# data[].attributes.body
According to Waiting for “Superman” and related research, tenure protections and rigid union rules make it extremely difficult and costly to remove ineffective teachers, even when their poor performance is well-documented. As a result, many ineffective teachers remain in classrooms for years, often being reassigned rather than dismissed. This disproportionately harms students in low-income communities, where struggling schools are more likely to retain these teachers due to limited resources and administrative capacity, leading to lower academic achievement, reduced student engagement, and perpetuation of educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Waiting for “Superman” and related research, tenure protections and strict union rules have, in some cases, made it difficult to remove ineffective teachers from classrooms. Once tenure is granted—often after just a few years—it provides strong job security, but it also creates lengthy, complex, and costly procedures for dismissing underperforming educators. Union-negotiated contracts may require multiple rounds of documentation, appeals, and hearings before a teacher can be let go, which discourages administrators from pursuing dismissal even when teaching quality is consistently poor.

In low-income communities, where schools often struggle to attract and retain high-performing teachers, these protections can have an especially harmful impact. When ineffective teachers remain in classrooms, students may receive lower-quality instruction, leading to weaker academic performance, reduced engagement, and diminished opportunities for advancement. Over time, this contributes to an achievement gap, as students in better-resourced schools are more likely to have access to effective educators, while students in disadvantaged areas face a cycle of underachievement reinforced by a lack of accountability in teacher performance.

Ultimately, while tenure and union rules are intended to protect teachers from unfair dismissal, the evidence from the film and research suggests that, without reform, these protections can inadvertently perpetuate educational inequality—particularly for students who most need high-quality instruction.

# data[].attributes.body
Lương Tiến Huy

In Waiting for “Superman”, tenure protections and union rules are portrayed as making it extremely difficult to remove ineffective teachers. Once tenure is granted—often after only a short probationary period—teachers gain strong job security, and union agreements can require lengthy, costly dismissal processes. As a result, ineffective teachers often remain in classrooms, sometimes reassigned rather than removed (“the dance of the lemons”). In low-income communities, where students may already face fewer resources and support, this perpetuates poor instruction, widens achievement gaps, and reduces students’ chances of academic success, college readiness, and upward mobility.

# data[].attributes.body
These schools often face larger class sizes, outdated materials, limited support staff, and higher rates of student poverty and behavioral challenges. Such conditions make the work more stressful and less rewarding, discouraging experienced or highly effective teachers from staying. Even when allocation mechanisms exist or job protections are reduced, the lack of incentives and supportive environments leads many skilled teachers to prefer positions in better-resourced schools, perpetuating the inequity.

# data[].attributes.body
Vân Khánh

In Waiting for “Superman”, tenure protections and rigid union rules often make it extremely difficult to remove ineffective teachers, regardless of their classroom performance. Once tenure is granted—sometimes after only a few years—teachers gain strong job security, meaning that even those with poor teaching records remain in the system. Related research shows that in low-income communities, this issue is compounded because students there have fewer resources and less access to alternative high-quality schools. As a result, they are more likely to be stuck in classrooms led by underperforming teachers year after year, which widens the achievement gap, lowers student motivation, and perpetuates cycles of poverty.

# data[].attributes.body
Khuất Phương Thảo

Under the lens of Waiting for “Superman” and empirical research, teacher tenure and certain union contract rules can unintentionally keep ineffective teachers in classrooms — with the greatest harm falling on students in low-income communities.

1) How the system keeps weak teachers in place

Superficial evaluations, rare dismissals: The TNTP Widget Effect found over 99% of teachers rated “satisfactory” and almost no dismissals for poor performance. The problem is not just tenure, but evaluation systems that fail to distinguish quality.

Lengthy, costly dismissal process: In NYC, “rubber rooms” housed hundreds of teachers accused of misconduct or incompetence for months–years on full pay, due to slow disciplinary and arbitration procedures.

Seniority-based rules: “Last In, First Out” (LIFO) layoffs force schools to keep senior teachers regardless of performance and let go of promising newer ones; weak teachers are sometimes just transferred (“dance of the lemons”) instead of removed.

