Should we require a 3 year stay?

I was recently talking to an administrator friend of mine who works at a school where the majority of staff are new teachers who are required to stay 3 years before transferring. We were discussing the school climate and turn over after teacher's 3 year requirement is filled. It has been her experience that teachers who want to leave are not as effective as those who are invested, and in fact, their presence can cause a contagious downward spiral of morale. I'm unsure if the "3 year rule" is state wide or just common practice but I do know that both DeKalb and Gwinnett follow such guidelines for new and transferring teachers.
My question is this- why do we require teachers to remain in a school for 3 years and how does this impact school climate? I understand that low performing schools typically do not attract as many educators as those which are higher performing however, do we really want teachers at schools who don't want to be there? Doesn't this, in a way, hinder growth of a culture when people are forced to remain? Moreover, how do leaders shift climate when they have staff who wish to be elsewhere but cannot due to county policy? We know that leaders of low performing schools already struggle with many factors, why compound this with staff? I'm not sure what the solution is but there has got to be a better way to attract and retain staff at underperforming schools other than forcing them to stay for a period of time.
What are your thoughts? Have you taught in a school where teachers wanted to leave but couldn't due to the transfer rules? If so, how did this impact your school climate and student achievement? How did your administration respond?

Comments

  1. UnknownJune 27, 2017 at 7:28 PM

    I agree that making someone stay can damage the climate of a school. This is also part of a contract they agreed to sign. I understand new teachers just want to get their foot in the door so they take any job they can get. They struggle through the first year and then they want to leave.

    I would find it extremely difficult, as a leader, to support an employee who wishes to be elsewhere. Staffing a school appropriately is a difficult task in itself. Lower-performing schools already struggle and having a constant carousel of teachers might make things worse. The logic behind the rule could possibly be time. It takes time to get comfortable in a classroom. Giving them a three year window to grow as a teacher might be what it takes to gain confidence and make improvements to succeed in the current environment.

    Just some thoughts! There are pros and cons on both sides of this argument.
    Thanks!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is it Safe to Stop Worrying about DeVos?

I'm not sure how many share the sentiment, but when Betsy DeVos was actually came into office I was #shook. Her inexperience, and comfort in her own ignorance made me think she would push to enforce an oversimplified, impractical, and hopelessly romantic one-step solution to the numerous, deep-rooted, and complex issues facing our educational system today. Luckily, it's looking like she might be all talk. Ideally, the Secretary of Education should improve the educational world for our teachers and students, at least a little. Not moving at all may be better than taking to many steps in the wrong direction, however. It has been six months, and Devos is still struggling to become fully staffed and slow to implement her school choice initiative. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2017/07/25/what-has-betsy-devos-actually-done-after.html We'll continue to keep an eye out.
Read more

Afghan Robotics Team Makes it to the States

One of the results of president Trump's travel ban was the exclusion of an all girl robotics team from having the opportunity to compete in the United States. Although I understand the intention of the ban was to keep everyone safe, I am one of the many who believe in providing everyone with an opportunity to seek a better life, and especially a better education. This was a classic example of how the ban limits many with good intentions. While it may be safer to say no one can come to the United States, the overwhelming majority of people who will suffer are those seeking a better life, an opportunity, and education. I considered how hard these girls had worked, and what sacrifices they had to make to qualify for an international competition. It is a shame that so little discrecion or care was used in crafting the ban. Fortunately, these girls were able to come after getting their visas rejected twice and the "international outcry" that resulted from the injustice. ...
Read more

What Georgia Educators are Facing

Being an educator in Georgia is no easy feat. The Georgia Partnership for Education came up with 10 problems that the field of education is facing in Georgia. Of the issues specific to Georgia some stood out to me. Georgia has seen a trend of more and more teachers leaving the profession, and less and less teachers interested in joining the field of education. Districts have also been given more responsibility, and the demand for quality leadership has increased. Our high school graduates have not been soundly prepared for college (based on incompletion rates) and are ill-prepared for the workforce. Students in impoverished areas receive $1,200 less per student. Georgia also has about 10% of students with mental health issues that directly affect their school performance. http://www.ajc.com/news/local-education/georgia-top-education-issues-2017/EUiJGHsurmxSYeNuowylpK/ In my experience as a Georgia educator, I feel these are genuine concerns. Many of the problems that our school f...
Read more