2 teachers out of 50

This is exactly what I'm seeing:

Of a staff of more than 50, only one other teacher and I have more than 10 years experience, and I'm the only one with much expertise in instructional issues. There is definitely a generation gap in knowledge and skills, no fault of the newer folks. Most had no preparation at all in curriculum, behavior management, instructional design, teaching skills etc. Lots of philosophy instead. I don't dare contemplate what things will look like in another 10-15 years.

My district is hemorrhaging experienced teachers.

In their place we hire novices. More than half of our new hires have never taught; the rest have fewer than 5 years' experience. The administration's stated intention, with all new hires, is to grant tenure. A great deal of time and energy are devoted to mentoring and supporting new teachers who are struggling.

My district has, in the past, refused even to interview experienced math teachers. One person denied an interview was qualified to teach math and physics. He had glowing recommendations. Another experienced NY teacher was told that if he taught here he would have to take a pay cut to the salary of a 5th year teacher. He has retired from the public schools and is now teaching in a private school.

I wonder whether this qualifies as a form of age discrimination? Someone asked the Board about the average age of new hires; the answer was, "We're not allowed to ask age." Wouldn't a policy of interviewing only novices be a problem in terms of age discrimination?

I suppose not. We do interview and hire career changers.


10-year rule

I should add that we've had some terrific young teachers. It's not the case that a young teacher can't be good. She can. (Mostly, these days, it's "she.")

It is the case that he or she isn't as good today as he or she is going to be.


The Why Chromosome
Practice Makes Perfect (the 10-year rule)