I heard a story on the radio today and decided to look it up online for some more details. Here's the scoop according to ABCNews:
The school board has decided to fire all 74 teachers at Central Falls High School in Rhode Island. Here's some stats on the school:
- about 800 students
- only 48% graduate in 4 years
- 96% are eligible for free or reduced-fee lunches
- 65% Hispanic, 14% Black, 13% White
- 25% receive English as a second language instruction
- Secondary teacher's in Rhode Island are paid on average $60,000, the national average is $50,000
The school is considered chronically underperforming by the state and the superintendent had a choice among four federally guided models to choose for the high school in an effort to improve. The choice was one that would lengthen the school day by 25 minutes, require teachers to receive additional training during the summer, eat lunch with the students once a week, provide more tutoring to students, and submit to more rigorous evaluations. The plan would pay the teacher's $30/hr for the extra time. The teacher's wanted to be paid $90/hr for the extra time so they rejected the proposal. The superintendent then recommended a "turnaround" model which means firing all the teachers and restricting the school to hiring back no more than 50% of the ones fired.
So what do you think? Is this the right course of action given the circumstances? Do you have an alternative solution that might be helpful?
Here's a few comments from teachers at the school that I heard on the news report, I've included my responses to these people in green. I don't mean to be too insensitive but I feel the need to write responses. You are welcome to respond if you want to.
"I've been at Central Falls for 28 years and I have done nothing to deserve to be fired, I give my heart, my soul to my job" - Consistently not producing the results that are demanded is a reason people get fired all the time. If you truly are giving your heart and soul to the job and you still aren't getting good results then you are not a good fit in that job.
"I'm heartbroken, I would do anything for this school system, I've done everything I can" - You would not do anything for the school because you rejected the plan to put in a little bit more time to try and improve.
"I'm disheartened, I feel like after 20 years I can see some progress beginning to be made and I'm sad that we're not gonna be around to follow that through, to push that forward." - 20 years! 20 years and you are just starting to see some progress. I'm sorry but no one gets a period of 20 years to turn around job performance.
Speaking strictly about this situation I think it is reasonable to fire the teachers. Obviously they are considered responsible for the school's graduation rate and it is not at an acceptable level. If you don't perform at the expected level you get fired, that seems in accordance with most workplaces. They were offered a different solution and said no, so I think the superintendent doesn't really have another choice. Honestly, I probably wouldn't have offered to pay them for the extra time, I thought the extra $30/hr was a generous offer.
I'm curious if this will re-ignite the tough questions that surround our education system. Like, should we have stricter evaluations of our teachers, and if so how do we do it? Should we make the extra efforts to educate students that don't speak English? Should we keep pouring effort into kids that aren't willing to try in school? Should schools be privatized or remain public but be managed by charter school type companies? Should teacher's go through more rigorous training to prepare them for the challenges they are going to face? Do we need longer school days?
The list goes on and on. It seems like it is easier to just ignore these questions and keep trying with things as they are. But I'm not sure that's the best thing for us to do.
Sorry for the lengthy post, hopefully it wasn't too dull. Feel free to comment, I'm curious about your thoughts on this stuff.