2) Why low-income students are hit hardest

Struggling schools have a higher share of inexperienced or less effective teachers.

Seniority-based layoffs cause more turnover in high-poverty schools (where many teachers are newer), harming student learning disproportionately.

3) Scale of the impact

Research by Chetty–Friedman–Rockoff shows replacing a bottom 5% teacher with an average one can increase a class’s total lifetime earnings by about $250,000, boost college attendance, and lower teen pregnancy rates — meaning poor teaching directly reduces life opportunities.

4) Fairness and nuance

Tenure and due process protect against bias and arbitrary dismissal, but weak evaluation, minimal support, and slow discipline make “no one rated ineffective.” Reform efforts have improved evaluation in some places, but rates of “unsatisfactory” ratings remain under 1% in many states.

5) Policy direction

Strengthen evaluations using multiple measures and provide real professional development before discipline.

Streamline due process to be fair but faster.

Avoid pure LIFO; consider teaching effectiveness, subject needs, and equity when making staffing decisions.

# data[].attributes.body
In Waiting for "Superman", tenure protections and union rules make it very hard to remove ineffective teachers, often keeping them in classrooms for years. In low-income communities, this has a severe impact: students—who often rely entirely on school for learning—receive poor instruction, leading to lower achievement, less motivation, and higher dropout rates. This contributes to a cycle of poverty and widens educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
Lê Thạch Thảo - 23041548

Waiting for “Superman” claims that tenure and union rules make removing ineffective teachers slow and difficult, keeping them in classrooms, especially in low-income schools, where they can hinder student success. Research supports that these barriers can hurt disadvantaged students, though other factors like school leadership and poverty also shape outcomes.

# data[].attributes.body
Tenure protections and strong union rules can make it almost impossible to fire ineffective teachers. As shown in Waiting for “Superman”, examples like “rubber rooms” and the “Dance of the Lemons” illustrate how problematic teachers remain in schools, often quietly reassigned rather than removed. This keeps poor teachers in classrooms, particularly in low-income areas, harming students’ learning. Research supports this: students taught by low-performing teachers fall far behind, and disadvantaged communities often end up with less skilled educators, deepening educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
Ng Phượng

Waiting for “Superman” shows that tenure protections and union rules make it difficult and expensive to remove ineffective teachers, sometimes taking years and large legal costs. As a result, such teachers often remain in classrooms, with low-income schools more likely to be affected. This leads to a cycle where disadvantaged students receive lower-quality instruction. Over time, it widens achievement gaps and limits students’ future opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
Vương Hữu Phát - 23064078

According to "Waiting for Superman" and related research, tenure protections and certain union rules make removing ineffective teachers extremely difficult due to complex and lengthy procedures. As a result, such teachers often remain in classrooms or are transferred between schools instead of being dismissed. In low-income communities, this has especially severe consequences: students receive lower-quality instruction, widening achievement gaps and limiting future opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
Waiting for “Superman” argues that tenure protections and union rules make dismissing persistently ineffective teachers so slow and costly that many remain in classrooms, and that this hurts kids most in low‑income schools—where ineffective teachers are concentrated more heavily and where the stakes of lost learning are highest. Research broadly supports parts of this picture: dismissals are rare; disadvantaged students are more likely to be taught by less‑effective or novice teachers; and teacher effectiveness has large lifetime impacts.

# data[].attributes.body
Nguyễn Thuỳ Linh

Waiting for “Superman” argues that tenure protections and union rules make it extremely difficult to remove ineffective teachers. Tenure, often granted after just a few years, requires lengthy, costly dismissal procedures, leading districts to transfer low-performing teachers between schools (“dance of the lemons”) rather than fire them. Research confirms that formal evaluations have historically rated almost all teachers as satisfactory, with dismissals for poor performance being rare.

