Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [North Dakota State University]On: 21 August 2013, At: 11:29Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
European Journal of Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cete20
The participation of schools in therecruitment of teachers: evaluatingnew procedures in GermanyChristine Schaefers a & Ewald Terhart aa University of Muenster, GermanyPublished online: 19 Jan 2007.
To cite this article: Christine Schaefers & Ewald Terhart (2006) The participation of schools inthe recruitment of teachers: evaluating new procedures in Germany, European Journal of TeacherEducation, 29:4, 505-517, DOI: 10.1080/02619760600944795
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02619760600944795
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The participation of schools in the
recruitment of teachers: evaluating new
procedures in Germany
Christine Schaefers and Ewald Terhart*
University of Muenster, Germany
Traditionally, in Germany, the centralized state school administration oversees the staffing of its
schools. Specifically, the administration assigns new teachers to designated schools. During the
last decade, some German Bundeslander have established new procedures for hiring new teachers.
Since 1997 the Bundesland Nordrhein-Westfalen (NRW) has implemented a new recruitment
system. Now local schools can advertise their own teacher vacancies and select among candidates.
The purpose of this is to support the school in developing and realizing a special ‘school profile’: a
certain pedagogical programme that is distinctive for a school. The results of the empirical study
show that the schools in general appreciate the new staffing procedure very much. They like it
because now the school has the opportunity to select among different candidates on the basis of a
personal appraisal. Support for the school profile seems to be not so important. So this innovative
procedure is very well accepted—but not for the reason it was originally installed for.
En Allemagne le processus de selection et d’embauche d’enseignants est traditionnellement gere
par la commission scolaire. L’inspection scolaire attribue les instituteurs aux ecoles a partir de
listes de candidats. Au cours des dix dernieres annees, quelques Bundeslander ont toutefois
introduit une nouvelle forme d’embauche. Le Bundesland Rhenanie-du-Nord-Westphalie (NRW)
a egalement etabli un nouveau systeme de recrutement en 1997. Les ecoles elles-memes peuvent
mettre en concours leurs postes libres et faire leur choix parmi les candidats. Cette procedure vise a
soutenir les ecoles dans leurs efforts a developper un profil pedagogique particulier et de le realiser.
Les resultats d’evaluations montrent que les ecoles apprecient beaucoup cette nouvelle forme
d’embauche, puisque elles ont desormais la possibilite de faire leur choix a partir d’une impression
personnelle. Par contre, l’aspect de soutien du profil pedagogique ne semble pas avoir autant
d’importance pour les ecoles. Cette nouvelle forme est donc tres appreciee— mais pas forcement
pour les raisons pour lesquelles elle a ete introduite.
Tradicionalmente son las autoridades escolares en Alemania quienes realizan el procedimiento
de la seleccion y contratacion del cuerpo docente. A base de las listas de los solicitantes, las
autoridades reparten a los docentes capacitados entre los centros educativos. Sin embargo, algunos
estados federales han implementado, en los ultimos diez anos, un nuevo procedimiento de
contratacion del profesorado. Desde 1997, el estado federal aleman de Renania del Norte-
Westfalia (NRW) ha establecido un nuevo sistema de ingreso en la funcion publica docente. En
*Corresponding author: Westfalische Wilhelms-Universitat, Institut fur Schulpadagogik und
Didaktik, Bispinghof 5/6, D-48147 Muenster, Germany. Email: [email protected]
European Journal of Teacher Education
Vol. 29, No. 4, November 2006, pp. 505–517
ISSN 0261-9768 (print)/ISSN 1469-5928 (online)/06/040505-13
# 2006 Association for Teacher Education in Europe
DOI: 10.1080/02619760600944795
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
consecuencia de ello, los mismos centros educativos ahora ya tienen toda la autonomıa para
ofrecer un empleo y eligir a sus candidatos. El objetivo de este procedimiento es de apoyar los
centros educativos tanto en el desarrollo del perfil escolar especıfico como en la realizacion del
mismo en la practica. Las investigaciones empıricas demuestran que los centros estiman en mucho
este nuevo procedimiento de empleo. Lo aprecian porque tienen la posibilidad de escoger, en
virtud de una impresion personal, el candidato apropiado. Si este apoya o no el perfil escolar les
parece ser de menos trascendencia. De modo que se aprecia mucho este nuevo procedimiento de
empleo aunque no sea por la razon pensada.
