Tweet

() Comments

Report

Sorry I missread your post. Clearly we are on the same
page. Maybe my district was in violation. It is believed
there that they can string people along indefinitely regarding
tenure. I think it's awful but who is going to blow the
whistle?!

On 4/19/16, depends, back to Retiree wrote:
> I'm in California as well. I'm not sure why you say the
> info I posted is "not correct." What you've written
> doesn't contradict what I wrote as far as I can see (as
> long as the person you know who was not awarded
permanent
> status after five years falls into one of the three
> categories I described, which I'm guessing they do - if
> they don't then the district was not following the law).
>
> Regarding the number of years, you and I have said the
> same thing. Your "Instead of it being three years for
> tenure year, it's only two years" and my "teachers [with
> the three exceptions] earn permanent status on the first
> day of their third year" are two different ways to say the
> same thing. Two years of probationary status, and then
> permanent status (or "tenure") earned on the first day of
> the third year.
>
> Yes, it used to be longer and yes, when the probationary
> period was shortened some rights were given up in
> exchange. I do not like the current system any more than
> you do, but it is what it is. In other words I basically
> agree with what you've written so I'm not sure why you
say
> the info I posted is "ideal" and "not correct". The system
> is far from perfect but it is, at least, well-defined.
>
>
>
> On 4/18/16, Retiree wrote:
>>
>> It would be nice and ideal if the info. below was correct
>> but
> sadly it
>> isn't. CTA gave up tenure rights along time ago. Instead
>> of it being three years for tenure year, it's only two
>> years. Well
> with it,
>> a non tenured fully credentialed, fully qualified teacher
>> can
> be let
>> go and they DO NOT have to state a reason other than,
>> "You
> will not
>> be back next year." Prior to the two year tenure, help
>> was
> provided
>> for struggling teachers and if they still didn't succeed
>> they
> could let
>> them go. This is absolutely correct and was explained by
>> a CTA attorney. It would be great if the purpose was
>> weeding out
> failing
>> teachers alone. However, if a political hack is waiting
>> in the
> wings
>> for a position, they may get the job. Nice huh??? I think
>> the
> old
>> three year tenure system was far better, but I'm an oldie
>> and
> there
>> are lots of things I liked better in the past. I do know
>> someone who was strung along for about five years
> and
>> still not rewarded tenure. Yes, they CAN DO that!! Fair,
>> no,
> but it
>> happens. So glad I taught when I did and got out when I
>> did. I never
> had any
>> problems but if I would have help would have been nice.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All fully-credentialed California teachers working in
>>> regularly-funded, non-temporary positions in public
>>> schools earn permanent status on the first day of their
>>> third year. If they do not it is because of one of the
>>> following specific circumstances:
>>>
>>> (a) the teacher is on a temporary contract or is working
>>> in a categorically-funded position and has never worked
>>> in a regularly-funded non-temporary position;
>>>
>>> (b) the teacher is not fully credentialed (i.e., has an
>>> emergency credential or substitute permit in place of a
>>> preliminary credential or clear credential);
>>>
>>> (c) the teacher works in a private school, since private
>>> schools set their own rules regarding certification and
>>> employment status.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/05/16, Concerned employee wrote:
>>>>> After working for a school district for four years
>>>>> could a
>>>> school district hire a
>>>>> teacher back the fifth year but not give the teacher
>>>> tenure?

Posts on this thread, including this one