Low-income schools are hit hardest because they face higher turnover and staffing shortages, making them more likely to receive reassigned ineffective teachers. Seniority-based “Last In, First Out” layoff rules further worsen the problem by removing newer—sometimes more effective—teachers from high-poverty schools while retaining less effective veterans.

The result is lower achievement and reduced long-term opportunities for disadvantaged students, reinforcing educational inequality and limiting economic mobility, even though tenure and union rules were originally meant to ensure fairness and stability.

# data[].attributes.body
Tú anh 23051893

Waiting for “Superman” portrays tenure and union rules as making it slow, litigious, and costly to remove persistently ineffective teachers—so districts often transfer them instead (“dance of the lemons”) or park them in reassignment centers like NYC’s former “rubber rooms.”
What the research finds about why weak teachers stay
Evaluation systems historically rated almost everyone “satisfactory,” so poor performance rarely triggered dismissal. In TNTP’s multi-district study, half the districts hadn’t dismissed a single tenured teacher for poor performance in five years, despite administrators and teachers acknowledging weak colleagues. Procedural hurdles in contracts and state laws were a key barrier.
Impact on students—especially in low-income communities

1. Ineffective teaching depresses long-term outcomes. Replacing a bottom-5% teacher with an average one is estimated to raise the present value of a single class’s lifetime earnings by >$250,000; a 1 s.d. increase in teacher value-added boosts earnings around 1% by age 28.

2. Disadvantaged students get more of the least-effective/inexperienced teachers. Studies show systematic sorting within and across schools—novice and lower-rated teachers are disproportionately assigned to classes with low-income and minority students, compounding inequality.
Evidence that changing the rules matters

When districts tighten evaluations and consequences, weaker teachers are more likely to exit and overall performance improves. DC’s IMPACT system—introduced under Michelle Rhee—produced measurable gains via both dismissals of low performers and retention bonuses for high performers.

Bottom line: The film’s critique aligns with evidence that tenure protections and contract procedures—combined with historically lenient evaluations—have kept ineffective teachers in classrooms, and because of staffing patterns, students in low-income communities bear the brunt in the form of lower achievement and diminished long-run opportunities. Sensible reforms (credible evaluations, faster due-process timelines, support + real consequences, and strategic staffing) can mitigate these harms without abandoning due process.

# data[].attributes.body
Lê Thị Thảo Vân

According to Waiting for “Superman” and related research, tenure protections and rigid union rules can create significant barriers to removing ineffective teachers from classrooms. Once teachers gain tenure, the process to evaluate, document, and dismiss underperforming staff becomes lengthy, costly, and bureaucratic. As a result, many ineffective teachers remain in their positions, sometimes being transferred between schools instead of being replaced—a practice often called “the dance of the lemons.”

In low-income communities, the impact of this problem is especially severe. Students in these areas typically have fewer educational resources, less academic support at home, and limited access to enrichment opportunities. Because they rely heavily on the quality of instruction they receive in school, being taught by ineffective teachers year after year can drastically lower their academic performance, reduce engagement, and limit college or career opportunities. Over time, this perpetuates cycles of poverty and educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
Quản Hà Thu Thủy

Waiting for “Superman” and related research argue that tenure protections and union rules—though designed to safeguard teachers from unfair dismissal—often result in ineffective teachers remaining in classrooms.

In many states, tenure is granted after only a few years with minimal evaluation, and once secured, removing a teacher becomes a costly, complex legal process. Seniority-based layoff policies (Last In, First Out) further compound the issue by prioritizing years of service over performance, meaning newer, potentially more effective teachers are laid off first. These factors combine to create a system where ineffective teachers are more likely to stay in the profession, especially in schools already struggling to attract and retain talent.

The impact is particularly severe in low-income communities, where staffing challenges mean ineffective teachers often remain the longest. Research shows that students in these schools are more likely to be taught by less experienced or lower-performing educators, leading to measurable losses in learning—up to nearly a year’s worth for those with the least effective teachers. High turnover and seniority-based layoffs destabilize the teaching force, widening the quality gap between affluent and disadvantaged schools. This perpetuates educational inequity and limits long-term opportunities for students, deepening the cycle of poverty and underachievement.

