2.7 percent) did not differ significantly from the proportion of probationary teachers whom superintendents believe are performing poorly in their districts (3.3 percent). In other words, these superintendents are removing about the number of probationary teachers they believe are not performing adequately.

On the other hand, the actual rate of involuntary separation for tenured teachers (0.15 percent) was significantly lower than the proportion of such teachers that superintendents believe should be separated for poor performance (4.1 percent). Thus superintendents are removing roughly 1 of every 27 tenured teachers they believe should be involuntarily separated.

A second finding in the study suggests an additional negative impact of tenure. The research assessed the relative proportions of those teachers involuntarily separated for classroom teaching versus problems unrelated to teaching itself.

A greater proportion of the probationary teachers was removed for classroom incompetence than the proportion of tenured teachers removed for the same reason. The primary explanation for this difference appears to be the greater burden of proof necessary to establish a case of classroom incompetence on the part of a tenured teacher. The dearth of statutory and legal guidance regarding behaviors that constitute ineffective or incompetent teaching further contributes to the difficulty of proving such cases.

Administrative Fitness

The differences in the proportions of involuntarily separated probationary and tenured teachers cited in the previous section might readily appear to be the result of tenure. It would be a mistake, however, to be overly critical of tenure without considering other issues.

For example, superintendents in the study rated fully one-third of the principals in their districts as being "below standard" in the skills of documenting teacher performance problems, providing performance counseling, and implementing dismissal procedures.

Aside from competence in these particular skill areas, other factors also contribute to administrative inertia in the removal of unsatisfactory teachers. For example, many administrators subscribe heavily to the myth that tenured teachers simply cannot be dismissed.

Others fall prey to concerns that their own competence is somehow made suspect by the negative atmosphere generated by the dismissal of a classroom teacher, irrespective of that individual's performance. Still others simply cannot deal effectively with their own aversion to criticizing the work of others or taking actions that so drastically affect the lives of subordinates.

Such shortcomings lend credence to the assertion of a Dade County, Fla., teachers association officer: Tenure doesn't protect incompetent teachers; incompetent administrators protect incompetent teachers." Obviously, improving administrator competence in the evaluation process has to be a primary focus of any efforts aimed at ensuring that poor teachers are removed from public school classrooms. Until such improvement occurs, overly harsh criticism of tenure will be, at least to a certain extent, unwarranted.

Other Variables

The study examined the impact of other variables on the removal of ineffective teachers. District wealth, as evidenced by local per-pupil expenditures, was not shown to be correlated with the proportions of involuntary separations.

Fiscal issues, however, were not totally irrelevant. The survey included the question, "How often do the costs of dismissing an unsuitable career teacher dissuade you from pursuing the dismissal of such a teacher?" The average response fell between "seldom" and "as often as not," suggesting that superintendents do, to a certain extent, factor such costs into decisions about dismissing poor teachers. An informal survey of area school law specialists placed the average pre-trial cost of dismissing a tenured teacher at $35,000.

The survey also examined the impact of intervention by professional associations. While a significant correlation was not found between superintendents' perceptions of such intervention and the proportion of involuntary separations, the respondents, in general, rated the intervention of professional associations between the responses more than necessary" and "much too often."

A similar examination of the influence of intervention by boards of education was conducted. In this case, a relationship, albeit moderate, was discovered. Although superintendents, for the most part, did not cite problems with board interference, in those instances when concerns relative to such intervention arose, the proportions of involuntarily separated tenured teacher tended to decline.

Separation Aftermath

This research examined the present employment status of the involuntarily separated teachers identified in the study. One in four had been rehired as a classroom teacher in another North Carolina school district. Data were not available to determine those who might have gained teaching employment in other states.

These findings should concern not only public school administrators but all public school stakeholder including teachers themselves Occasions do arise when an otherwise competent teacher and a particular district are simply a poor match for one another, but it is disturbing that school systems able to accomplish the removal of only a small portion of unsuitable teachers should then rehire 25 percent of those previously found ineffective elsewhere.

The research examined whether the opportunity to resign in one district increased the likelihood of a teacher regaining employment in another district. Interestingly, there was no significant difference in the reemployment rate for formally dismissed teachers and the rate for those who resigned in lieu of dismissal. Rather, most of those who regained teaching employment were teachers who are in high demand for one reason or another--for example, they held math, science, or exceptional children's certification.

Pragmatic Implications.

The issue of addressing the ineffective performance of what is (thankfully) a small minority of public school teachers has no simple solutions. One should not make too many assumptions on the basis of a single study.

However, the present research does offer some guidance to policy and practice:

* Administrators should communicate with legislators and promote identification and modification of components of tenure statutes that unnecessarily inhibit the removal of unsuitable teachers;

* Administrators should lobby for statutes that provide standards to define incompetent performance more clearly;

* Administrators should discourage legislative efforts to diminish discretion presently applicable to the nonrenewal of probationary teachers. Some states have increased the dueprocess provisions for such non-renewals--many states now require school boards to provide reasons for non-renewal and to provide hearings to those probationary teachers not recommended for renewal;

* Administrators should ensure that adequate attention is focused on district efforts to train principals and other supervisors for their roles in performance counseling, documentation of personnel problems, and implementation of dismissal procedures;

* Administrators should ensure that personal background checks for prospective classroom teachers are sufficient to prevent the re-employment of individuals whose work has been found unsatisfactory in other school districts;

* Administrators may need to pursue revisions to reduction-in-force policies to focus greater attention on performance and less on longevity;

* Administrators should work to strengthen communications with professional associations and teacher unions;

* Administrators should work with board members to clarify their respective roles in personnel policy and practice.

* Finally, administrators should take seriously and confidently their obligation to remove poor teachers. In spite of the sometimes exhaustive procedural requirements of tenure, professional review panels and the courts have consistently upheld well-documented, justifiable teacher-dismissal actions.

A Public Trust

As administrators direct their energies to such tasks, they will be fulfilling one of their most important, though difficult, public trusts. Without a doubt, the costs will be high in terms of time, stress, and dollars, but the failure to address the issue of teacher competence adequately will surely exact a higher toll in lost public confidence and, more importantly, in lost learning opportunities for the nation's children.

Mike Ward previously served as superintendent in Granville County N.C.

COPYRIGHT 1995 American Association of School Administrators
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group