A Bad TeacherEveryone knows at least one bad teacher. Everyone knows that you can't fire bad teachers. Right?
Actually, it's relatively easy to fire a bad teacher in Utah. Utah law authorizes school districts to fire provisional teachers for any reason or no reason during their first three years of employment. After that, even career teachers can be fired for good cause. Because Utah law gives local boards of education considerable authority to operate the school district, it's far too easy for local boards of education to fire even good teachers.
Why does UEA defend teachers who some consider to be bad?
First, our system of government requires for career teachers that some reason be given before the teacher can be fired. The teacher has a right to minimal due process to contest the decision. Minimal due process means that the teacher know the reason for the proposed termination, the teacher has an opportunity to have the issue heard by a reasonably unbiased decision-maker, to have the evidence supporting the decision presented in his/her presence, an opportunity to examine the witnesses and evidence, and to present his/her side of the case. Every teacher — even bad ones — is entitled to elementary due process. That's the difference between our form of government and those who believe the government's decision cannot be challenged. Their motto, taken from early, but now discredited English law was, "The King can do no wrong." There are those who want to return to this standard — except when they are the accused. Due process is a constitutionally guaranteed right.
Second, a good many teachers are not guilty of the offenses charged. About one-third of those accused by students of physical improper conduct are innocent. The student simply made up the charge. Due process often proves the teacher innocent. That's a very good reason for providing due process.
Third, too often a parent complains that a particular teacher is a "bad teacher." When closely examined, the parent really means that the teacher gave his/her child a "C" or lower. Sometimes the "bad teacher" is one who simply follows the rules and applies them consistently to all students. These teachers often find themselves at odds with the community leaders when the rules are applied to the community leader's children.
Then there's the athlete. The team's star athlete fails a class. Woe be unto the teacher who fails to take into account the school's athletic program when completing semester grades. This teacher, too, can suddenly find him/herself in the ranks of the "bad teacher."
Finally, there's the personality conflict. The fact is that some people's personalities don't mesh. A perfectly good teacher, even a paragon of exemplary teaching, can find him/herself at odds with a new building administrator. All of a sudden, the teacher's evaluations slip, dip, even become unacceptable. This sometimes occurs because the teacher disagreed in public or a faculty meeting with the administrator. Given that the good teacher is still good, and the administrator was given that position because he is qualified, neither the administrator nor the teacher has become bad. They simply don't get along. Rather than losing a good teacher or administrator, the solution is to separate the two and allow both to succeed. Due process permits the hearing panel to recognize that the problem is not that of a "bad teacher," but rather a personality conflict, which can be resolved through mediation, reconciliation, or a change of assignments.
These are some of the reasons for providing due process and defending so-called "bad teachers." As for teachers who really don't belong in the classroom, follow the procedures set forth in the law. It's relatively easy to fire them as long as the administrator is honest, follows the rules of the district, and has "real" as opposed to contrived evidence to support his or her recommendation.