# data[].attributes.body
Bùi Phương Thảo -22041645

"Waiting for Superman" argues that teacher tenure and union rules, while originally intended to protect educators, have created a system that makes it incredibly difficult to remove ineffective teachers from the classroom, regardless of their performance. The film suggests this process is often expensive and rarely successful, allowing underperforming educators to retain their positions. According to the documentary, this issue disproportionately harms students in low-income communities, who are more likely to be placed in schools with a higher number of ineffective teachers. The film posits that this perpetuates a cycle of educational inequality, as these students are deprived of the quality education needed to escape poverty, thereby widening the achievement gap between them and their more affluent peers.

# data[].attributes.body
Đào Ngọc Linh - 23040899

The documentary Waiting for “Superman” and related research highlight concerns about how tenure protections and union rules affect education quality.
Tenure protections make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers because the process to evaluate and dismiss them can be very long, complex, and expensive. Union rules, such as “last in, first out,” often prioritize seniority over performance, meaning that even poorly performing teachers can keep their jobs.

In low-income communities, the impact is especially serious. Students in these areas often have fewer educational resources, so having ineffective teachers year after year limits their learning opportunities. This can lead to lower test scores, reduced motivation, and fewer chances to succeed in higher education or careers. Ultimately, the system can keep struggling schools from improving, widening the gap between wealthy and poor communities.

# data[].attributes.body
Waiting for "Superman" argues that teacher tenure and union rules, while designed to protect educators, often make it nearly impossible to remove ineffective teachers, trapping them in the system. This disproportionately hurts low-income students, as struggling schools end up with more underperforming teachers, leading to lower achievement and perpetuating cycles of educational inequality. The film highlights how rigid seniority-based policies and lengthy dismissal processes prioritize job security over student outcomes, leaving disadvantaged kids with fewer opportunities to succeed.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Waiting for “Superman” and related research, tenure protections and union rules often make it lengthy and costly to remove ineffective teachers, leading districts—especially in low-income areas—to keep them in classrooms. This disproportionately harms disadvantaged students, as poor instruction compounds existing educational gaps and limits long-term opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
NGUYỄN THỊ MAI 21062058

Waiting for “Superman” shows that tenure and strict union rules make it hard to remove ineffective teachers, often leaving them in classrooms. In low-income schools, this means students are more likely to have underperforming teachers, which lowers achievement and limits future opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
In Waiting for "Superman", tenure protections and union rules make it very hard to remove ineffective teachers, often keeping them in classrooms for years. In low-income communities, this has a severe impact: students—who often rely entirely on school for learning—receive poor instruction, leading to lower achievement, less motivation, and higher dropout rates. This contributes to a cycle of poverty and widens educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Waiting for “Superman” and supporting research, tenure protections and rigid union rules often make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers, even when their performance consistently falls below acceptable standards. In many cases, the process for evaluating and dismissing such teachers is lengthy, costly, and bureaucratically complex, leading school districts to either reassign them to other schools (“the dance of the lemons”) or keep them in the same classrooms. For students in low-income communities where access to high-quality instruction is already limited this issue can be especially damaging. Ineffective teaching compounds existing educational disparities, slows academic progress, and reduces students’ chances of meeting grade-level benchmarks. Over time, it can also erode motivation, lower graduation rates, and perpetuate cycles of poverty, as these students are denied the strong educational foundation needed to compete academically and professionally.

# data[].attributes.body
Trần Vũ Thu Giang - 21061089

In Waiting for “Superman” and in supporting research, tenure protections and rigid union rules are shown as major barriers to removing persistently ineffective teachers. Once tenure is granted—often after just a few years—it becomes extremely difficult, costly, and time-consuming for districts to dismiss underperformers. Union contracts can also enforce “last-in, first-out” layoff policies, meaning that teacher retention decisions are based on seniority rather than instructional quality.

