As CPS prepares to close a record number of schools, the fate of students and communities is in question.
Join the conversation
We encourage our readers to leave comments and engage in dialogue about our stories. But before you do, please check out our "rules of the road."
Current Issue
Teachers, principals should work together on faculty hiring
Right now, our city’s teachers and central office administration are at an impasse. Much has been made in the media and in conversations on the picket line that this strike is about power and respect. The sticking point seems to be who decides who teaches our children, with the Board of Education demanding unilateral autonomy for principals linked to accountability and the union refusing to accept nothing less than full job protection for all of their tenured workers city-wide.
As a school principal, I can’t help but think that both sides are missing the point. They are so focused on who gets the power to say who is in the classroom with our kids, that neither side has demonstrated, at least publicly, an aptitude for developing creative and cooperative solutions to the competing needs. All they can see is the product, when true compromise and collaboration can be found in the design of the process.
It has been my privilege to work with and lead some of the most talented educators in the city of Chicago for the past two years as principal of a Chicago public school. I trust these teachers. I trust them with the success of the neighborhood’s children, with my career, and in a few years with my son’s education.
As principal, I trust them above all with the ability to select, in partnership with me, who joins our faculty. Teachers do not want to prop up colleagues who cannot contribute. That is not to say that they don't often do so out of care for their children, but ultimately they desire colleagues who stimulate their thinking and share ideas. They don’t want to get kids that they have to catch up or send them to teachers who they know will next year lose the ground gained so far. That is why the most successful and strongest teachers are hired in a collaborative process that has teachers and school administrators sharing the leadership of selecting faculty. Great faculties are built by teachers and principals sharing the responsibility of interviewing and hiring.
Perhaps there is compromise, as well as better opportunities for students, if both the CTU and the board can worry a little less about who the end candidate is at each school or who is available to select from, and work together to design a process that gives teachers and administrations (and hopefully one day students) a voice in who facilitates each classroom.
Instead of fighting for a displaced teacher pool and hiring rights when displaced, what if the union fought for rights for their teachers on staff to be part of the hiring process? What if the board fought for processes that envision and create schools as teams of people working together for kids instead of enshrining autonomous rights for principals who can be blamed for failure or knighted for success? I believe agreement could be found there.
With my faculty, I have hired five displaced Chicago Public Schools teachers because we all agreed after seeing them teach that they were the best candidates. We were proven right. So far, only once have we been forced to hire from a pool of displaced teachers with only three candidates. In that case, not one teacher or I considered the candidates qualified or able to teach our children. If the teachers in the building cannot envision working with the person, why should teachers and principals be forced to hire them? More importantly, why should we be forced to subject our children to them?
Perhaps it is time that the two organizations stop paying lip-service to their respect and trust in teachers and cooperatively demonstrate that trust for teachers and leaders at a local school level by building a process rooted in the power and potential of teamwork.
Adam Parrott-Sheffer is principal at Peterson Elementary in North Park.



Absolutely!
I agree with Mr. Parrott-Sheffer 100%! I have both been interviewed and hired as part of a hiring committee and served on a hiring committee with colleagues and my principal; both experiences were enriching, enlightening and ultimately ended in great hiring decisions. Hiring committees also give staff another chance to collaborate as a team and to continue having rich and thoughtful discussions about our vision for the school. Many of us have talked about this model this week as we have been picketing; frankly, it's hard to believe this isn't the solution that has already been decided! Pay teachers their hourly wage to be on this committee, much like an ILT.
YES!
Finally something that makes sense!
what do principals know
What do principals know about subjects outside of their own? How could they possibly assess the capability of the candidates? It does seem that Chicago schools are somewhat isolated from each other. If principals have this much authority, why does CPS need so many administrators?
you don't have to be a
you don't have to be a content expert on every single subject in a school to hire a good teacher.. there are certain foundational practices that all good teachers have that a principal would look for. I would argue there are far too many "content" experts that fail to actually transfer knowledge to students
What points are commenters 3
What points are commenters 3 & 4 addressing? They seem unrelated to the column; no where does he bring up isolation or content area.
True-CPS does not need so many administrators--one chief has
clerks to spy on the principals. Give principals independance--let them lead. Put all that money from the areas and let the schools use it to do what they need to do. BOE does not want this. Why?
Principal Hiriing
I agree with what he is saying...but I am getting tired of political and quasi-nepotism hiring of friends and area principals’ relatives! I probably can accept the want the best candidates...but hiring politically is often the norm!
hiring laid off senior teachers
Principal Parrott-Sheffer presents what appears to be a common sense solution to the current impasse over a section of the contract titled "Tenured Teacher Layoff and Recall," in the CPS draft proposal posted by Catalyst just yesterday. Unfortunately the principal's proposal is outside the apparent framework of the underlying goals of the Chicago Public Schools in relation to this section of the contract and that is saving money on a system wide basis. In fact in its budgeting process CPS uses analytics that presume that senior teachers who are more expensive will be replaced by younger teachers who are less expensive. This is actually called the vacancy factor and is used by CPS to adjust its projected costs. While, it is more than rational to assume young teachers will take the place of older teachers as they retire the metrics CPS uses goes beyond projected retirements and into the realm of school closures.
While I have no doubt that there are many honorable principals like Mr. Parrott-Sheffer who will hire senior teachers who are a good fit with their school and whose ratings have been deemed satisfactory, there are apparently many principals who avoid these teachers like the plague. Currently CPS is faced with several age discrimination suits over exactly this issue and one such case involves a certified special education teacher with good ratings, and who was actively involved in the Illinois Council for Exceptional Children. The open position that this particular teacher sought sat unfilled for a full school year.
The CTU must represent all of its members including teachers in their late 40s and 50s who may have been the subject of age discrimination. Any solution to the current impasse must include an affirmative component that addresses the discrimination these laid off teachers may have faced. Unfortunately Mr. Parrott-Sheffer's solution does not address this aspect of the current impasse. I am hopeful CPS and the CTU will reach agreement on this most critical issue.
Rod Estvan
It also does not mention per pupil funding, which will encourage
motivate or force principals to hire younger or newer teachers.
Sickened to the stomach
i'm really tired of inexperienced, politically minded, dishonest, hypocrites who SAY one thing and DO another. Thank God there is a higher power out there who is higher than all of us and will do justice one day.
To address some of the previous comments...
Nepotism- would not exist if the decisions were made by a committee & not by the principal alone. A committee was what Mr. Parrott-Sheffer suggested.
What do principals know- actually quite a bit. Statistics show % of Principals were previously teachers. Good principals also sit in on classes & see a teacher's performance first-hand. They also hear from parents, students, & other teachers about teacher's performances. I think they take all of these factors into consideration & are more than qualified to assess teachers as part of a hiring committee.
Senior vs. young teachers- hiring teachers should be based on ability alone & have nothing to do with age. If you were hiring someone to personally work for you, wouldn't you want the person with the best ability; factoring-in the advantages of experience & the advantages of young new ideas?
Principal Visits
I feel that many principal visits are meant for evaluation ONLY. I have hardly ever had a principal come in and help me with a group of kids, or give me an idea for homework. Every visit is a "gotcha" so many times. Yes they need to evaluate...but they need to lead by example and rememember when they were teachers....
Add your comment