Traditionell wird in Deutschland der Prozess der Auswahl und Einstellung von Lehrern durch
die Schulbehorden vollzogen. Auf der Basis von Bewerberlisten weist die Schulaufsicht
ausgebildete Lehrer den Schulen zu. Im Laufe der letzten zehn Jahre haben jedoch einige
Bundeslander ein neues verfahren der Lehrereinstellung eingefuhrt. Seit 1997 hat auch das
Bundesland Nordrhein-Westfalen (NRW) ein neues Rekrutierungssystem etabliert. Jetzt konnen
Schulen selbst ihre freien Lehrerstellen ausschreiben und zwischen Bewerbern auswahlen. Der
Zweck dieses Verfahrens ist es, die Schulen in der Entwicklung und praktischen Realisierung ihres
besonderen Schulprofils zu unterstutzen. Die Ergebnisse der empirischen Untersuchungen zeigen,
dass die Schulen dieses neue Einstellungsverfahren sehr schatzen. Sie schatzen es, weil die Schule
nunmehr die Moglichkeit hat, zwischen geeigneten Bewerbern aufgrund des personlichen
Eindrucks zu entscheiden. Die Unterstutzung des Schulprofils scheint fur die Schulen weniger
bedeutsam zu sein. So wird dieses neue Verfahren also sehr geschatzt—aber nicht aus dem Grund,
weswegen es eingefuhrt worden ist.
The importance of teacher recruitment
Research has demonstrated that one of the most important factors influencing the
quality of teaching and schooling is teacher cooperation (Cochran-Smith & Lytle,
1999; Clement & Vandenberghe, 2000; Talbert & McLaughlin, 2002). Improving
cooperation among teachers is paramount to the successful development of a school
and its teaching practice. However, the establishment of this special relationship—
collegial cooperation—is problematic, as cooperation is not a job performance
criterion that supervisors or policymakers can realistically mandate or enforce
(Hargreaves, 1991). Such mandates usually lead to lip service and formal
arrangements, which are often hard to sustain. Likewise, it is naıve to believe that
teacher cooperation and collaboration will naturally evolve. Accordingly, research
has consistently shown that cooperation among teachers must be nurtured and
developed (Terhart, 1999).
One precondition for fostering cooperation amongst staff members is the composition
of the staff. In selecting staff members, one must consider the teacher’s area of expertise,
coupled with the school’s comprehensive course offerings. In addition, school leaders
consider an applicant’s special teaching competencies. We propose that a high
performing staff reflects a composition of people with unique competencies. Similar to
an orchestra, the sum of its parts creates a more effective whole.
Recruitment strategy is crucial to hiring productive school personnel. Therefore,
when recruiting new teachers, school-based managers and state administration must
find a ‘balance of power’ in carrying out the teacher selection process. In most
506 C. Schaefers & E. Terhart
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
countries, school-based managers have the authority to recruit and recommend new
teachers for employment, while the central state administration mainly oversees the
process. In the OECD-Report ‘Teachers matter: attracting, developing and
retaining effective teachers’ the different recruitment procedures of 26 countries
are listed and analyzed (OECD, 2004a, p. 149). Four countries recruit from
candidate lists only (Austria, French-speaking part of Belgium, Germany1 and
Switzerland). All other countries practice forms of an open recruitment and
competitive examinations, sometimes combined with a listing procedure.
Empowering schools to recruit new staff members emanates from accountability
initiatives, which hold school leaders (and the whole staff) accountable for student
performance. If the local school is responsible for raising student achievement, then the
school must have the authority and flexibility to recruit those teachers best able to meet
the school’s needs. If a school does not have the authority to select and recommend
new teachers, it seems unfair if the central state administration holds the school
accountable for student performance (Seyfarth, 1991; Watson & Hatton, 1995).
In Germany, teacher recruitment is especially crucial because teachers are civil
servants. Once the administration approves a teacher’s appointment, the teacher is
likely to receive tenure. Once tenured, teachers (even poor teachers) are not likely to
be dismissed. Therefore, one would expect the recruitment procedure to be
extremely thorough, also the school itself should participate in the teacher
recruitment and appointment process.
Teacher recruitment is not only crucial for the development of staff cooperation
and school accountability. Additionally, the practice of teacher recruitment raises a
theoretical issue concerning the perennial question of teaching as a profession
(Leggatt, 1970; Hoyle, 1995). According to the classical concept of the term
‘profession’, members of a full profession are responsible for the training and
recruitment of their associates. As the German teacher force does not retain control
of the training and recruitment of its own members, one may view teaching as a
semi-profession. However, in comparison to other employees, the state administra-
tion’s regulation of teacher training and recruitment has enabled German teachers to
experience relatively stable and comfortable positions.