For students in low-income communities, the effect is especially damaging. These schools already face challenges attracting and keeping strong teachers, so being “stuck” with educators who consistently fail to meet students’ needs widens learning gaps. Year after year, children may lose months of academic progress, and for many, that lost time is almost impossible to recover—ultimately reinforcing cycles of disadvantage rather than breaking them.

# data[].attributes.body
Trần Thảo Chi

According to Waiting for “Superman” and supporting research, tenure protections and strict union rules can make it very difficult to remove ineffective teachers. Once tenure is granted, dismissal processes often become lengthy, costly, and bureaucratically complex, discouraging schools from addressing poor performance.

In low-income communities, where students often face additional socioeconomic challenges, this issue can be especially harmful. Ineffective teaching can limit students’ academic growth, lower engagement, and reduce their chances of meeting college- or career-readiness standards. Over time, it can widen achievement gaps and perpetuate cycles of poverty.

# data[].attributes.body
Phạm Như Quỳnh -21061245

"According to Waiting for 'Superman' and related research, tenure protections and union rules often make it very difficult to remove ineffective teachers because the dismissal process is lengthy, costly, and bureaucratic. As a result, some teachers remain in classrooms despite consistently poor performance. In low-income communities, where students may already face challenges such as limited resources, unstable home environments, and fewer educational opportunities, having ineffective teachers can greatly harm learning outcomes. These students miss out on quality instruction, lose motivation, and may struggle to catch up academically, which can further widen the educational gap between them and students in more privileged areas.

# data[].attributes.body
Trần Thị Phương Mai 21031212

Tenure and union rules make it very hard to fire bad teachers, so they often stay in classrooms. In low-income areas, this means students may get stuck with poor teaching, leading to lower achievement and fewer opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
Phạm Thanh Trúc - 21061297

According to Waiting for “Superman”, tenure protections and strict union rules make it very hard to remove ineffective teachers. This means some low-performing teachers stay in classrooms for many years. In low-income communities, this has a bigger impact because students there often rely completely on school for quality education. As a result, they may fall behind in basic skills, lose motivation, and have fewer opportunities to succeed later in life.

# data[].attributes.body
The film Waiting for “Superman” and related research argue that tenure protections and certain teachers’ union rules make it extremely difficult to remove persistently ineffective teachers from the classroom. In many districts, dismissal for poor performance requires years of documentation, multiple evaluations, and lengthy hearings, creating a process so slow and costly that principals often avoid pursuing it. Collective bargaining agreements can further limit flexibility through seniority-based layoffs and strict evaluation rules, making it harder to replace low-performing staff. This problem is particularly acute in low-income communities, where research shows that students are more likely to be taught by less effective teachers. Because high-poverty schools already face challenges in attracting and retaining strong educators, the presence of ineffective teachers—protected by tenure and union rules—can severely limit students’ academic growth and long-term opportunities, thereby widening the achievement gap. While tenure was originally intended to protect educators from arbitrary dismissal, critics argue that outdated dismissal procedures and weak evaluation systems allow poor teaching to persist, disproportionately harming disadvantaged students.

# data[].attributes.body
In Waiting for “Superman” and related research, tenure protections and strict union rules are shown to make it very difficult to remove ineffective teachers from classrooms. Once teachers receive tenure, they often have strong job security regardless of their performance, and the dismissal process can be lengthy, costly, and bureaucratically complex. In some cases, this leads to practices like “the dance of the lemons,” where ineffective teachers are transferred between schools instead of being removed.

In low-income communities, where schools may already face challenges such as limited resources and higher student needs, keeping ineffective teachers can have a particularly damaging impact. Students in these areas are more dependent on high-quality instruction to overcome educational disadvantages, so being taught by underperforming teachers year after year can widen the achievement gap, lower graduation rates, and limit future opportunities. Essentially, these protections—while intended to safeguard teachers’ rights—can unintentionally perpetuate educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Waiting for “Superman” and related research, tenure protections and strict union rules often make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers, even when their poor performance is well-documented. As a result, underperforming educators may remain in classrooms for years, limiting students’ academic growth. This problem disproportionately affects low-income communities, where students rely heavily on schools for upward mobility, further widening the achievement gap.

