With the unexpected wave of retirements, the NYC public school system had to hire 6,000 new teachers. You would think that many schools would be thrilled to replace their retiring teachers with experienced teachers since it would not significantly affect their budget. Guess again, the schools, rather than during what's best for their students, instead saw an opportunity to hire novice teachers and in some cases getting two for the salary of the retiring teacher. Meaning quantity over quality at the expense of the academic outcomes of the school's students. In other cases the principals reduced their staff salaries and used the additional funds for their own pet projects.
Unfortunately, the NYCDOE is famous for its "education on the cheap"policies when it comes to funding schools and the classrooms. To ensure that schools suffer from tight budgetary constraints, the DOE imposed the "fair student funding"formula on them that forces principals to hire the "cheapest and not the best teachers"for their students. Is it any wonder that student academic achievement has shown little or no gains and the racial/income achievement gap is as wide as ever?
Novice teachers suffer from a steep learning curve, in acquiring effective teaching techniques, fully understanding the curriculum, developing classroom management skills, and staying power as 50% of the "newbies" leave the classroom within five years and 80% leave the school they started in. What a waste of money in training and time when only 20% of the "newbies" will be in the school by the time they get tenure and are considered "quality teachers". Moreover, how unfair is it to subject the students as guinea pigs to untested teachers who may or may not even last the school year?
Too bad the mass media choices to ignore the DOE's "education on the cheap"policies that hurt student academic achievement but loves to demonize the teaching profession, especially ATRs.