Firing Teachers is not the Answer

The firing of all of the teachers Central Falls High School in Rhode Island has really upset me. It bothers me a great deal because I think it is a sham. The stated reason for the firing was that the teachers wouldn’t spend more time with students without being compensated for the time.

Would more time doing the same thing the teachers are currently doing make a difference in student achievement? I don’t think it would. I agree some teachers should be fired. Perhaps the personnel director who hired the teachers and oversaw their evaluations should be fired. If the superintendent has been employed more than three or four years, perhaps he or she should be fired.

Firing the entire teaching staff is not an acceptable action. This problem has gone on for some time and no one has provided the leadership for the school staff to improve the school. The superintendent should be ashamed of himself for his lack of leadership. The community has to take a hard look at the system to see what has been done to provide training and support for the teachers to improve. What changes in scheduling, class size, discipline, curriculum and instructional strategies have been implemented? What leadership has the superintendent provided to help the students?

In my mind the firing is a ploy to force the teachers to comply with the administration’s wishes for a longer school day. However, as I said earlier, more time using the same instructional strategies will produce little or no improvement. It looks bold, makes the news, and accomplishes nothing.

I recently had the pleasure to visit a middle school with an 80% free and reduced lunch rate. 80% means that the student population is economically poor. Typically, students in a school with an 80% free and reduced lunch count would be underachievers.

When the new principal took over the school she realized that significant changes needed to be made to improve student achievement. The students were spending as much time in PE, art, and music and they were spending in mathematics, reading and English. She increased the class time for the academic areas by 50%. At the same time she knew that more instructional time alone would not solve the problem.

The principal decided that one third (30 minutes of a 90 minute period) would need to be spent in small group learning activities. The activities would be based on the needs of individual students and allow the teacher to work with small groups of students to improve learning. I had the opportunity to visit a math class to see the changes in action. This is what I observed:

• A group of four or five students working independently on a set of problems. This might have been homework, but when they got stuck they could seek help from other students and/or the teacher.
• The teacher working with a small group on a math concept.
• A group of students working a computer based math instruction.
• A student leading a group of students in a math challenge problem. The problem was one from a chapter they were going to study in a month. The group was working together to see if they could figure out how to do the problem.

The principal also knew that smaller class sizes were important. So she used her Title funds to hire additional teachers and reduce class size in the academic classes. Her students were achieving as well as the other students in the school and state. The principal encouraged teachers who didn’t want to work in this environment to transfer out of her building.

That principal demonstrated leadership and vision. What bothers me about Rhode Island is their lack of vision and leadership. The leaders in Central Falls made headlines. They did not improve education.  It is a sad day for education.