A termination is only a termination if teachers go through a "due process" hearing and "lose," which they almost always do because these sham tribunals are more often than not rigged in a district's favor. Few teachers recommended for firing ever go through them, and many teachers who do didn't do anything wrong but chose not to take a settlement for fear it is an admission of guilt. They also want the right to sue a school district in court.
A non-renewal is the firing of a person who doesn't have a continuing contract (misnamed "tenure"
. A principal can fire this person for any reason at all or no reason, as long as the person isn't in a protected class.
A "settlement" in a resignation isn't a true settlement as in a court settlement. It is, in fact, a separation package negotiated with a school district in lieu of a dismissal. The vast majority of teachers who are recommended for "dismissal" take these agreements with gag orders not to talk about them or to sue them in court. Teachers take these fake "resignations" in some mistaken hope they have a better chance of getting a job than if they go through the sham hearings. There is no evidence at all it helps their chances of getting future employment. The remainder of teachers pushed out of the field take early retirements, if they qualify.
A RIF is a true layoff. So is a temporary contract that isn't renewed when it is grant-funded or is a position that is being temporarily filled while the incumbent is out on leave.
School districts have a whole arsenal of methods to get rid of teachers they don't like. It is a very easy process, indeed, to get rid of them.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read