Should school leaders dismiss low-performing teachers?

Administrators in some K-12 schools are hesitant to dismiss low performing teachers for several reasons.

Let’s Look at an Example Case: Why Tennessee Administrators are Hesitant to Dismiss Low Performing Teachers

Over the past twelve years, Tennessee has implemented educational reforms that include changes to its teacher evaluation system.

The new Tennessee teacher evaluation system includes a combination of classroom observation scores, ratings, and ongoing feedback between teachers and school leaders, and was designed to allow teachers and school leaders to have an ongoing dialogue about what happens in the classroom and how it impacts student performance.

Data from Tennessee evaluations shows that 42% to 44% of teachers are considered “low performing”— defined as a teacher who received an overall level of effectiveness rating of 1 (significantly below expectations) or 2 (below expectations) during a given year—and a majority (61% to 63%) of administrators kept low performing teachers on staff. These administrators cited their belief that deficient teachers would improve over time. About 87% indicated that they placed the low performing teacher on a plan for improvement.

The reluctance of school administrators to dismiss low performing teachers on the belief they will improve over time appears aligned with the objective of Tennessee’s teacher evaluation system, which focuses on a process for improving the quality of teaching. A 2018 TERA brief authored by Brown University faculty and others seems to corroborate this view, emphasizing that teacher development is not fixed but continues to develop throughout the educator’s career. There may be a wide range of other factors that weigh in on a school administrator’s staffing decisions. A 2020 Tennessee Department of Education report on teacher retention notes that frequent turnover upsets collaboration, stability, relational trust, and institutional knowledge. In addition, the department estimates that the financial cost of replacing a teacher can be as high as $20,000 for urban districts, thus “putting extra strain on districts with limited resources who must absorb the cost of teacher attrition.”

But, Low Performing Teachers Have a Profound Effect on Student Outcomes

While school administrators are to be commended for helping low-performing teachers improve and providing a supportive work environment, the process of remedying performance deficiencies takes time. Until performance improves, it is the students who are most affected. Those students do not receive instruction of the same quality as their peers taught by high-performing teachers. The negative consequences of this disparity can be significant and may result in learning loss that harms long-term academic growth. In addition, high-performing teachers may come to resent a colleague whose performance is subpar and view them as not carrying their weight. This could disrupt team camaraderie and damage teacher collaboration on curricula, pedagogical methods, and other matters critical to ensuring that student needs are met, and desired outcomes are achieved.

So, Should School Leaders Dismiss Low-Performing Teachers?

These are tough decisions for school leaders and must be made with care.

For more information about why school administrators retain low-performing teachers, read this article co-authored by Mason Assistant Professor Seth B. Hunter.

The Education Leadership program in Mason’s School of Education offers graduate study focusing on K-12 school and teacher effectiveness, school leadership, and other educational policy issues. We invite you to explore our degree offerings.