For example, German teachers enjoy a certain sense of autonomy regarding
interactions with students, parents, and other societal interest groups and education
stakeholders. For German teachers, this professional autonomy is possible only
because the state affords teachers a certain degree of protection and independence.
German teachers, however, experience ambivalent feelings toward state adminis-
tration. On the one hand, teachers enjoy the protective cloak of the state, while on
the other, they live in fear of imposed state regulations; particularly those regulations
focused on teacher recruitment and geographic placement.
The traditional and the new procedure for teacher recruitment
Previously in Germany, the single (local) school lacked the authority to participate in
the teacher recruitment process. Since 1997, though, some German Bundeslander
Participation of schools in recruitment of teachers 507
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
have changed the procedure (e.g. Hessen, Niedersachsen, Nordrhein-Westfalen).
Schools in Nordrhein-Westfalen (NRW) have become more involved in the
recruitment initiatives. In this paper, we present the empirical results of a study
we conducted, which focused on the experiences and effects of the new NRW
teacher recruitment strategy.
To better understand the new recruitment system, we must first describe the
traditional system. Germany heavily integrates the activities of the school system and
teacher profession into the centralized state school administration. This ‘center’ is
not the federal state (Berlin), but rather the school ministries and administrations in
the 16 Bundeslander. Within the central system, a hierarchical relationship exists
between the Schulministerium of a Bundesland, its different Regierungsbezirke
(5administrative districts) and their Schulabteilungen (5school departments), and
the single community school. Part of this system is a defined teacher recruitment
procedure, which traditionally bestows all decision-making power to the state, while
extending little or no voice to lower (local) parties.
The traditional procedure: teacher recruitment occurs on a semi-annual basis.
Traditionally, teacher applicants apply for a position through the central state school
administration, (i.e. to one or several of the Bezirksregierungen in one or more
Bundeslander). In this process, applicants express geographical preferences. Schools
seeking new teachers, due to vacancies or increased student enrollments, rely on the
state administration to handle teacher vacancies. The administration has two options
for filling positions: (a) the administration searches for an employed superfluous
teacher to transfer him/her to a needy school—an option free of additional costs; or
(b) the administration searches for a qualified candidate who has passed the
necessary teacher examinations, and is looking for a position.2 In this second case,
the administration ranks all applicants according to (a) examination results, (b)
subject certification areas, and (c) personal characteristics. Based on these rankings,
the administration appoints teacher applicants to schools in need. If the applicant
accepts the appointment, he/she assumes the position. If the applicant declines the
appointment, the state administration appoints the next qualified applicant, and
excludes the original appointee from the recruitment procedure for up to two years.
As local staff teams (including the principals) lack a voice in these recruitment
activities, they are sometimes surprised by the new colleague(s) assigned to their
school. This is particularly true if a new colleague does not possess the expertise to
teach the exact combination of subjects requested by the school. Nonetheless, the
reason for the centralized recruitment and placement policy is to ensure that all
schools and regions have access to equally qualified teachers, who can provide equal
educational opportunities for all.
In accordance with worldwide trends (OECD, 2004a), German school admin-
istrators are slowly changing the teacher recruitment process by strengthening the
role of the single school, deregulating the school system, and developing school-
based management. Schools are explicitly encouraged to develop ‘school profiles’,
which distinguish them from other schools. Deregulation extends autonomy and
responsibility to the single school concerning financing, curricular profiling, internal
508 C. Schaefers & E. Terhart
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
evaluation, and the recruitment of personnel. This new ‘balance of power’ between
school administration and the single school has many important implications and
consequences. In our paper, we concentrate on the consequences of school-based
participation in teacher recruitment.
The new procedure: in NRW the process of profiling schools has been going on
since 1997. Every school was mandated to develop (and lay down in a document) its
special school profile. Partly on the basis of what was already a special curricular
element of a school and partly on the basis of establishing new special elements, each
school developed a profile (e.g. bilingual teaching, special programs for student
exchange with partner schools in other European countries, special efforts in science
education or in intercultural education etc.). This process of profiling schools was
meant to strengthen the autonomy and identity of the school—and to make it
different from other schools so that parents have more choice. This integrates a little
bit of ‘marketization’ in the school system. As an important element in the process of
school profiling, schools have the right to recruit new teachers who fit the school’s
profile and who support the school in putting this profile into practice. The new
procedure for teacher recruitment was officially based on this idea.
