Everyone agrees that we don’t want bad teachers educating our children. However, there is substantial disagreement as to how to ensure teacher quality.

In this post, I want to focus, not so much on the Vergara decision itself, but on the general idea of teacher tenure. There are pros and cons to tenure, but I want to take a more nuanced stance, for it seems to me that the debate about tenure ignores the larger issue.

Trust. That’s the real issue here.

One criticism of teacher tenure is that it protects bad teachers from being fired. No one wants to protect bad teachers, but there are just too many doubts in the teaching profession these days around job security – and, more specifically, fair employment decisions. Good teachers understand that bad teachers pull down the entire profession, but fear that any steps taken to get rid of their poor performing colleagues might be used against them as well.

In short, the fear is that there is a hidden agenda, that the real goal is not just to get rid of bad teachers, but rather to get rid of veteran teachers, good or bad.

Where does this fear come from, and how does it play into the desire for teacher tenure?

Teachers fear that personnel decisions will be made based on money rather than quality.

There is some legitimacy to this claim, though not with any malicious intent. I’ve witnessed first-hand school leaders discussing the merits of having two veteran teachers at $60,000 apiece versus three new teachers at $40,000 each. If you have $120,000 for staffing, what do you do? What is more important, quality or quantity, experience or class size? The question is a budgetary one, not one about teacher quality.

This is less of a concern at traditional district schools, although district policies can make this a factor. It’s much more of a concern, though, in autonomous schools. Don’t get me wrong – I’m all for school autonomy. But think about it for a second. A principal at a traditional school has positions to fill according to a staffing formula, but doesn’t necessarily have budget restrictions for those positions; if you need a math teacher, you get the best math teacher you can find, with salary not really an issue at the school level. However, a principal at a more autonomous school may get a budget and have the freedom to hire and program within that budget; here, quality is certainly important, but salary comes into play as well.

If principals are given budgets, as opposed to just staffing positions, then they may face the choice between one veteran or two new teachers, leading to the scenario described above. Whether or not that veteran teacher has tenure plays a huge role in a school leader’s ability to make that decision.

Teachers also fear that personnel decisions will be made based on personal relationships with school leaders rather than substantive quality. I’ve seen veteran teachers dismissed where age at least appeared to be a factor. This tactic is more common in schools with younger or insecure leaders with more authoritarian leadership styles. Veteran teachers, for example, will not often quietly accept poor working conditions, whereas those new to the workforce don’t know any better or don’t feel confident enough to speak up.

Finally, teachers fear losing their jobs for exposing their students to controversial subjects. At the elementary and secondary levels, the concern for academic freedom is not the same as it is at the undergraduate and graduate levels, but the increased political polarization in our nation does cause concern.

Do Science teachers have enough protections to teach evolution? Are Social Studies teachers protected enough to introduce kids to the ideas of historian Howard Zinn? Are English/Language Arts teacher safe to have their students read the likes of George Orwell, Alice Walker, John Steinbeck, and Toni Morrison?

In some places, likely not.

What should be done about teacher tenure? I’ll leave for another time. I have some thoughts on the issue, but it’s more important to take a step back and see the bigger picture. And the big picture is this: There’s just not enough trust in education today.

Good teachers want to get rid of bad teachers.

But too many teachers feel that, without the job security offered by tenure, even if they do a good job, they’ll end up losing this job for one of the reasons outlined above. Until we do something to ease this fear, talk about tenure reform is premature.

Legislators, state officials, and district leaders need to ramp up teacher engagement. Make sure that teacher voices are heard. Make sure that teachers feel valued and secure in their jobs. Make sure that good teachers know that you have their backs and that, if you’re successful with kids, your job is 100% guaranteed.

Only then will teachers be ready for tenure reform.

James Aycock is currently the Director of Scholar Support at Grizzlies Prep, an all-boys public charter middle school located in downtown Memphis. He previously served as the founding Special Education Coordinator with Tennessee’s Achievement School District, after several years as a special educator and baseball coach for Memphis City Schools. Contact him at [email protected].