My spouse teaches middle school and last year was a nightmare with one position in the department. The teacher left over the summer (most teachers that are leaving make it known in the spring after the get hired for a new position, giving the school the opportunity to replace), so they had a very short window to find a replacement. The person they got was not the best, but qualified. Unfortunately, that person quit early in the school year, and they were left scrambling again to find either a qualified permanent teacher replacement, or a qualified long-term sub. Neither one materialized and the studnets went through five different teachers (including my spouse for the final months of the year). The kids really suffered, and they offered a free mini summer school with the opportuntiy to retake the exam, so they could get the high school credit. Even in middle school, an incompetent teacher makes a difference.
I'm curious, though, OP, how you know that the teacher is incompetent. What examples do you have that brought you to this conclusion? Is there usualyl a high teacher turnover rate at the school? My spouse's school is "less desirable" and they have a difficult time keeping teachers for the long haul. Maybe your child's school is not rushing the process because they know it would be difficult for them to replace the teacher.
Anonymous wrote:This is exactly why teacher's unions are a bad thing. I can't believe people don't jump on this!!
Unions protect workers from unjust firing (among other things). Do you feel the same way about police unions? Fire fighter unions? Factory worker unions? While I agree it's important to be able to remove "incompetent" teachers, I'm not comfortable with the idea of an administrator having the power to immediately fire a teacher with no protocol in place. The teachers' union in question has negotiated a process for removing incompetent teachers, and from the OP's post, it looks like that process has already started.