How does this new, participatory recruitment system work? Typically, a school
searching for a new teacher advertises the position and specifies the combination of
desired subject expertise, e.g. maths and physical education, and other teacher
competencies, which fit the school profile. For school profiling to be effective, school
personnel must recruit candidates who ‘fit’ the profile. In this new system, the state
administration retains ultimate control of the advertisement process, including the
posting of school vacancies on the Internet. Applicants apply for one or more
positions by sending their applications to the schools of their choice and to the state
administration.3 Again, state administration (!) ranks the applicants according to
their examination results, and sends the list with all applicants to the local school.
The school can then choose to interview the applicants. The local school’s selection
committee, which consists of the principal, teachers, parents, and sometimes
students, then meets with the invited applicants. Upon completion of the interviews,
the selection committee ranks the applicants and offers the position to the top
person. If he/she does not accept the position, the committee offers the next
candidate the job. Unlike the traditional system, applicants who decline a position
are not excluded from further application procedures.4
The process described above reflects the basic structure of the new recruitment
system. Since 1997, the detailed regulations (see Schmidt & Albers, 2002) have
changed many times. In the initial phase of implementation, local schools filled only
10% of all vacancies in this manner. Since 2002, however, all vacancies have been
integrated into the new system. Nevertheless, the traditional ‘listing procedure’ still
exists and is used in those cases where a position cannot be filled by using the new
selection procedure. This situation can occur in unattractive school types (e.g.
Hauptschule) or in schools located in geographical or social settings, where it is
difficult for schools to attract quality teachers. Therefore, an unintended outcome of
this new deregulated recruitment strategy may be (a) the inability of unpopular
Participation of schools in recruitment of teachers 509
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
schools to attract quality teachers, and (b) that it actually increases disparities
between schools, and impedes the social-integrative and cohesive function of the
school system.
Does the new procedure reach its aims? What are the effects of the new procedure?
Are there any unintended side effects? How do schools regard this procedure? How
do they estimate the relation between costs (in time/manpower) and benefits? These
questions have not, until now, been able to be answered on an empirical basis.5
Research related to the new recruitment procedure
The design of the study
To answer some of the above questions and to perform some steps in the evaluation
of the new procedure for recruiting new teachers, we launched a research project.6
First, we collected all announced teacher positions in NRW in spring 2002 (51140).
There were no free Grundschule (primary school) positions (see Table 1).
After the selection procedure in these schools was finished, three questionnaires
were sent to each school (April 2002): one for the school principal, one for a member
of the selection committee (teacher), and one for the new teacher who was appointed
(53420 questionnaires). The job for these newly appointed teachers started in
August 2002. We questioned these three groups of people because we expected
differences in the perspective and evaluation of the procedure and its benefits and
effects on them. Furthermore, we expected that principals would come to a more
positive evaluation than the teacher; and the freshly recruited teachers would give a
quite different evaluation. Also, we expected differences in the evaluation of the new
procedure among the different school types. In addition to these hypotheses, we
were interested in the kind of conflicts the procedure might cause, and in the views
of principals, teachers, and nominees concerning the relation of benefits and costs.
Finally, we were interested in proposals for developing the new procedure, and in
critical arguments against it.
In April 2003 again, we mailed questionnaires to the same respondents. We sent
this ‘second wave’ to get information about the experiences with a) former selection
procedures in general and b) the experiences with the selection procedure performed
one year before. Has the new colleague fulfilled the expectations of the hiring school?
The return-rate of 31.5% (first wave) rsp. 34.0% (second wave) can be regarded
as sufficient (see Table 2). The results cannot be representative in a statistical sense
for all schools or all teacher recruitment procedures in general, because we just
Table 1. Schools announcing a teacher position vacancy7.
Hauptschule Realschule Gesamtschule Gymnasium Berufskolleg Total
367 312 178 93 190 1140
32.2% 27.4% 15.6% 8.2% 16.6% 100 %
510 C. Schaefers & E. Terhart
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
included those schools in NRW with free positions in Spring 2002. Nevertheless, the
data are informative.
The view of principals and teachers
The following results are based on the view of the principals (n5421) and teacher
members (n5344) of the selection committee. In general, it can be said that schools
appreciate the new procedure of recruiting teachers. The idea of letting schools
participate in the recruitment procedure is especially welcome. This is not very
surprising because being allowed to participate is, of course, always welcome.
