This paper addresses two interconnected issues in educational administration. The first section analyzes a curriculum conflict between a traditional teacher resistant to change and a reform-minded colleague who believes students are underperforming relative to their potential, proposing a structured board review as the fairest resolution. The second section examines a sixth-grade teacher's tenure review, arguing that average or mediocre performance — even when technically positive — should not automatically qualify a teacher for continued tenure. Drawing on Boyer's (1990) four concepts of scholarship, the paper contends that truly effective teachers must stimulate, challenge, and inspire students, and that the American school system suffers when tenure processes fail to distinguish the exceptional from the merely adequate.
The conflict between Mrs. Vei and Mrs. New is essentially a new versus old school issue. Mrs. Vei is a traditional teacher who wants to follow established structure, does not believe in innovation in educational instruction, and is guided by the principle that "if it isn't broken, it doesn't need to be fixed." Mrs. New, on the other hand, believes in just the opposite. She wants to change the curriculum to help children reach their full potential, arguing that students with such favorable demographics should be performing at the 90th percentile rather than the 76th.
The best solution to this conflict would be to call a meeting with school superiors, present a plan for curriculum review, and explore how change might be introduced. Since Mrs. New has dealt with a much tougher school environment and was still able to achieve a 73rd percentile outcome, it demonstrates that she understands what she is talking about. She has experience helping students reach their full potential, and her plan for change is therefore worth serious consideration.
Because Mrs. Vei has more experience, however, she believes that her style of instruction does not need to be corrected. The best resolution would be to present both plans to the school board and allow them to make a final decision. Mrs. New should prepare a written plan describing why she wants to see a change, what changes she wants to introduce, and how those changes might affect instructional style and overall academic performance. Mrs. Vei should similarly prepare a written document explaining why she believes the current system should remain unchanged. In light of each teacher's experience with different student demographics and the results each has achieved, the school board would then be in the best position to decide what course of action is most appropriate.
Mrs. New's document should focus on the following aspects of her plan:
a. Her experience with at-risk students and the academic success she has been able to achieve with them.
b. Research literature demonstrating that students with better demographics are more likely to succeed, establishing that a 76th percentile outcome is significantly lower than what can realistically be achieved.
c. The specific changes she wants to introduce in the curriculum and instructional method.
d. Her experience with various instructional styles, supported by concrete examples of what her teaching methods have achieved.
e. Why she believes her plan would work and bring out the best in each student.
f. How she plans to make the curriculum more challenging and stimulating for students.
A document addressing all of these points should be submitted for board review. The decision should then rest with the board, whose members can assess whether the school is under-challenging its students and whether the curriculum and instructional methods need to be revamped.
Tenure review is a serious responsibility. While tenure protects qualified teachers against teaching fads and fleeting trends, it can also overprotect those who are not truly worthy of remaining in the profession. Some teachers could be let go much more readily were it not for lenient tenure review processes that allow them to stay despite an obvious lack of teaching ability.
For this reason, tenure reviews must be conducted with rigor and care to determine whether a teacher genuinely merits continued employment. After careful study of the report in question, it is my assessment that this sixth-grade teacher should not be granted a second tenure for the reasons outlined below.
"Boyer's framework applied to mediocre performance"
Mediocre teachers can be found everywhere, but if we truly care about the growth of our children, we need to provide them with the very best the teaching profession has to offer. The very best teachers are those who go beyond the ordinary and create genuinely challenging and stimulating environments for their students — those who push students to achieve and do more than they thought possible.
It is precisely because we conduct teacher evaluations without sufficient rigor that the American school system has come to seriously lack quality and struggles to compete with other developed nations. Building a more capable and competitive nation begins while children are still in school. We therefore need to hire more qualified, more dedicated, and more outstanding teachers, and we must stop extending second chances to those who have demonstrated only mediocrity.
Joseph C. Morreale. "Post-tenure Review: Evaluating Teaching." In Changing Practices in Evaluating Teaching: A Practical Guide to Improved Faculty Performance and Promotion/Tenure Decisions, Peter Seldin and Associates. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing, Inc., 1999.
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.