# data[].attributes.body
Đào Ngọc Bích

According to Waiting for “Superman” and supporting studies, tenure protections and strict union rules make it extremely difficult to remove underperforming teachers. This means that even when teachers consistently fail to help students progress, they often remain in classrooms for years. In low-income communities, where students already face fewer resources and greater challenges, ineffective teaching further widens the achievement gap, leading to lower test scores, reduced graduation rates, and limited future opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
In Waiting for “Superman” and supporting research, tenure protections and certain union rules are shown as factors that can make it difficult to remove underperforming teachers from the classroom. These policies are intended to safeguard teachers’ job security and protect them from unfair dismissal, but they can also result in lengthy and complex dismissal processes. In some cases, ineffective teachers remain in their positions because the procedures for evaluation, documentation, and termination are burdensome for administrators. For students in low-income communities, where schools may already face resource shortages and other systemic challenges, this situation can limit access to high-quality instruction. Over time, it can contribute to lower academic performance, reduced engagement, and fewer opportunities for upward mobility.

# data[].attributes.body
Ngô Hồng Phương

According to "Waiting for 'Superman'," tenure protections and union rules make it nearly impossible to fire ineffective teachers. This keeps them in the classroom and disproportionately harms students in low-income communities.

The film argues that the complex and expensive process to remove tenured teachers discourages administrators from acting. This results in poor-performing teachers remaining in the system. This especially affects low-income schools, as they often receive a higher percentage of these ineffective educators, while effective teachers use their seniority to transfer to more affluent schools. This perpetuates the achievement gap and limits opportunities for students who need the best education most.

# data[].attributes.body
In Waiting for "Superman", tenure protections and union rules make it very hard to remove ineffective teachers, often keeping them in classrooms for years. In low-income communities, this has a severe impact: students—who often rely entirely on school for learning—receive poor instruction, leading to lower achievement, less motivation, and higher dropout rates. This contributes to a cycle of poverty and widens educational inequality.

# data[].attributes.body
Van Khanh 23041681 Tenure protections and strict union rules, as shown in Waiting for “Superman”, can make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers, even when their performance is consistently poor. In low-income communities, where students often rely heavily on school for academic and social support, this can lead to persistent low-quality instruction, wider achievement gaps, and reduced opportunities for upward mobility.

# data[].attributes.body
Nguyễn Thị Thu Trang: Tenure protections and strict union rules often make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers, leading to “teacher shuffling” instead of dismissal. In low-income communities, this can trap students with poor instruction year after year, widening achievement gaps and limiting their future opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
Tenure protections and union rules can make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers, even when their performance consistently harms student learning.

As shown in Waiting for “Superman”, this often results in “passing the problem” by transferring such teachers rather than addressing the issue.

In low-income communities, where resources and alternative opportunities are already limited, this can severely reduce the quality of education students receive.

Over time, it widens the achievement gap and limits students’ chances for academic and future success.

# data[].attributes.body
Tenure protections and union rules can make it difficult to remove ineffective teachers, leading to lower teaching quality. In low-income communities, this often worsens achievement gaps, as students already face fewer resources and opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
NGUYỄN PHƯƠNG THẢO 23041866

In Waiting for Superman and related research, tenure protections and strict union rules make it very difficult to remove ineffective teachers. Once teachers gain tenure, they are often shielded from dismissal, regardless of performance, because the dismissal process is lengthy, costly, and heavily regulated by union contracts.

As a result, some ineffective teachers remain in classrooms for years. In low-income communities, this problem is worse because these schools have fewer resources to attract and retain highly effective teachers. Students in these areas often face larger achievement gaps, lower test scores, reduced motivation, and fewer opportunities to pursue higher education — reinforcing cycles of poverty and limiting upward mobility.