Principals and members of the selection committee do not differ in their positive
opinion. The votes are not that positive when the relation between costs and effects
is estimated. The results show that the traditional criterion for recruiting teachers—
examination results—is viewed as insufficient by about 60%. About 90% accept the
statement that the decision to recruit a new teacher should be independent from
examination results!
This makes clear what principals and teachers do not regard as an appropriate
recruitment criterion. But what do they want? 70% want to broaden the influence of
the school; 30% think that it is broad enough. 83% think that the school should have
more influence in the process of constructing the list of those who can be invited for
an interview. Table 3 shows the critical arguments against the new procedure:
The critical arguments again indicate that the new procedure is viewed as a step in
the right direction—but that next steps should be taken, that is: the influence of
school administration should be reduced and the single school should have more
autonomy. Does this generally positive view differ systematically between the
Table 2. Number of questionnaires and the return (schools).
Questionnaires Haupt-
schule
Real-
schule
Gesamt-
schule
Gymna-
sium
Berufs-
kolleg
total %
sent 2002 1101 938 534 279 570 3420 100
received 2002 325 261 114 132 247 1079 31.5
sent 2003 1101 938 534 279 570 3420 100
received 2003 389 354 88 97 236 1164 34.0
*return related to the specific school type
Table 3. Critical arguments (%).
Criticism Principals Teachers
first ranking list is given by school administration 10 13
very time-consuming 13 8
administrative rules too strict 19 24
Other 58 55
Participation of schools in recruitment of teachers 511
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
different school types? According to our results, the Gymnasien and the Berufskollegs
welcome the new procedure, whereas the acceptance in the Hauptschule and the
Realschule is not that strong. The Gesamtschule is somewhere in-between.
We asked for the special benefits of the new procedure. The results clearly indicate
that for principals and teachers, two things are dominant: to get a personal impression
of the different applicants (34%) and to recruit a teacher with exactly that
combination of subjects the school needs (33%). The official aim of the new procedure
(strengthening the school profile) is only mentioned by 9%! This indicates that
schools prefer the new procedure because they can choose among applicants on the
basis of personal impressions and get the chance of getting the new teacher they need
and want (Schaefers, 2004). The official political aim of the new procedure—
strengthening school profiling by recruiting teachers exactly fitting the profile—is
broadly accepted, but seems to be of very low importance.
Most innovations—and especially those, which lead to a new balance of
power between the different stakeholders—lead to conflicts. Surprisingly, the data
show that, in our study, this is not the case. 88% say that there are no conflicts
between the single school and school administration; and more than 90% say that
there were no conflicts in the selection committee. Nevertheless, the critique of the
new procedure indicates that there have been conflicts with school administration
(see below).
The view of the nominees
For the nominees (n5344), the most important reasons for sending the application
were:
1. The suitable combination of subjects
2. The school is within a comfortable distance to the home1
3. The applicant’s personal additional qualification fits the requested additional
qualification.
Only 28% mention that they are interested in the special school profile of the school.
This indicates that—also from the applicant’s point of view—the official political aim
is not that important. About 80% of the nominees sent applications to more than
one school; the average number of applications was two. 67% were invited to two
interviews. Yet another remarkable result: 24% of the nominees had already worked
in the school wanting them. School administration is always very suspicious when
there are indicators that a school, in advance, has decided to select a certain
person, already known and well accepted. Administration is in fear of nepotism
(‘corruption’) and/or political influence. On the one hand, it is a clear advantage to
let schools decide whom they want to hire, but, on the other hand, there is always the
risk that ‘bad schools’ will gain new staff members according to their own ‘bad’
criteria.
Also the nominees’ general view of the new procedure is positive. The new
teachers regard it as a chance to come to a school where their interests and
512 C. Schaefers & E. Terhart
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
competencies can strengthen the school profile. The new procedure is not regarded
as stressful. Similar to principals and teachers, an overwhelming majority of the
nominees (84%) thinks that the amount of school autonomy concerning the hiring
of new teachers should be extended. It has to be taken into account, that this positive
attitude of the nominees towards the new recruitment procedure is also due to the
fact that they were successful in this procedure.
It is interesting to find out what kind of special, additional qualifications were
asked for by the schools in their interviews with the candidates. What do selection
committees ask when they interview the candidates? (see Table 4).
