Teacher tenure affects nation’s future

Terry E. Peele, Las Vegas

Friday, Feb. 18, 2011 | 2:03 a.m.

I have reread the book “Waiting for ‘Superman’: How We Can Save America’s Failing Public Schools” and have watched the subsequent movie. Both of them make a very important point: All children are capable of learning. If that is true, then why is public education in this country failing?

A high percentage of the blame falls at the feet of bad teachers. If that is the case, why can’t we just get rid of them? Both the book and the movie point to teachers unions and the institution of tenure.

While I agree that tenure makes it next to impossible to get rid of bad teachers, I wonder why the unions get all the blame. Every contract with a teachers union is negotiated. Negotiations require two sides, the unions and those representing the school district. Why did the unions determine tenure to be so necessary and the school districts willing to surrender to it?

Unions have the responsibility of protecting teachers’ jobs. Tenure makes that easier. School districts have a budget they must work with. Tenure places no burden on that budget. Neither position takes into consideration the effect tenure has on the ultimate goal: the education of our future.

This effect needs to be considered heavily in the next contract negotiations. And one more important matter: We the public need to grasp the fact that public education is extremely important to the future of this country and be willing to make the sacrifice necessary to support it.