Firing a teacher?

Question

Do you think that a teacher should be fired because about 20% of her students are failing?

Answer 1

It depends on if the students are actually trying. Because if she's like, no teaching them anything and giving them quizzes on stuff she never taught them or something like that, then yeah. But if the students just don't care and aren't even giving any effort, that's not the teacher's fault.

Answer 2

What is the composition of the class? What percentage of the class is special education (if any). I would investigate the records of the 20% to see if they are chronic poor performers. If they were doing well in their previous classes and this year they began to fail, you could possibly say the teacher may have had an impact, more than likely the students will have a track record of poor performance. It is highly unlikely that a student who has been doing well for years will suddenly begin to fail without any tell tale signs that it is the teacher (sudden dislike of school, defiant behavior etc.). So to make a long story short, a teacher should not be fired soley based upon failing test scores.

Answer 3

In all truthfullness, 20% failure rate is quite low in most school systems.
If you are a part of the 80% of the class that is passing, congradulations.


If you are a part of the 20% that are not passing, please get some extra help or a tutor and work harder.

There are a great deal more poor students than incompetent teachers, and the school systems do require that teachers are tested and observed in order to be presenting classwork in the best way possible for the students.

I hope that you are doing well in your classes and are just not whining on here because you do not want to do the work.

Have a good night.

Answer 4

20%? That's nothing. It is not uncommon for me to have 30% failing in a "regular" level class (rates are much lower in honors). Unless the failures are purely arbitrary and the teacher has no documentation WHATSOEVER to support the reason for the failures, 20% failure rate is nowhere NEAR grounds for dismissal.

Now if the teacher is not yet under more than a one-year contract, a principal who disagrees with the teacher's standards and grading approach might not invite him/her back the next year, but the percentage alone should mean nothing if the teacher has valid numbers to reflect the reasons for the failures. If the teacher has contacted parents and warned students in time to change the failures, then he/she is doubly covered.

Answer 5

Not just for that reason--
perhaps the students don't have a good background-
perhaps the students are in the wrong class
For a teacher to be fired, there has to be a large amount of evidence that is derogatory and proves the teacher is incompetent or immoral.

Answer 6

Depends. Is she writing the exams they are failing, or are they failing state exams? If she's writing them, maybe she's expecting too much. If they are state exams, she's not preparing them well. But it also depends on the students. Could another teacher do better with them? Have the same students passed the state exams in the past, or are they not capable of it?

Answer 7

no! sometimes kids don't get it but it doesn't mean she is a bad teacher. Maybe you should observe her and see if her teaching skills are the problem. Maybe those 20% of her students need to be in easier classes.

Answer 8

No, just means the teacher can teach or the student suck. My school is pretty good , its blue ribbon it called Bravo Med. Mag H.S. and in my A.P. Bio class half the class is failing 50% it mostly becasue we slack off and do our work.

Answer 9

No, but principal intervention should be used. Why isn't some of this the students' fault?