The effects of the new procedure
The follow-up-questionnaire (spring 2003) was aimed at getting insights in the
success of the new procedure. In general also the data of the follow-up questionnaire
support the positive view of the new staffing procedure in all three groups
(principals, members of the selection committee, new member of staff). The great
majority of principals and teachers think that the selected new member of staff has
been integrated very well in the school’s culture. So the element of cooperation
among colleagues which is crucial for the quality of school work is strengthened by
the new procedure (Schaefers, 2004). Around 75% of the principals and the
members of the selection committee say that they again would choose the person
they had chosen. But most important of all: an overwhelming majority in both
groups says that this successful integration of the new member of staff is due to the
new procedure—and again they say that this is so because now the school has the
Table 4. Additional competencies and readiness asked for.
1 experiences with students 73%*
2 ready to teach subjects not studied 61%
3 To fulfill the school profile 60%
4 ready to lead special interest groups 50%
5 engaging in extracurricular activities 39%
6 cooperation with institutions outside school 38%
7 personal qualifications 37%
8 experiences with parents 37%
9 general social engagement up to now 36%
10 experiences with stress and strain 26%
11 activities outside school during preparatory phase** 22%
12 extracurricular sports 21%
13 working with, or leading a drama group 11%
14 working with, or leading a choir/orchestra 8%
15 knowledge concerning school law 5%
Formal additional qualifications 56%
*read: 73% of the nominees say that they were asked for that
**In Germany, all initial teacher education consists of two phases: the 1st phase at university
(average: five years) and the 2nd phase in a teacher seminar (with close contact to a school), also
called ‘‘preparatory phase’’ (two years).
Participation of schools in recruitment of teachers 513
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
chance to select among candidates on the basis of personal impressions! In accordance
with the results of the first wave the fit between school profile and the nominee’s
additional pedagogical qualifications is not so important. This shows that schools
appreciate the new procedure very much—but not for the very reason it has been
installed for.
Discussion
Our results indicate that despite the labor-intensive efforts required to implement
the new teacher recruitment system, schools generally accept and support the new
system. In fact, principals, teachers and recently recruited teachers prefer the new
system to the traditional system. School personnel continue to insist, however, that
the state administration must grant the single (local) school even more decision-
making authority in recruiting, selecting, and appointing new teachers to their
schools.
The positive views toward the new teacher recruitment system are not particularly
surprising. Remember that under the traditional recruitment system the state
intentionally omitted the single (local) school from the comprehensive recruitment
and selection process. Consequently, it is not surprising that school personnel favor
those reform initiatives, which lessen the state’s autocratic hold on teacher
recruitment practices.
Through this investigation, we have learned that the single school considers
‘strengthening the school profile’ a less important benefit of the new procedure than
does the NRW school ministry and administration. School personnel rather view the
new recruitment system as an important opportunity to meet, interview, and assess
teacher candidates before appointment. Additionally, school personnel use the new
process to ensure that a candidate’s teaching credentials and experiences are
compatible with the school’s staffing needs.
Finally we would like to direct the reader’s attention to some additional problems
and questions that require further attention and study:
1. In the everyday life of schools the criterion of getting new staff members with the
required combination of subjects is of higher importance than the idea that the
new staff member should have additional qualifications or competencies to
support the profile of his/her new school. With regard to the positive experiences
and the general approvement of principals and teachers it might seem to be no
problem that the original political purpose of the new procedure of teacher
recruitment—strengthening the profile—is not so important. But on the other
hand that means, however, that on school level there is in fact no connection
between the school’s ‘staff policy’ and the educational development of a school.
According to the idea of school autonomy the decentralization of responsibility
is expected to improve school performance. Staff recruitment on the one hand
and educational autonomy on the other hand are key domains. If they are not
connected on school level it is questionable if the main purpose of school
autonomy can be achieved.
514 C. Schaefers & E. Terhart
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
2. The new teacher recruitment system allows schools to participate in the
recruitment process; however, the higher-level school administration retains
teacher recruitment policy, practice and decision-making. In other words, the
state does not grant the single (local) school the authority to determine teacher
appointments. While NRW school personnel may benefit from more autonomy
and self-governance in defining staffing needs, the central administration
preserves its right to control all aspects of the recruitment system.
3. Clearly, school personnel favor the new teacher recruitment system. The fact
remains, however, that under the new recruitment system, highly qualified
teacher candidates apply for teaching positions in geographically and/or socially
desirable school settings. As a result, schools in less attractive settings often rely
on less qualified candidates to teach their students. In this context, the new
recruitment system can be problematic. In essence, the newly designed
recruitment system denies impoverished (socially challenged) schools access
to the most experienced and highly qualified teachers. This phenomenon is
worrying, because it has the potential to undermine the state’s ability to provide
equitable and quality schooling for all students.
4. Certainly, the new teacher recruitment system attempts to engage local school
personnel in recruitment efforts. Yet, a tradition of mutual distrust between
school personnel (teachers) and school administration (bureaucrats) continues
to exist. Unequivocally, teachers and administrators view each other’s motives
with prejudice. Teachers see the administration as being disinterested,
uninformed, and insensitive with regard to the problems teachers are confronted
with in their day-to-day school practice. More to the point, teachers perceive
administrators as a group of bureaucrats focused on inventing new regulations
to disrupt school life and frustrate teachers. Consequently, teachers often pay
‘lip service’ to the new ideas and practices administrators introduce. Conversely,
administrators assert that they must regulate and supervise teachers to ensure
quality praxis. To this end, the administration imposes stringent regulations on
school personnel, often causing teachers to respond with increased stolidity and
resistance.9
5. Finally, one must recognize that in many cases the number of teaching
applicants determines whether the new teacher recruitment system serves as a
viable recruitment strategy. After all, the new system’s benefits and effectiveness
can show up only in times when there are more applicants than vacancies to
ensure a credible selection process. Due to a teacher shortage in select school
types (Hauptschule5the lowest stream in secondary schools, Berufsschule5
vocational schools) and specific subject areas (all sciences), many schools do not
have the option of choosing among applicants. In such instances, the new
system has proven largely ineffective. On the other hand, a massive over-supply
of freshly examined teachers exists in other school types (Grundschule5primary
school), and subject areas (German language and history for the
Gymnasium5the highest track in secondary schools). Accordingly, on the
teacher labor market teacher shortage and teacher over-supply can be observed
Participation of schools in recruitment of teachers 515
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
simultaneously. Such conditions preclude a complete endorsement of the new
recruitment system.
To summarize, the school staff views the new teacher recruitment system
positively—not because the system fulfills the state’s intended purpose, but rather
because school staff has a discerning voice in determining who becomes a member of
the school’s teaching staff. In short, the participation of schools in the recruitment of
new staff members provides teachers and principals with a sense of ownership and
responsibility for enhancing teacher cooperation and overall school quality. Though
the new procedure may not fulfill its official goal, it does strengthen the position of
the school in the recruitment process and its ‘feeling’ of being responsible for its
internal process and its ‘products’—the learning experiences of the students.
Notes
1. Additionally it is mentioned in a footnote, that growing numbers of teacher positions in
Germany are filled through direct involvement from the school. In the German Bundesland
Nordrhein-Westfalen, meanwhile all free positions are filled on the basis of a strategy combining
administrative (central) control and school-based decisions (see below).
2. For an overview about the system of teacher education in Germany see Terhart (2003) and
OECD (2004b).
3. Also, already employed teachers can apply for this vacancy. If they are adequately qualified
and get the allowance to leave their former school (the allowance is given by the responsible
school administration) they get the position—and the whole procedure is stopped. In 2004 this
has been changed: an already employed teacher has to compete with the other applicants.
4. If a new teacher accepts the new position and then fails to show up when work starts (that
sometimes happens and leads to extreme difficulties in schools) then he/she has to pay a 2,500
EUR penalty.
5. Some empirical information can be found in Bellenberg, Bottcher & Klemm (2001) and
Ditton, Edelhaußer & Merz (2001).
6. The research was funded by the Ministerium fur Wissenschaft und Forschung of Nordrhein-Westfalen.
More results of the study can be found in Hercher et al. (2004); Schaefers (2004); Terhart (2004).
7. The school system in Germany: between the ages of 6–10 all children attend the Grundschule
(primary school). Then, they are streamed to three (four) different school types: Hauptschule
(ages 11 to 15/16; lowest stream), Realschule (ages 11–16; middle stream) or Gymnasium (ages
11–19; superior stream). Some of the Lander have the Gesamtschule (comprehensive school) as
a fourth ‘stream’. The Berufskolleg (in NRW) is a system of vocational schools (3 years) which
can be attended after Hauptschule, Realschule, Gesamtschule. (Endnote to Table1)[my notes]
8. Only 17% have sent an application to a school that is more than 80 km from their home. This
correlates to the fact that only 17% have to move from their current home.
9. Both world views mirror and support each other. Each side plays its role in the game. This
explains the fact that if a teacher changes from the chalkboard in the classroom to the bureau
desk in the administration, he/she easily shifts his/her world view and immediately speaks the
language of administration.
Notes on contributors
Christine Schaefers, Diplom-Sozialwissenschaftlerin, has been working as research
assistant at the University of Bochum and at the University of Munster. She is
writing her doctoral thesis.
516 C. Schaefers & E. Terhart
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
Ewald Terhart is Professor at the University of Munster, Faculty of Education and
Social Sciences. His research interests are teaching, teachers, and teacher
education.
References
Bellenberg, G., Bottcher, W. & Klemm, K. (2001) Starkung der Einzelschule. Neue Ansatze der
Ressourcen Geld, Zeit und Personal (Neuwied, Luchterhand).
Clement, M. & Vandenberghe, R. (2000) Teachers’ professional development: a solitary or
collegial (ad)venture?, Teaching & Teacher Education, 16, 81–101.
Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. (1999) Relationships of knowledge and practice: teacher learning
in communities, Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.
Ditton, H., Edelhauber, T. & Merz, D. (2001) Erweiterte Selbstverantwortung im Urteil von
Lehrkraften und Schulleitungen. Eine Untersuchung zum ‘‘Schulprofil’’ an bayerischen
Schulen, Die Deutsche Schule, 210–222.
Hargreaves, A. (1991) Contrieved collegiality. The micropolitics of teacher collaboration, in: J. Blase
(Ed.) The politics of life in schools. Power, conflict and cooperation (Newbury Park, Sage), 46–72.
Hercher, J., Schaefers, Chr., Treptow, E. & Rothland, M. (2006) Jeder Schule ihre Lehrer?
Empirische Befunde zum Auswahlverfahren bei der Besetzung von Lehrerstellen in
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Zeitschrift fur Erziehungswissenschaft, 8, 305–320.
Hercher, J., Schaefers, Chr., Treptow, E. & Terhart, E. (2004) Die Mitwirkung von Schulen bei
der Einstellung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern: Erfahrungen und Wirkungen. Bericht an das
Ministerium fur Wissenschaft und Forschung des Landes NRW. Westfalische Wilhelms-
Universitat Munster. Institut fur Schulpadagogik und Allgemeine Didaktik (Munster).
Hoyle, E. (1995) Teachers as professionals, in: L. Anderson (Ed.) International encyclopedia of
teaching and teacher education (Oxford, Pergamon), 11–15.
Leggatt, T. (1970) Teaching as a profession, in: J. A. Jackson (Ed.) Professions and
professionalization (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press), 155–177.
OECD (2004a) Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers, Synthesis Report, November
2004.
OECD (2004b) Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers, Country report, Germany.
Schaefers, Chr. (2004) Die erweiterte Entscheidungskompetenz von Schulen bei der Besetzung
von Lehrerstellen: Welchen Stellenwert hat das Schulprogramm?, in: W. Bottcher
& E. Terhart (Eds) Organisationstheorie: ihr Beitrag zur Analyse und Gestaltung padagogischer
Felder (Opladen, Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften), 159–169.
Schmidt, K.-D. & Albers, Th. (2002) Lehrereinstellung in Nordrhein-Westfalen. Das
Ausschreibungs—und Listenverfahren. Schulverwaltung NRW 1, 15–18.
Seyfarth, J. (1991) Personnel management for effective schools (Needham Heights, Allyn & Bacon).
Talbert, J. E. & McLaughlin, M. W. (2002) Professional communities and the artisan model of
teaching, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8, 325–343.
Terhart, E. (1999) Developing a professional culture, in: M. Lang, J. Olson, H. Hansen
& W. Buender (Eds) Changing schools/changing practices. Perspectives on educational reform and
teacher professionalism (Louvain, Garant Publishers), 27–39.
Terhart, E. (2003) Teacher education in Germany: current state and new perspectives, in:
B. Moon, L. Vlasceanu & L. C. Barows (Eds) Institutional approaches to teacher education
within higher education in Europe: current models and new developments (Bucharest, Romania,
UNESCO/CEPES), 135–156.
Terhart, E. (2004) Die Mitwirkung von Schulen bei der Besetzung von Lehrerstellen. Uberlegungen
im Anschluss an ein Forschungsprojekt, Schulverwaltung NRW, 15, 280–283.
Watson, A. J. & Hatton, N. G. (1995) Teacher placement and school staffing, in: L. Anderson (Ed.)
International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (Oxford, Pergamon), 606–611.
Participation of schools in recruitment of teachers 517
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Nor
th D
akot
a St
ate
Uni
vers
ity]
at 1
1:29
21
Aug
ust 2
013
